Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA3490DEVIL PROJECT L A s K I I I \ I I I \ I I A \ I Alaska C a n a d a 0 FAIRBANKS 1 I UNITED STATES \ I I I \ I I RIVER 1 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION REPORT OP THE COMMISSIOJnm O't RECLAMATION THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. J ····-u. s. Depa.l"trnent of the Interior, Bureau r.Jf Reclamation, Washington, D.C., March 6, 1961. SIR: This is my proposed.. report on 3 plan of development for tl:le Devil Canyon Project, Alaska. It is based upon and include~ the attaChed report of the District Manager, Juneau, Al.aska, da1~ed May 1960_, and re- ports of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of tf.i.nes, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service., Corps of' Engin1;ers of the Department . of the Army, and Forest Service of' the Department of Agricul:t;ure, as well as letters from various agencies of the State of Alaska, all of which are appended to the Diatrict Manager's report,. The investigation and the report on thi·s potential project were made in accordance with the provisions of the Act of August 9., 1955 (69 Stat. 618). The proposed Devi+ Canyon Project is essentially a single-purpose hydroelectric power development, designed to meet present and antici• pated future power and energy requirements for domestic, municipal, and industrial purposes in south-central Alaska. ~are is· no opportuni ... ty for realizing substani;ial multiple-purpose benefi.ts through water resource developments for agri~lture, municipal, or industrial water supply,.flood control, navigation, recreation, or fish and wildlife. However 1 detailed studies of the fish and wildlife res,ources affecte.d by the project would be conducted, as necessary, after project authori- zation, in,accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 u.s.c. 661, et seq.}. Such reasonable modifi- cation in the authorized project facilities would be made by the Secre• tary as he may find appropriate to conserve and develop these resources. The preservation and propagation of fish and wildlife would be a purpose of the project .. The project will consist of two major dams and reservoirs on Susitna River, a powerplant, and transmission lines and appurtenant facilities to deliver power and energy to Fairbanks, Anchorage, and other load centers. The largest structure will be Devil Canyon Dam, a high con- crete arch dam, rising 635 feet above its foundation and forming a reservoir with a total storage capacity of 1 1 100,000 acre-feet. This site, about 14.5 miles upstream from Gold Creek station on the Alaska Railroad, possesses many advantages for development of hydroelectric power, but the storage capacity is not adequate to control the runoff of Susitna River. Therefore, a second dam is proposed for construction about 115 miles upstream near Denali 1 where a much larger reservoir (5,400 1 000 acre-feet total capacity} can be created nth a compara- tively low (219 feet) earthtUl dam. A powerplant 1s proposed at the toe of Dev1l canyon Daœ to utilize the average head ot 538 feet to generate hydroelectrie power. The ult1- mate installed capac1ty of that plant would be 580,000 kilowatts, 1n eight units of 72,500 kilowatts each. From. the powerplant tM 230-kilo- volt transmission lines would be bullt, ext.ending about 16o miles south- ward to Anchorage and about 190 miles northward to Fairbanks. Through this system about 2, 755 1 000,000 kilowatt-hours of sa.lable firm energy would be made available annually. The oost of constructing tbese works, under priees as of April 1960, is estimated at $498,874,ooo, all of which would be allocated to power. The Devil Canyon ProJect is economically justified. Direct bene- ~its would exceed the costs in the ratio of 1.32 to l over a 50-year period of analysis and in the ratio of 1.72 to 1 over a 100-year period of analysis. The local, State, and nationwide indirect or secondary benefits attributable to bringing a large block of power and energy eat eomparatively low cost into this potentially rich but undeveloped region have not been evaluated in monetary terms and therefore are not reflected in the above ratios. Should this project be authorized for construction, an adequate survey would be conducted to determine if deposits of valuable minerals of possible commercial or strategie significance exist within the res- ervoir sites. Should any be found, methods will be devised to protect or salvage such deposits. The District Manager's report anticipated that the facilities of the Devil Canyon Project would be installed by stages as the power œrket develops. The analysis assmnes that the firth or last stage of construction would be completed by the end of the l2th year of project operation. sale of the firm power output of the project at an average rate of 7.89 mills per kilowatt-hour at the load centers would permit the amortization of the entire Federal investment of $564,675,000, includ.ing interest during construction, within 50 years of the date the last stage of construction is completed. The projection of total energy load for the Devil Canyon Project power market area presented in the District Manager's report shows the entire firm energy output of the project would be absorbed by 1982. This projection, whieh we believe to be reasonable, has been used as the basis for selection of the sizes and timing of the construction of the five proposed stages of development, which in turn establishes the basis for the repayment analysis above discussed. Power and energy generated at the Devil Canyon Powerplant would be deUvered through. a transmission system, which is part of the pro:eet plan, to aU load centers in the Railbelt .area and interconnected cezlters. 2 ·-··---,-~~--····~ " ----- This area includes the two largest cities in the State, Anchorage and Fairbanks, and many smaller oommuni ti es, mili tary installations, and commercial and industriel enterprises. By virtue of its relatively well developed transportation facilities, the vast area which it serves as a market center, and the rich naturel resources with which it is endowed, the Railbelt area is the center of population expansion in the State. The great preponderance of presently farmed land and of poten- tiel agricultural lands in the State are within the power market area. This area, therefore, has natural assets of national importance which oan be ex:pected to support a large and varied industriel and agricul• tural economy and a population many times the existing one. One of the major factors now preventing realization of this potentiel is the present high oost of electrical energy. Alaska, and the Railbelt area in particular, from a strategie or national defense standpoint, is or paramount importance to the Nation. The numerous military installations which now have their own sources or power may be expected to utilize Devil canyon power for expanding re- quirements or for replacew~nt of present facilities as they become obsolete, with consequent savings to the United States. The Devil Canyon Project is the catalyst needed to spark the economie expansion of the Railbelt area. To assure its effectiveness in this role1 the large block of power and energy wbich it can provide must be made available at the lowest possible rates. In order to encourage and promote progress in the development of Alaska's resources, which is extremely important to the Nation as well as to Alaska, we reel that certain departures from the Bureau's usual criteria for setting power rates are justified here. Accordingly, an alternative analysis was prepared, assuming that (l) the firth or last stage of construction would be completed in the l5th year of proJect operation, (2) payment of interest during con .. struation would be waived1 and (3) no interest payme:nts would be re- quired on the investment during the 15 years of the pcwer market devel- opment period. This study reveals tbat the amortization with interest or the remain~ng unpaid investment can be achieved within f)O years a.fter the 15·year development period utilizing a power rate of 6.0 mills per kilowatt-hour. This 6-mill power rate is substantially lower tban any existing or tmmediately foreseeable alternative rates in the market area and should be low enough to promote greater use of electricity by present consumera and to encourage the establishmel)t of industriel enterprises to develop the rich natural resources of the area. Pertinent to the above analysis is the conservative approach exer- aised in estimating the eost of aonstructing the $134 1 000,000 Denali Dam and Reservoir. Because of the perma-frost ~ other unusual c~n­ ditions encountered at the site, exceptional allowances were mad~ to 3 assure that the oost estim.ate is adequate. There is reasonable expect- ancy, however, that more detai~ed studies wil~ reveal that actuel con- struction can be accomplished at a sign5.fic~ntly lower oost. Should this oocur, it would offset, in comparabl(;l mer.s-;.tre, the -waiv:tng of the return of interest during construction and dtlring the power market de- velopment period. The Devil Canyon Project, if built in accordanoe with the plan pro• posed in this report, will be of great importance to the State of Alaska and to the Nation, and will be in harmony with the purposes deo~ared by the Congress in passtng the Act of August 9, 195$, tt ... for the purpose of enoouraging and promoting the development of Alaska ••• 11 This purpose can best be aocomplished by making a plentiful supply of power available at rates whioh would encourage industriel and commercial enterprises. Accordingly, I recommend that the alternative repayment plan dis- cussed above be adopted, thereby providing for firm energy to be delivered anywhere in the Railbelt ares at wholesa~e rates of about 6 mills per kilowatt-hour. With this exception, I concur in and adopt the reoommen- dations of the District Manager as set forth on page 95 of his report for the development of this projeot. I reoommend you approve and adopt this as your proposed report on the Devil Canyon Projeot, Alaska, and authorize me to transmit copies of the report in your behalf to the Governor of Alaska and the heads of interested Federal departments and agencies for information and comment, as required by the Act of A~gust 9, 1955 (69 Stat. 619), and to the Governor for the views and recommandations of the head of the agency exercising administration over the wildlife resources of the State, in aceordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 4ol, as amended; 16 u.s.c. 661 et seq.). Respeotfully, /s/ Floyd E. Dominy Commissioner Enclosures Approved and adopted: March 25, 196~ /s/ James K. Carr Acting Secretary of the Interior 4 DEVIL CANYON PROJECT ALASKA FEASIBIL!TY REPORT i"LAY 1960 BUREAU OF RECL4MATION ALASKA DISTRICT JUNEAU, ALASKA SUMMARY Devil Canyon Project Location: On the mainstem of the Susitna River in Southcentral Alaska, approximately midway between Anchorage and Fairbanks. Authorizad: Act of August 9, 1955 (69 Statv618) and appropriation acts authorizing expenditures by the Bureau of Reclama- tion for engineering and economie .investigations, and for related reports, for the development and utiliza- tion of the water resources of Alaska. Plan: Construct a thin arch concrete dam 635 feet above foundation at Susitna River mile 134. Build a power- plant near the base of the dam along the r~ght abutment. Install a total of 580,000 kilowatts of generating capacity in four stages. Construct an earth, sand and gravel-fill dam at ri.Ter mile 248 to be 290 feet high above bottom of cutoff trench. Construct two 230,000- volt, single-circuit, wood pole transmission lines from the switchyard to a substation near Fairbanks and two 230,000-volt, double-circuit, steel tow~r lines to a substation near Anchorage. Project Features: Dam -Devil Canyon -Concrete Arch Crest elevation, feet (msl) Height above foundation, feet Height above normal river water surface, feet Crest length, feet Base width of crown, feet Crest width, feet Radius of upstream face at crest, feet Q~m -Devil Canyon -Concret~ Thrust Block Height, feet Crest length, feet i 1,455 635 565 1,370 136.2 20 700 100 225 ,1 ~m ... Devil. canyon -Eartb. nute Crest elevation, feet (msl) Muimum heigbt above ori&inel sround1 feet Crest Lengtb1 feet Crest width1 feet Dam -Denali .. Earth, Sancla and Gravel FiU Crest elevation, feet (msl) Height above bottom of eutoft trenob1 teet Height above river-bed1 teet Crest J.ength1 feet Maximum base widtb1 feet C:rest wiclth1 feet SRillwg • Dev1l. Cgon ~ Crest elevation, feet ( msl) Number of radial gates Gate heigbt1 feet Gate length1 feet Spillway tunnel diameter (tapered), feet Maximum discharge capaci ty 1 second-teet Spillwal • Denali Type Crest elevation, teet (msl) Conduit diamete~, feet Ma:ld..mum discharge capaci ty 1 second-feet Reservoir -DeVil C!Elo~ Nortt1al full pool elevation, feet {msl) Maximuln water surface elevation, teet (msl) Minimum water surfaee elevation, feet {rasl) Surface area at. elevation 11 4;o acres Initial active storage capacity1 ac~ ... feet Initial inactive storage eapacity1 acre-féet Active eapacity af'ter ;o .. yr, sedimentation, aere-teet Active capacity after 100-yr. sedimentation, acre-feet 11 s~ 1,461 200 775 30 2,;64 290 2l9 2,050 l,84o 4o Gated 1,391 2 59 4o 48-41 11J2,ooo Gloq hole 2,552 19 18 6oo ·. t l,4;o 1,4;; 1~2'15 7,550 &:>7,000 293,000 765,000 725,400 Reservoir -Denali Normal full pool elevation~ feet (msl) Maximum water surface ~levation, feet (msl) Minimum water surface elevation, feet (msl) Surface area. at elevation 2,552, acres Initial active storage capacity, acre-feet Initial inactive storage capacity, acre-feet Active capacity after 50-yr. sedimentation, acre- feet Active capacity after 100-yr. sedimentation, acre- reet Hydrology Devil Canzon Drainage area, square miles Average annual runoff (1950-59), acre- 5,810 fe et 6,848,000 Maximum annual runoff (1956), acre- feet Minimum a.nnual runoff (1950), acre- 7,954,550 feet 5,538,950 PowerElant Capacity installed-initial stage (3 units), kilowatts Capacity installed-third stage (2 units), kilowatts Capacity installed-fourth stage (2 units), kilowatts Capacity installed-fifth stage (1 unit), kilowatts Capacity installed-total (8 units), kilowatts Average head, feet Design head, feet Summary 2,552 2,562 2,386 61,000 5,300,000 100,000 4,770,000 4,260,000 Denali 1,260 2,545,000 3,354,890 1,957,520 217,500 145,000 145,000 72,500 :580,000 538 530 570 395 Maximum operating head, feet Minimum operating head, feet Average head loss, feet Average tailwater elevation, feet (msl) Annual firm output (ultimate), kilowatthours 5 875 2,900,000,000 iii ,/ Switchyard Transformer capacity installed -initial stage, ki.lovolt-amperes Transformer capacity installed -third stage, ld.lovolt-amperes Transformer capaci ty installed -fourth stage, ki.lovolt-amperes Transformer capacity installed -total, kilovolt- amperes Summary 380,000 180,000 180,000 740,000 Transmission Lines, Devil Canyon to Anchorage Ultimate number of lines Voltage, volts Number circuits per line Type construction Conductor size, MCM --ACSR Length per line, miles 2 230,000 2 Steel tower 954 157·5 Iransmission Lines, Devil Canyon to Fairbanks Ultimate number of lines Voltage, volts Number circuits per line Type construction Conductor size, MCM --ACSR Length per line, miles Anchorage Substation Transformer capacity installed -initial stage, kilovolt-amperes Transformer capacity installed -fourth stage, kilovolt-amperes Transformer capacity installed -total, kilovolt- amperes Fairbanks Substation Transformer capacity installed -initial stage, ld..lovolt-amperes Transformer capacity installed -fourth stage, ki.lovolt-amperes Transformer capacity installed -total, kilovolt~ amperes iv 2 230,000 1 Wood pole 795 193 275,000 275,000 500,000 75,000 75,000 150,000 Summary ..,.con;.;;;..;.s ...... truc.......,.t.:t;,;;;o.-n_c.....,o .... s~: (April 15)60) Total. Plant Accounts DeV1l Canyon Dam and Reservoir $1112.~0811 000 Denali Dam and Reservoir 133 1 917 1 000 Devil Canyon powe~plant 115 1 096 1 000 Devil. canyon switchyard 9,464,000 DevU canyon -Anchorage transmission lines 49, 74o 1 000 Devil canyon -Fairbanlts transmission lines 21,2411 000 Anchorage substation 12,0031 000 Fairoanks substation 6,749 1 000 Devil Ca~on general propert,y 71 753 1 000 Denali general property 8~0L22Q Total Construction Cost $498,874,000 Interest during construction ~8 1 ~16~ÇQ ~tal Federal Investment ~ 7,Q9ô,ooo Construction Costa : Total investment by stage Stage one Stage two Stage three Stage four Stage five Total Aunual Revenue Deductions Operation and maintenance (ultimate) Provisions for replacements (ultimate) Total Power Rates: Cost o:f' generation, milJ.s/kilowatthour Cost of transmission, mills/kilowatthour Total rate for firm energy, mills/kilowatthour ie~al!ent -62-year totals: Revenues Revenue deductions Net Revenues Interest Principal Earned Surplus ., $308,480,000 l4.t,48o,ooo l2,590,000 53,190,000 JJ .. 1 350,000 $5~7,090,000 $ l 1 9lO,OOO 400.!000 $ 2,310,000 6~09 l .. So 7:B9 $1,214,073,750 · l~.t.85o,ooo $1 1 0 ,223 1 750 515,061,572 ,-.5?4,~5 0~~ 7 . 1 ./ ./ Benefits and Costs: Average annua1 benefits Average annua1 costs Benefit-cost ratio vi 50-yr. Life $26,024,000 19,722,000 1.32 to 1.00 Summary 100-yr. Life $27,847,000 16,150,000 1.72 to 1.00 / CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 TRANSMITT AL • • • ., • • • • • • • • • • .. • • Authority for Report ................... ., Investigations • • • • • • • • • • • • .. • • • • • • • Plan of Dtrvelopment • • • • • • • • • • .. • • • • • .. • Financial Data • • • • • • • .. .. • • • • ., • • • • • • Ac1mowledgments. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • CHAPTER II GENERAL DESCRIPTION • • • • • • • • • • . ... The Project A~ea • • • • • • • • • • .. • .. • • • • • o Physical Features • .. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Geography .................... . Clima.te • • • • • • • •• ., ••••••••••• History and Settlement • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Population • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ., Communi·t.y Devalopment .............. ,. •• , •• Anchorag:a .. .. • .. • • • • • • • • o • • ., • • • • Fairba..'lks • ... • • ., • • • "' • " .. • .. • • • ., • • Seward • • o .. • • • • • • • • • .. • .. .. " .,, • • • ••• Y~tanuska Valley Other Railbelt Areas • • ••• • • .. . A .._ .e • " .... . .. " " . .. . .. .. CHAPTER III AREA ECONOMY AND RESOURCES • ., • • • • • • • .Mili tary • • .. • • • • • • .. • • • • • 0 • ... • • • • • Governmant ., • .. " • • • • .. • • ~ • ,. • • • • • o • ., Transportation 4 • • c .. .. • .. .. ., , • • • • • • • • .. Air " • .. • .. • .~ • .. .. .. • .. • • " • • • .. • • • water ••• ~ • .. .. ............. " •• Highway • • .. • • • • • • .. • • • • • ., • • • • • Rail • • • • • • • • • • • ...... ..... " , .. Construction • • .. • , • • • • • • • ., • • • .. • • • • Manu!' ac turing 41 • .. • • • • ••• • • • • .. . • • .. .. mning • • .. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • o-• • • • Metals. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• Construction Minerals •••••••• ., ••••• Mineral Fuels • • • • • • • • • .. • • ., • • • • • Summa.ry • • • • • .. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Agriculture • • • • • .. • • • • • • • • .. .,, • " • • • • Forestr,y • • • .. • • • • • • • • • • • .. • .. • ., • • • Commercial Fisheries • • • • • • • • • • • • .. • .. o • Sport Fish and Wildlife ........... o ••••• Tourism and Recreation • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • VII Page 1 1 1 2 3 3 5 5 5 6 7 8 ll 12 12 l4 15 16 16 18 19 20 21 21 23 25 26 26 28 29 29 30 31 32 32 35 37 38 39 "' ,_/ CONTENTS CHAPTER IV POWER DEMAND AND SUPPL7 ...... ., ••• Area o:f Power Use • • • .. • .. • ., .. • • • • .. • .. • • Present Po~er Supply and Use • • • • • o • .. • • • • • Nonmilitary Utility Systems • • • • • • ...... Source or Supply. • ., • • • • • • • • • • • • Co st o:f SU.pply • • • • • • • • .. • • • • • .. Power Use •••••• ., ........... . Retail Power Rates • • • • • • • • • • • • ., . Military Systems • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Seure e or Supply • • • • ., • • .~ • .. ,. • • • Power Requirements • • • • • • • ., • .. • ., • Future Power Requirements and Supply • • • • • ., • • .. CHAPTER V Ganetel UUlltt ~~ • • • • • • • • • • Projection by Load Growth Pattern • ~ • • .. • Projection by CUstamer Classification • • • • Large Industria.l Requirements .. .. • • • .. • • .. • Military P~quiroments ..... ~ o ... ., o ...... Total Projeeted Requirement~ and Supply .. o • ., o Load Characteristics • • • • • .. • .. • c • • o • WATER AND POWER ., • • • • . •· • !1 • . " . Water Resourcas .. • • • • • • .. .. • • .. .. • .. • • " • Historica.l Runoff • .. • ., • • • ., • • • • • • .. .. Pariod of Study • ., • • " ., • • • • .. ., • ., ., • ~ Wa·t.er R:l.ghts ., • .. • .. .. • "' • • • • • .. .. • • • Power G3nerat,ion ., .. • .. .. • • ., ~ • • .. • • • • ., • • Operat.ing Plan .. " • • .. • .. • • • • • • • ., • • Res ervoi1•s , • .. • • • .. .. ., • • .. • ,. .. .. • • • Sedimen'i:,ation " • • • • • • • • • • • " • • .. Devil Canyon Reservoir • • • • .. • .. • • • • Denali Reservoir. • ., • • • • • • • • • • • • Power Operation • .. • • • .. • • • • • • • • .. • • • • Evaporation • • • • • • • • ~> • • • • • • • • • • Power Head • • • .. • • .. • • • • .. • • • • ., • • Reservoir Releases • • • • • 9 • • ~ • • .. • • .. Operation studies • , • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Energy OUtput and Powerplant Capa.city ••••• ., •• Dapendable Capacity ....... • ... ç ••••••• CHAP'I'ER VI PLANS AND ESTIMA.TES • • • • "' • • • • • • Plan of Development • <~ • • • • • • • • ç • .. • .. .. • Devil Canyon Dam, Powerplant and Reservoir • • • • • • Dam '~ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••••• VIII ~B! 41 41 42 42 42 43 44 44 46 46 46 48 48 50 52 53 55 55 58 60 60 60 61 61 62 62 63 63 63 64 64 64 65 65 65 66 68 69 69 70 70 CONTENTS Spillway • • • • • • • .. • • • • • • • .. ., • • • Out.let. Works • • • • • • • • • • .. • • • • ,. • • Powerplant • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .. • • • • Raservoir • • 1): • • • • • .. • • • • • • • • • • Other Facilities • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Geology -Devil Canyon Damsite • • " • • ••• • D~nali Dam and Reservoir • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Dam ........... • ••••••••••• Spillway ..................... . Outlet Works • • • • • • • • • • • • , • • • .. • Reservoir • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Other Faoilities ••••• • •••••••••• Geology -Dênali Damsite • • • • • • • • • • • • Transmission Sys·r.em • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ,. • • Design and Construction Probl~s • • • • • • • • • • Aceess:i.bility ., <t .. • " • • • • .. • • .. • • • • Relocation • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Rights•of-way • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Housing • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • o ., • • Conmnnrlcations • • • • o c • • • • • • • • • • • Project Costa • • ~ • • • • • • • • • • • • ~ o • • • Construction Costa • • • • • • ~ • • • ~ • • • • Operation and Maintenance • • • • • • • • • • • Pro~sions for Replacements e • • ~ • • é • • • Construction Schedule • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Project ForrîJ.1.ùa.tion .. , • • .. " • .. • • o • • • • ., .. CHAPTER VII FINANCIAL ANALYSIS • • • • • • • • • • Projeot Davelopment • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Project Repayment • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Annual Revenues • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Annual Revenue Deductions • • • • • • • .. • ~ • Operation and Mgintenanoe • • • • • • • • • Provisions for Replacements • .. • n • • • • Amortization o! Investment • • • • • • • • • Average Rate • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Average Rate and Repayments Study • .. • • .. • • • Benefit-Cost Analysis ............. . Cost of Power from Alternats Source • • • • Direct Benefits • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Costs • • • .. • • • • • ~ • • • • • • • • .. Benefit-Cost Ratios • • .. • • • • • • • ... Indirsct Ben~fits • • • • • .. • • • • • • • • • IX Pas;e 70 71 71 71 72 72 73 73 73 74 74 74 75 75 76 76 76 77 77 77 77 78 7S 79 79 80 82 82 S3 83 84 84 85 s; 86 86 S6 87 88 sa 89 89 CONTENTS ORAPTER VIII REPORTS OF O'.ŒER AGENCIE • • • • • • CHAPTER IX CONCLUSIONS AND .REOO~IONS • ,. • Conclusions • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .. • • • Reeommendations ,. • • • • ,. • • • • • • • • • • • . .. • • CHAPTER X SUPPI.J!iv.IENI.fA ANALYSIS • • • • . . .. , Section l ,. • • ,. • • • • • • • • • • ,. • • • • • • " Se.ltion 2 • • • • ,. • .. • • • " • • • • • • • • • • • Section 3 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Section 4 • .. • • • • • • ,. • • • ,. • • • • • ,. • • • Section 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Section 6 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Section 7 • • • • • • .. • .. ,. , • • • • • • • • o • • Section 8, • • •• ,. • • •• ,. • • •• ,. • • • ,. • • • Section 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • APPENDED REPORTS OF OTHER AGENCIES • • • • Fian and Wildlife Service Bureau or Mines Bureau of Land Management National Park Service Corps of Engineers Forest Service Agricultural Experiment Station x • • .. . . • • • Pae;e 91 94 94 95 96 96 96 96 97 91$ 97 97 98 98 99 / LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS Following Page Anchorage -Alaskats Largest City • • • • • • • • • • • • • 12 Fairbanks -Distribution Center for 2)0~000 square mile area. 14 Modern Steamliners Ply the Alaska Railroad~s 470 Miles of • Mainline Tracks ~ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 26 Potatoes, Cabbage and Lettuce are the Principal Row Crops in Matanuska Valley. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 32 MQunt McKinley -Highest Peak on North American Continent • 39 Denali Dam Will Impound 5,400,000 Acre-Feet of Water. , • • 73 LIST OF CHARTS AND MAPS Preceding Pag_0! -General :Map • .. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 Following Pa~ Principal Land Withdrawals From Public Domain • • • • • • • 17 Kno~~ Mineral Deposits • • • • • • • • • o • • • • • • • • 28 Areas Containing Known and Potential Agricultural Lands • • 31 Fir.m Energy -Requirements and Supply • • • • • • • • • • • 59 Firm Peaking Capacity -Raquirements and Supply • • • • • • 59 Reservoir Operation • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 66 Water Re1ease and Energy Output • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 66 Devil Canyon Dam and Powerplant -Feasibility Estimate Drawing -Sheets 1 and 2 • • • • o • • • • • • • • • • 71 Denali Dam -Reconnaissance Design Drawing • • • • • • • • 74 XI LIST OF PRINCIPAL TABLES p~~ II ·1 Summar,y of Climato1oaieal Records • • • • • • , • • • 9 III-~ Agricultural Land in Bailbelt Area •••••••• • 34 IV·l Utility Generat1ng Capacit,r ••••••• , • • • • • 43 IV-2 I!istor:Lcal Utillty Loads • • ••••• • • • ••• • 45 IV•3 Betail Power Costs tor Residentiel Use • • • • • • • 47 IV-4 M1litar,y Generating Cspacity and Estimated ut!lization 49 IV·5 Projection of Total Energy Load ••• • • • • • • • • ;6 IV-6 Projection of ~tal Peak Load • , •• • •••• , • • 57 IV•7 Load Oharacteristics •••••• • • • • ••••• • 59 V-1 Buno:f'f, Susitna Biver at Devil Canyon Damsite ••••• , • • • • • • • • • • Following 61 V-2 Runoff', Susitna Biver at Denali Damsite •• Following 61 V-3 Annual Summaey -Reservoir and Power Operation Study" 67 Official Estimate (PF·l) • ••• , ••••••• Jo4J.e'l4ni 78 Control Sohedule (P.F-2) • • • • • • • , • • • • $ Following 8o Prelimina:cy Power System Average Rate and Repayment · StUdy •••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Followin$ 86 _.....~,·, XXI _, APPENDIX A E c D E F APENDIXES POWER DEMAND AND SUPPLY WATER AND POWER PLANS ANIJ ESTIJI.IATES FINANCIAL ANALYSIS GEOLOGIC REPORT -DEVIL CANYON DAM, POWER- PLANT, AND RESERVOIR GEOLOGie REPORT -DENALI DAM AND RESERVOIR XIII MILITARY INSTALLATIONS [] Wildwood M ilitory Bose Œl Whittier Militory Port rn Elmendorf Air Force Bose 0 Fort Richardson Ar my Bose rn Fort Greely Ar my Bose [!) Eielson Air Force Bose m Lodd Air Force Bose [!] Cl eor Militory Bose I0 -26 -59-Rev . 3-14-60 G P O 994 274 c 0 0 K '?'-;: '{:.() If~">.----..-~-;t ~"'-" Chokochomno Lake 2"230 KV ~TRANSMISSION j- LI NES FAIRBANKS SUBSTATION (150,000 KVA) 25 ARCT!C OCEAN C A N A D A G V L F OF A L A S K A KEY MAP • Stream Gog i ng Stat i ons SC ALE 0 OF M 1 LES 25 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE I NTER I OR BUREAU OF RECLAMAT I ON ALASKA DISTRICT DEVIL CANYON PROJECT 5 0 GENERAL MAP PROJECT FEATURES IN RED 8 52 -906-14 -- CHAPTER I TRANSMITTAL To: Commissioner From: District Manager Subj ec t: Feasi,bili ty Report on Devil Canyon Proj ect, Alaska This report outlines the physical plan and financial as- pects of developing the Devil Canyon Project to supply hydroelectric power to Anchorage and Fairbanks and ta other areas along and near the Alaska Railroad. T.he project includes two storage reservoirs on the Snsitna River, one powerplant, and facili·ties to transmit power to load centers. The report describes extensive feasibility studies of proj• ect features and economie aspects. A specifie course of action is recommended. AUTHORITY FOR REPORT Authority for this report and the prior field investiga- tions and office studies is contained in the Act of August 9, 1955 (69 Stat. 618). The Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to investigate and report to the Congress on the development and utilization of the water resources of Alaska~ Investigations prior to the above date were authorized by the Department of the Interior appropriation acts for each fiscal year. INVESTIGATIONS Investigations of water resou:r:'ce develo:pment of the Susitna River were begun by the Bureau of Ree1..amation in Fiscal Year 1950. These early investigations are descr:Lbed in the 11District Manager's Reconnaissance Re:pr:..rt of June 1953 on Susitna River Basin, Alaska 11 • That report outlined an ultimate plan of development as a general Transmittal guide for turtber investigations. The report also recommended that particular attention be given to the urgency of investigating the Devil Canyon Project. Detailed studies of Devil Canyon Project were started in Fiscal Year 1953· Field work included surveys, surface geologie investigations, and core drilling of dam and powerplant sites. Office studies were made of power markets, water resources and use 1 plan of development, project costa, and financial feasibtlity. These investigations have been performed in sufficient detail to provide a reasonable basis for determining the engineering and economie feasibility of the project. More detailed investigations will be required prior to construction to define more preoisely the beat design and the probable costs of some project features. PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT Devil Canyon Project is named for the major potentiel structure. Devil Canyon Dam would be located on the Susitna River 14,5 miles upstream from the Gold Creek station on the Alaska Rail· road. A concrete arch dam would raise the stream 1 s water surface about 565 feet and would impound initially about 1 1 1001 000 acre- feet of water. A 580,000-kilowatt powerplant would be located on the right abutment. Denali Dam would be located on the Susitna River about 115 miles above Devil Canyon Dam and 15 miles below the Denali Highway Bridge. It would be an. earth, sand and gravel-fill structure with a crest 2 1 050 feet long, rising 219 feet above streambed. The 51 400 1 000-acre-foot reservoir, in conjunction with Devil Canyon Reservoir, would almost tully regulate the flows of Susitna River for use by Devil Canyon Powerplant. There would be no powerplant at Denali Dam. Power produced at Devil Canyon Powerplant would be supplied to Anchorage and Fairbanks by about 350 miles of 230·kilovolt trans- mission line. Project power would be used on the Kenai Peninsule, by Anchorage and towns in the Matarruska Valley, by aommunities along the Alaska Railroad, and by Fairbanks and to~s as far east as Delta J'unation, 2 Transmittal FINANCIAL DATA The completed :project is estimated to cost $498,8741 000 to build. In addition, simple h1terest that would accumulate on annual appropriations during construction would amount to $28 1 216,ooo. Total capitalized project cost to be repaid would be $527,090,000. The annual cost of operation and maintenance would be $1,910 1 000 for full development. Provisions for periodic replace- ments would impose an additional annual revenue deduction of $4oo,ooo. In order to pay all annual operation, maintenance and replacement oosts as well as amortize project investment in each stage within 50 years after its completion a unit power rate of 7•89 mill~ per kilowatt-hour would need to be charged. This rate applied to a net salable firm output of 2,755 1 000 1 000 kilowatt~hours would realize annuel revenues amounting to $21,736,950 upon full utiliza- tion of project power~ Analyzed over a 50-year economie life project feasibility is indicated by a benefit-cost ratio of 1.32 to 1.0. For a 100- year economie life this ratio increases to 1.72 to 1.0. Project benefits were determined by estimating oost of power from a similar sized steam powerplant located at the Matanuska coal field. Indirect benefits were not used in determining the benefit- cost ratios but they are believed to represent a substantiel economie factor. The availability of a large block of relatively low cost power would not only lead to a decrease in the cost of living and a lesser cast of doing business but would also remove one of the major obstacles to industrialization. The high voltage transmission tie between the major load centers of Anchorage and Fairbanks would benefit military as well as public utility systems. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The assistance of many Federal and State agencies and local groups and individuels has been invaluable to the investigation of the Devil Canyon Project. ~aeir cooperation and help are gratefully acknowledged. 3 Transmi ttal Water supply data, weather data, power use statistics, area economie factors and information, and res~urces evaluation repre- eent the type of basic data supplled by others and essentiel to project feasibility determination. 4 CIIAPTER U GElflaAL DESCl'liPT:tOB tle southern coast of .Alaêka forma a sreat 4rescent, sweeping trom the Alaska PeaiDsul.& QCl Kodiak lslaml on ~fi west, past the K:ene.i Peninsula ~ PriJ)C:e WUl.!am Sound.1 to the Alexa:ncieJ! Archipelago 1n Southeastex'D Alaska. Central.ly locate4 1.d t,b1S sreat ara is tb.e Ci 'bf ot AnChorage, the State 's larpst JUl4 tastest srowl.ng coœmunity. 1be .AJ.aska Bailzoad .passes througb AP,cllorage on 1 ts pa th trom tbe seaport of SeWàrd to Fairbanks 1 nortJ1 of the Alaska Bans;e. 1b~s railbelt area is tb.e hùb ot Alaskf apd the locale of the DevU Canyon PJ.-oJect. · · 'lbe Devil Canyon ProJect Area comprises that part of south-central Alaska througb.out which power from proJ,ct. :tacilittea would be 41stributed and sold, 'J!le area includ.es aU of tb.e Kenai Peninsule exc;ept the extreme soutbern and eastern t1pa. Mov'ing north ot the peninsule, it narrows to a stl'"ip about 80 mlles wide1 'With the Alaska RaUroad located approximatel7 :Ln the center. ~e area w1dens on the eastern aide a1ons the Denal1 B1shwq to the town ot Paxson. Movine; north from hx8on1 the boundarJ lies east ot the Bichardson Jfigb:wq and Delta Juœtion. 'l!le notth~l'D bound· aey of the market area is an arc. roushl7 50 miles nor1'Jl pt and paralleling the higb:we.y between Delta Jynct:t.on and :Ne~aJifh 'lbe power market area :t.s further descr:t.bed in Cbapter IV. · '!be maJor project works would be locateclixl a J;tl"ip aJ.ons the main stem of the Susitna River from the headwater$ to the Golc1 Creek station on the ra:Lùoad. Denali Dam would be consboœted near the upper end ot tb.is reach and Dev:U Canyon Dam 1ai:Ml Powe- plant near .the lower end. 1he power market area extends about 4oo mil•• trœ aoutb to north and :Lœlud.es a wide range of seosraplû.c end qliO.tic oondi t1ona. ' General Description Geograpby The Susitna River Basin is centrally located in the power market area. The Susitna River, one of the major rivers of Alaska, heads at several glaciers on the southern slopes of the Alaska Range. Mountains in this area rise over 13,000 reet. The Susitna River drains a large plateau area to the east and southeast before entering the canyon section near the mouth of Oshetna River. The MacLaren River is the principal headwater tributary. Steep, narrow canyons typify the westward-flowing section of the river to a point just below the Devil Canyon dsmsite. Numerous tributaries then join the Susitna River in its southward journey to tidewater at Cook Inlet, the chief ones being the Chulitna, Talkeetna, and Yentna Rivers. The maximum elevation in the Susitna River Basin is 20 1 269 feet at the summit of Mt. McKinley, the highest point in North America. Anchorage lies near the mouth of Knik Ar,m, a northwesterly extension of Cook Inlet. Near the head of Knik Arm, the famed Matanuska Valley nestles between the Chugach Mountains on the south and the Talkeetna MoUntains on the north. The town of Palmer is the busy center of valley fa.rm lite. South of Anchorage and Turnagain Arm lies the Kenai feninsula. A relatively low plain borders Cook Inlet on the north- west side of the peninsule.. On the southeast side the Kenai . Mountains 1 which consti tute about two-thirds of the peninsule. area, rise to more than 6,000 feet above sea level. The most important towns are Homer and Kenai on the west coast, Whittier on the east coast and Seward on the southeast. Seward is the southern terminus of the Alaska Railroad. The Tanana River, a tributary of the Yukon, drains the area north of the Susi tna Ri ver Basin and the Alaska Range. The Nena.na River, a Chief contributor to flow of the Tanana, heads on the southwestern slopes of the Alaska Range not far from the head- waters of the Susitna River. The river flows through the Alaska Range in the Nenana Canyon and then emerges on an extensive plain before joining the Tanana River. Broad Pass, the divide between the Susitna and the Tanana, is, at elevation 2350 1 the lowest pass through the Alaska Range. Fairbanks., the chief city of interior Alaska, situa.ted on the banks of the Chene. River, another lfanana tributar» is 473 miles by rail from Seward. 6 General Description Clima.te The climate of the power market area falls roughly into three different zones:. (l) a zone dominated almost entirely by maritime influences; (2} a zone of transition from maritime to continental climatic influences; and (3) a zone dom.inated by continental clima.tic conditions. Most of the area lies in the transition zone. Only the southeastern and eastern portions of the Kenai Peninsule. are in the maritime zone, which is characterized by sma.ll tempereture variations, high humidities, considerable cloudiness, and abundant precipitation. Climatological records at Seward and Whittier are the only data in the power market ares that are typical of the maritime zone. The transi tional zone embraces all of the portion of the power market area that is t:ributary to Cook Inlet. This includes the balance of the Kenai Peninsule., the Ma.tanuska Valley, and the Susitna River Basin. In general, this zone marks an area where the maritime influences decline progressively from south to north .. The change from a maritime to a semi-continental type clim.a.te is rather abruptly apparent in the Matanuska Valley and other areas north of the Chugach Mountains. The transition is more gradual on the western Kenai Peninsula and in the lower Suai tna Valley because of the pronounced maritime influences that occasionally move northeastward from the open sea area through Cook Inlet. Mean temperatures gradually decrease from Homer in the south to Talkeetna. in the Suai tna Valley, whereas temperature ranges increase over the same area. Maximum temperatures in the transi- tional zone normally range in the high 80's, wi th minimums in some sections lower tban -4o°F. No temperature records are avail- able for the upper Susi tna Ri ver Basin, but i t is probable that the extremes in this area exceed the figures shawn above .. Precipitation is fairly high along the western border of the power market area. in the transition zone. Anchorage and the Mata.nuske. Valley 1 however, are shel te red by the Chugac:h and Kenai Mountains and receive only one-half as much precipitation as Homer and Talkeetna. Most of the precipitation oc:curs during the la.te summer and fall months. 1 - General Deeeription Bo long•term records are available to indicate the climate of the project development area in the upper Susitna River Basin. A short period O'l reoord at a station near the Denali Highway bridge across the Susitna River indicates tbat the climate of this area is more similar to that of the region near McKinley Park than it is to tbe.t of the middle or lower Susitna River Basin. For the short period of record, both temperatures and precipitation averaae less then at Talkeetna. The dominant continental climatio zone of the power market area lies north of the Alaska Range. The region is remote from open ocean areas, and surrounding topographie barriere prevent the inland movement of air influenced by marine factors. Maximum temperature readings exceed 85°F. almost every summer. The most striking aspect of this region is the great range in temperature, with Fairbanks recording an extreme range of l65°F. The annual range at Fairbanks equals or exceed l35°F. in almost every year. Precipitation is relatively light, with annual totale averaging between 10 and 15 inches. T.be heaviest rainfall months are usually June, July, and August. Widespread precipitation of consequence seldom occurs in this well sheltered ares.; precipitation during the growing season is usually of the local shower type. Table Il-l summarizes olimatological data recorded at several stations in the power market ares. HISTORY AND SETTLEMENT Recorded history of the area dates from 1778, when Captain James Cook became the first white man to visit the body of water tbe.t now bears his ne.me. Disappointed in his search for the elusive northwest passage, Captain Cook turned his boats around and so established the name of Turnagain Arm. In 1.788 the Russian-American Fur Trading Company established two small settlements on the west coast of Kenai Peninsula. Except for some minor agricultural eolonization in the Homer area in 1793 1 peninsular activity was very limited until the salmon eannin& industry was established in the l880's. Discovery of placer gold on 8 ) ' ) TABLE n .. 1 SUMMARY OF CLIMATOLOGICAL RECORDS Average Average Length Ground ; Annu.a.1 Average of Eleva-Years Temperature-(Degrees F. ~ Precipi .. Annual Growing ti on of Mâxi-Mini-Mean Mean Mean tatien Snowfa11 Season Station (Feet) Record --~pl --~~--l!-1lm ______ January _Ju1_l ____ Annua.1 (Inches) <~-é~~'-~ (~~s} Maritime Zone \0 Seward 76 33 88 -20 ~24.2 56.5 39·5 69.92 84 134 Transition Zone Anchorage 92 37 92 -38 13.0 57.3 35.3 14-.27 64 ll9 Homer 67 20 80 -18 22 .. 6 52.8 37 .. 3 25.22 47 1o6 Ma tanus ka Agr .. Exper. Station 150 34-91 -41 13.1 5f1S.6 35.8 15.96 47 109 Talkeetna 345 30 91 -48 8.5 57 .. 3 33.3 29.92 118 76 Continental Zone Big Delta 1268 16 91 -63 -5 .. 6 59.5 27.6 ll.63 36 107 Fairbanks 436 42 99 -66 -9.8 60.9 26.2 11 .. 92 6o 96 McKinley Park 2092 26 89 -54 3 .. 8 54.9 25.8 14.42 76 62 General Description the Kenai in 1896 induced a wave of prospecting and the town of Homer was founded in that same year. The city of Seward was established in 1903 as a supply center and tidewater terminus for the Alaska Central Railroad. This railroad, financed by private capital, Was built only 79 miles on its proposed way to the Matanuska coal mines and the Fairbanks gold fields. Federal construction of the Alaska Railroad was authorized in 1914. The route of the Alaska Central Railroad was purchased, and contruction began in 1915. Plagued by wartime financial problems and lack of skilled laber, the railroad crept northward toward its destination at Fairbanks. President Harding came to Alaska in 1923 to drive the last spike. In 1943 a 14-mile spur was constructed to link the military port of Whittier with the main line of the railroad. Under the impetus of the Alaska Railroad, Anchorage came into being as a construction camp in 1914. The city's existence depended for many years on the railroad, a little farming, sorne gold mining, and two small coal mines in the Matanuska field. Then came the Matanuska Colony in 1935. The Federal Governmentsent 200 families from Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan to farm in the Matanuska Valley only 50 miles northwest of Anchorage. This influx of settlers was an economie beon to Anchorage, as well as to Palmer, which to that time had been little more than a rail· road siding~ The Susitna River Basin was only vaguely know.n when the Eleventh Census (1890) first took official cognizance of the region. A few prospectors passed through the region, but there were no permanent white settlements. After the discovery of gold in the Klondike area of northwestern Canada, an exploration party traveled up the Susitna River and across Bread Pass into the Nenana River drainage, looking for a possible rou~to the interior; the trail was never used extensively. Except for a small village of traders, trappers, and prospectors at Talkeetna, there was no permanent settlement prier to construction of the Alaska Railroad. Fa:i.rbanks 1 more than any ether city in the power market area, owes its origin to gold. After prospecting for two years, Felix Pedro made a rich strike of placer gold in 1902. The winter of' 1902-3 brought stampeders to the new mining center 1 many of them ~0 General Description from the declini~ Klondike camps. By 1909 the city claimed more than 3,000 inhabitants. Completion of the Alaska Railroad provided furtber economie stability :for Fairbanks. Political changes in Alaska had little effect on the history of the power market area. Gatbering war clouds in 1939, however, foretold significant changes in the entire Territory and particularly in the Railbelt.. In June 1940 the f'irst contingent of' a f'ew hundred American troops arrived in Anchorage, then a quiet town of about 3, 500 pers ons. The troops were housed in tenta until permanent f'aeilities were constructed. This was the beginning of a construction boom that has continued witb intense, although vary- ing, activity up to the present time. Although military personnel and construction workers continued to pour into Anchorage, the civilian population did not increase signif'ieantly, owing to the evacuation of many civilians af'ter December 8, 1941 1 and the subsequent invasion of the Aleutian Islands. Bowever, the steady influx of' construction workers brought the population back up to 9,000 by the end of the war. In July 1948 the population of Anchorage was estimated at 19,000, a growth of 570 percent during and immediately following the war years. Military activity and population growth at Fairbanks was similar, although less spectacular. The railbelt area outside of Anchorage and Fairbanks experieneed much lesa of a boom during the war years. Influenced by the growth of Anchorage, the population of the Kenai Peninsula and the Matanuska Valley showed a slow but steady rise. Some eoromuni- ties near Fairbanks similarly refleeted the growth of that city. Many small settlements, such as those along the railroad in the Susitna and Nenana Valleys continued life in much the same manner as before the war. POPULATION The estimated population of the project area, including military personnel, bas increased as follows: 11 1929 1939 1950 1956 1957 1958 1959 9,000 14,400 58,900 129,000 131,000 113,000 125,000 General Description The population decrease in 1958 was the direct result of withdrawing about 12 1 000 troops from Alaska, most whom came from the power market area. A comparison of number of uti1ity customers 1 school enrollment, availàble housing, and simi1ar factors, for 1958 and 1959, indicates that a substantia1 portion of this decrease bad been made up in 1959. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The chief urban communities in the power market area are Anchorage, Fairbanks and Seward. Visitors to Alaska are often surprised to 1earn that cities and towns in the 49th state provide community facilities comparable to those in cities and towns of corresponding size and situation in othe1· states. The relative isolation of Alaskan municipa11ties may contribute to a deficiency of seme services, auch as a shortage of electric energy, or to a greater than average supply of some services, auch as amusement and recreation facilities. Anchorage Anchorage is the 1argest and probably the most modern city in Alaska. The city itself is bordered by several suburban develop- ments, all of which are inc1uded in the Greater Anchorage area. In recent yee.rs many suburban area.s bave 'been annexed to the city. The 1950 census showed a population of 11,254 within the Anchorage city limita and 32,o6o in the Anchorage District, wbich includes a tew thousand outside the Greater Anchorage area. These figures include military personnel permanently residing in the area. To a greater extent than for most other Alaskan cities, it is very difficult to estimate the population of Anchorage. This is 12 •. / General Description due largely to the greater yearly fluctuation in population, which in time is due to the movement of construction workers in at the beginning and out at the end of the construction season. Educated guesses of population subsequent to the 1950 census are therefore based on trends in employment, school enrollment, utility services, excess of births over deaths and similar indexes. The average annual population of the Greater Anchorage area, including beth civilian and military, was estimated to be 78,000 in 1957. The trans~er of military personnel in late 1957 and early 1958 caused a substantiel reduction in total population. By 1959 the population was again increasing but was still probably slightly less than it was in 1957. Anchorage is the primary trading center for the southern portion of the power market area. Here can be procured most of the goods and services that are obtainable in cities of 100,000 persans in other states. Anchorage is also becoming a wholesale supply center for much of interior Alaska. For several years following World War II, Anchorage suffered from a severe housing shortage. Recently, however, the supply has been adequate, although the quality of rouch available housing is substandard. Owing to rapid growth, local governments have had diffi· culty in keeping pace with necessary expansion of streets, sewers, and water systems. Progress is good in the city but slow in the suburbs. The electric utilities, however, are relatively current on domestic connections throughout the area. The Anchorage Independant School District encompasses the Greater Anchorage area. The facilities of the school district are of excellent quality and bigh educational standards are maintained. Because of a chronic shortage of classroom space, the district is continuing to construct new schools to serve a constantly increas- ing student enrollment. On-base schools are provided by major m111tary establishments. The Anchorage Community College, an extension of the University of Alaska, offers junior college courses on a nigbt scbool basis. Alaska Metbodist University, a 4-year liberal arts college with an ultimate planned enrollment of 1,000, is scheduled to open its doors to students in the fall of 1960. A 74-bed general hospital for public use is located in Anchorage. Construction is expected to start in 1960 on a 140-bed 13 " General Description replacement for this hospital, with e?,t:Pansion to 300 beds now in the planning stage. Construction of a large state mental hospital is also expected to start in 1960. Anchorage is the site of a 395- bed hospital for the exclusive use of Alaska natives ~ Aleuts, Eskinos, and In.dians. Ths City Planning Commission in a 1956 economie report, listed the following services avail~ble: Churches Newspapers -daily .. weekly Rad.io stations Television stations Movie theaters Hotels and motels 40 2 1 3 2 4 31 Anchorage has a modern library, a municipal auditorium, and many varied recreation and cultural facilities~ The city is governed by a council and a city manager; it maintains efficient police and fire departments, and all utilities are municipally owned and operated. In addition, the many private businesses and services characteristic of a city of this size are available in Anchorage. The Chuga.ch Electric Association, an R.E.A. cooperative, supplies electric power to the suburbs and to small areas within the city limita. Each suburb bas a volunteer fire department but depends on the State Highw~Y Patrol for police protection. Central water and sewer systems are lacking in large areas of the suburbs. Fairbanks Located about 120 milessouth of the Arctic Circle, the Greater Fairbanks area includes the city of Fairbanks and consid- erable suburban development, much of which has been annexed to the city in recent years. Much of the area, but little of the population, of the Fairbanks District is outside the Greater Fairbanks area. Total population of the Greater Fairbanks area in 1957 was about 33,000. As was the case with Anchorage, the 1959 population probably does not exceed this figure. 14 .,.., General Description Fairbanks, the State's second largest city, is the distri- bution center for 230,000 square miles of the interior. Both whole- sale and retail trade bave shawn substantial growth in the last ten years. The city operates all utilities, including power, telephone, water and sever systems. Because of cold weather and permafrost, underground utilities are placed in large conduits that also enclose steam pipes to keep the wster and sewer pipes from freezing. The Golden Valley Electric Association, an R.E.A. cooperative, supplies power to outlying areas. The city, which is governed by a council and a city manager, operates police and fire departments. Fairbanks supports two radio stations, two television sta- tions and two newspapers -one daily and one weekly. Two theaters, office buildings, large multi-unit apartment bouses, an up-to-date hospital, several medical clinics, and many fine betels and motels - all are typical of modern Fairbanks. School eqrollment in six elementary and two secondary schools exceeds 41 500. The two major military bases provide addi- tional elementary schools on base. All major religious faiths are represented. The University of Alaska, the "farthest north" institu- tion of higher learning in the world, is located at Collage, 3 miles west of Fairbanks. It attracts students from most states of the union and from many foreign countries. Residents of Fairbanks support many and varied cultural and recreational activities. Seward In 1950 the Seward recording district had a population of 2,7o8, of which 2,114 1ived in the city of Seward. The estimated 1957 population of the Seward trading area was 3,500. Incorporated in 1912, Seward is governed by an elected mayor and city counc11ï daily operations are in Charge of a city manager. All utilities except telephone service are owned and operated by the city. Seward boasts a bank, a weekly newspaper, excellent hotel accommodations, modern sebools, one general hospital and one hospital for chronic diseases, and all the usual stores, shops 1 and services that go to make up a thriving community. Until 1958, the State of Alaska operated a large tuberculosis sanitarium at Seward • 15 ,/ General Description Matanuska Valle;y The Ma.tanuska Valley is a sma.ll rural community centered around the town of Palmer.. In 1950 the population of the Palmer and Wasilla Districts, which consist primarily of the Valley, vas 3,108.. The Valley population in 1957 was about 6,000. Palmer, whioh incorporated as a city in 1951, operates its own telephone and water systems, as weU as a police force and a volunteer fire department. Electric power is supplied to the city and to the rest of the Valley by the Matanuska Electric Association, an R.E.A. cooperative. The Matanuska Telephone Association, a cooperl:!::t.ive organization, ~:-ovides telephone service to the rural areas·of the Valley. Palmer is well supplied with professional, retail 1 craft, and service facilities, including a bank, a public library, a 25-bed hospital and seven ohurches. Many other small businesses are located close to the city and scattered throUghout the Valley. The Palmer Independant Sohool District provides both elementary and secondary edueational facilities for the Valley. The State also operates an elementary school at Wasilla. Palmer is the trading center for the entire Valley and for communities along the Alaska Railroad at least as far north as Talkeetna. The Valley is well-covered by a network of good roadsj nearly every farm has access, within a short distance, to a gravelled road leading to Palmer. The paved Glenn Righway provides easy access from Palmer t9 Anchorage, 48 miles distant. It also facili= tates travel by Anchorage residents to resorts or cabins on the numerous lakes in the Valley. Other Railbel t A :reas Many smaller communities are sœttered throughout the power market area. Most of these are small villages which include only residences and provide no community facilities. Some, however, are trading centers for small areas and 1 as such, have stores and varied service establishments. The State of Alaska operates schools in many villages in the Railbelt area. 16 ,/ General Description Homer 1 with a population of 307 in 1950, is one of the more important of these small communi ti es. It i.s the trading center of the southern section of the Kenai lowlands, an area which has shown considerable agricultural expansion in the last few years• Electricity is supplied by the Homer Electric Association, an R.E.A. cooperative. The many businesses and facilities include two hotels, a dry-cleaning plant, self-service laundry, bakery, theater, bank, radio station, and va.rious shops and stores. A berry processing plant, several small sawmills, and three small fish processing plants add to the general economy of the area. Harbor facilities are availa.ble for small craft and for large freighters. The first-class airport can accommodate DC-3's. Kenai is a typical fishing village, with the usual marine supply and repair shops. Harbor facilities are adequate for ~ishing boats to dock at the two large salmon canneries 1 but de~ dra.:f't vessels cannet be accommodated., The airport can handle DC-3's. Kenai has about the same stores and services found a.t Homer, .except for the radio station. The Kenai Power Company, a private utili ty, is the power source for the community. The Wildwood Military Base, a communications center, has helped make the village one of the fastest growing communities on the peninsUle.. Similar to the Homer area, however, the greatest expansion is occurring in the outlying areas. Several villages on the Kenai Peninsule. have attained a population of lOO since 1950, spurred on by the comple~ion of the Sterling Highway. A general store, filling station, and possibly a lunch counter, supply local needs, with required a.dditional services being provided by the lai'ger trading centers. Whittier exists primarily because of the military port facilities, constructed during World War II. One of the largest sawmills in Alaska is located here. The 1950 population of Whittier was 627. All community facilities, including those for civilian inhabitants are supplied by the military. There are many villages along the Alaska. Railroad as i t wends its way up the Susitna River and then down the Nenana River. Most of these exist only in connection with operating and maintaining the railroad. others, however, serve ether purposes as well. For example, McKinley Park is the headquarters for Mt. McKinley National Park, and Healy is a coal mining center. 17 C 0 0 K MILITARY INSTALLATIONS [IJ W1ldwood Militory Bose Œ) Whittier Milifory Port !!J Elmendorf Air Force Bose 0 Fort Richardson Army Bose rn Fort Greely Army Bose (!] Eielson Air Force Bose III Lodd Air Force Bose Clear Militory Bose 4 -8 -60 G PO 994274 ·~ ;:~1:> \-~:~.'!\ \tl'--" hokochamno Lake ., ' \ \ ' ' ' ' \ ' .. ' ' ' ' 1 ' ' ' ' 1. ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' .... ' .... .... ' ' , ,, .... ~ , , ' , , , ... , .... , , ... ' ' , 25 ARCTIC OCEAN C A N A D A PSC MR ws GULF OF A L A S KA KEY MAP LEGEND POWER S I TE CLASS I FICATION MILITARY RESERVATION WATER SUPPLY PROTECTION IR IND I AN RESERVATION SCALE 0 OF M 1 LES 25 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION ALASKA DISTRICT PROJECT DEVIL CANYON 50 PRINCIPAL FROM LAND WITHDRAWALS PUBLIC DOMAIN ACRES OR MORE) ( 10,000 852-906-37 CHAPTER III AREA ECONOMY AND RESOURCES The power market area encompasses about 4o,ooo square miles of land. However, several large military reservations within this area eliminate sizable tracts from economie development, Additional millions of acres are restricted in use by other Federal withdrawals, Many of these such as National Foresta, Water Supply Protection, and Power Site Classification do not preclude public land use but rather reserve it for that type of development for which it is beat suited, Drawing No. 852-906-37 illustrates the major Federal with- drawals within or near the project power market area. The economie history of the power market area has been fashioned from a variety of resources, including mining, agriculture, fishing, timber, and government expenditures for transportation and military activities. In recent years, military payrolls and con- struction of defense facilities have been the most important con- tributors to the area 1 s economy. These activities will continue tc be significant, but they will probably decrease in relative impor- tance as ether factors expand, The long-range effect of Statehood on the economy is difficult tc appraise. It is expected that the State government will take steps to encourage and promote the growth of activities that will use the Statets natural resources. Economie resources or activities whose influence may be felt directly in the power market area are disoussed even though they may lie outside the area which will use project power. Precise economie data are lacking for the power market area as a whole and for seme component parts of it. Rowever, data are available in separate analyses of major portions of the power market area, covering the Kenai Peninsule, the Matanuska Valley, the Greater Anchorage Area, and Fairbanks and contiguous area. These data, most of which are for the late l950's 1 have been com• bined, where feasible, to indicate approximately the impact of various factors on the economy of the power market area as a whole. In the following discussion certain industries or activi- ties are described as basic or nonbasic. Basic activities are those which can increase the total income available within an area by applying available resources to produce goods 1 services, or capital primarily for export to markets outside the area. Nonbasic activities comprise the internal trade in goods 1 personal services, 18 _,/ Area Eeonomy and Resources and capital witb.in the area. Tb.e "outside 11 money income from basic activities provides the purchasing power spent in the area for non- basic activities. These dependent or service activities are re- stricted by loèal demand and income levels, but respond to varia- tions in income received from outside the area. Whetb.er an activity is basic or nonbasic depends in some measure on the size of area wb.ich is being considered, For example, agriculture in the Matanuska Valley is a basic industry wb.en only the Valley is con- sidered, because most of the product is exported, The same agricul·· tural development would be nonbasic from the standpoint of the power market area, because the production is utilized almost entirely with- in the power market area and little is exported, MILITARY Eight important military installations are located in the power market area. These are listed below by number as shown on the General Map, Drawing No. 852-906-14: 1, Wildwood Military Base near Kenai 2. Whi ttier Mili tary Port 3· Elmendorf Air Force Base near Anchorage 4. Fort Richardson Army Base near Anchorage 5• Fort Greely Army Base near Big Delta 6. Eielson Air Force Base near Fairbanks 1· Ladd Air Force Base near Fairbanks 8. C1ear Military Base south of Nenana Each base makes a signifieant contribution to the economy of the local area in whicb. it is situated. Col1ectively, they are important to the entire power market area. The estimated military population in all Alaska on July 1, 1958, was 35,000, a decrease of 12,000 from the figure l2 months previous, A substantiel majority of this personnel is based in the Railbelt area, Families of tb.ese service men and civilian employees 19 ,/ Area Economy and Resources of the military establ.ishments constitute a significant part of the civilian popul.ation in the power market area. Data compiled by the Anchorage City Planning Commission indicate the importance of defense expenditures to the Railbelt economy. Personnel employed on military installations in the Greater Anchorage area in 1958 included 15,8o0 military and 31 000 civilian. Total payroll for these employees was $72 1 000 1 000. In addition, local purchases by military installations for supplies and transportation exceeded $37 1 000 1 000 in the same year. Specifie data auch as these are not available for the Kenai Peninsule and the Greater Fairbanks area. There is little d.oubt 1 however 1 that military spending in both those areas is a major factor in the economy, particularly for Fairbanks. The figures listed above do not include any expenditures for military construction, which further adda to the economy of the power market area. This item is subsequently discussed under Construction. The future impact of military activities on the Railbelt area is difficult to predict. The type of installation may change significantly, owing to rapid technological development. The stra~ tegic importance of the establishments, however, will probably not permit sharp decreases in expenditures. On the other hand1 no large increase in activity is assumed. Military activities are classed as basic activities for the power market area, because they increase the total income available within the area. Because the military establishments are engaged primaril;y in defense of the continental United States, this industry may be thought of as utilizing the resource of "strategie location" to export "protectionn to the southern 48 states. GOVERNMENT Civilian employment by the Federal government provides the second largest economie base for the power market area. It will remain relatively important until other elements of the civilian eaonomy can develop more tully. Data for the Greater Anchorage area illustrates the signif- icance of Federal civilian employment. The most important agencies are the Federal Aviation Agency, the Public Health Service (Department 20 Area Eeonomy and Resources of He al th, Education,. and Welfare) 1 the Post Office Department, and the Alaska Railroad (Department of the I:nterior). These agencies (excluding the Alaska Railroad1 which is inoluded under Transporta- tion) and other Federal agencies in the area, ~aid wages totaling more tban $11 1 500 1 000 in Fiscal Year 1957; almost half of this was paid by the CivU Aeronautics Administration, predecessor of the FAA. Local purchases by these same agencies exoeeded $2 1 0001 000 in F. Y. 1957. These agencies fur:nish essentiel services, and their contribution to the local economy can be expected to inerease as the population grows. T.he State and local governments poured more than $9 1 0001 000 into the Greater Anchorage economy in 1957 1 of W:nich less than one- fourth was from the State. T.his ratio would not apply to the Greater Fairbanks area, because of the State-operated University of Alaska at College. As with Federal agencies, expenditures by the State-and local governments provide a stable source of employment and income and will increase as the need for services expands. Most of the Federal agencies in the power market area furnish services for the State as a whole and for the rest of the states. The State and local governments, on the other band, are largely engaged in providing services to the Railbelt area. Govern- mental aetivities are therefore bath basic and nonbasic. TRANSPORTATION As implied by the term "Railbelt 11 , transportation is an important economie activity of the power market area. Other forma of tran.sportation are fully as significant as rail, which operates entirely within the study area. Air, water, and highway transporta- tion link the area wi th ether parts of the world. ', Air Because of its location Alaska, and especially Anchorage, is an air crossroads. Tbree foreign airlines have recently established transpolar routes through Anchorage from Europe to Asia, and two ether lines are actively considering such routes. For several years, one u. s. airline has stopped at Anahorage on reguJ.ar :f'ligllts to and from the Orient. .ret airpl.anes will soon be used for these intercontinen- tal fllghts. 21 Ares E~onomy and Resources Four domestic airlines provide t'lights from the continental United States to Anchorage or Fairbanks. Most of the :f'ligbts originate in Portland or Seattle. Weekly passenger service is now available from New York and Minneapolis to An~horage, and jet planes will soon be :f'lying to that city from Washington, D. C. Jet fllghts !rom Seattle to Fairbanks began on Marcb 1 1 1960. Intra-Alaska air transportation is vital to the existence of many communities in the State, beeause of limited surface :f'aeil- ities. Several intrastate scheduled airlines and scores of certified common carriers, commercial contract carriers, and bush pilots carry passengers, mail and freight over mountains, rivera, and frozen wastes all year long. œhese carriers not only link tbe communities within the power market area but also provide service from the main airports at Anchorage and Fairbanks to all of western and northern Alaska, including such faraway places as Attu, Nome, and Barrow. Because of this great need for and use of air transporta- tion, Alaska boasts the world's highest per capita flight mileage. Similarly, Alaskan use of air freight is about 200 times as great as in the rest of the United States on a per capita basis. Alaskans' airmindedness is further demonstrated by the prevalence of private craft used for business and recreation; there is one private plane for every 165 inhabitants. One-fourth of the seaplanes in the world are in Alaska, and 20 percent of those are based in the Anchorage area. A modern system of airways to faeilitate this a.ir traffic is administered by the Federal Aviation Agency. Airports and ses- plane facilities are availab1e throughout the area. Modern, effi- cient airports at Anchorage and Fairbanks, built and operated by the FAA, are of intercontinental express classification. Figures for passenger traffic and freigbt into and out of the Anchorage International Airport ref1ect both the activity and growth of air transportation: 1953 1955 1957 Passengers In and Out 97,776 138,.722 178,443 Freight In and O'ut 7,241 tons 12,049 tons 29,.455 tons y y Abnormal increase due to heavy shipments :for mill tary construction. 22 / Area Economy and Resources During Fiscal Year 1955, the two civilian airports at Anchorage handled 285,195 operations, making it the fourth busiest air center in the nation, outranked only by Chicago~ Detroit, and New York. The future of air transportation for the area is extremely bright. Commercial flying over the North Pole is in its infancy, and the Anchorage International Airport appears destined to b~aome one of the most important in the world• Service to the hinterland from botn Anchorage and FairbankS wili gradually expand as the resources of the area are developed. Air transportation is both a basic and a nonbasic industry. To the extent that services are performed for the benefit o~ areas outside the power market area, it is basic and provides additional money income. ~ of its activity is transporting goods and services within the power market area; to this extent, it is a service industry. Water MOst of the freight destined for the power market area is handled by three companies competing on sea routes between the Pacifie Coast and Alaska. Except during the brief salmon-canning season, northbound cargo màkes up 75 to 95 percent of the total revenue tonnage. When not hauling the salmon pack, ships return from Alaska almost empty. As in the case of air carriers, this customary lack of return cargo contributes to higher freight tariffs. Two of the companies operate steamships and the third uses barges towed by ooean-going tugs. Full use is made of unitized cargo and loaded trailer vans to permit better use of hold and deck space and to reduce neoessary handling. one line reoently completed a study of facilities to run loaded railroad cars directly on to special ships, from Which they would run directly on to the Alaska Railrçad, thus eliminating load handling at both trans-shipping points. This plan has been dropped for the present because of unexpectedly high initial construction costs. Terminal facilities within the power market area for ocean- going vessels are ava.ilable at three main ports; Seward, Whittier, and Anchorage. The extensive port facilities at Whittier are under military control and cannot generally be used for civilian freight• Outside the power market area the port of Valdez provides terminal tacilities for transhipment via the Richardson Highway to Fairbanks. 23 Area Eaonomy and Resouroes The principal civilian port is Seward 1 which serves the interior by means of the Alaska Railroad and the highway system. Five 'Wharves 1 the largest of 'Which belongs to the Army1 are avail· able at Seward. The port of Anchorage is usual.ly closed to navigation from late November to April l because of ice conditions in upper Cook Inlet and Knik Arm. Although the waterway seldom freezes solid because of the 30-foot tidal range, navigation through the ice floes is difficult. The chief dock, whiah is leased by the Alaska Railroad to the u. s. Army 1 a an· accommoda te only one ocean-going vessel at a time. Owing to the restricted water depth and the extrema tidal range, barges are used to breast vessels out from the dock; this necessitates double handling of the cargo. The City of Anchorage, however, is striving to become the main seaport of Alaska. An $8 1 000 1 000 port improvement program 1 financed by municipal bonds, is now under construction. The initial development will consist of a single general cargo barth and neces- sary unloading and warehouse facilities 1 with ultimate expansion to a 3-berth 'Wharf. Special facilities, such as coal loading equip· ment and a tanker terminal, are also envisioned. This port will undoubtedly attract muah of the commerce now passing through the port of Seward. It will considerably reduce the amount of civilian cargo now hauled by the Alaska Railroad and various truck linas between Seward and Anchorage. Suah shipping will not be eliminated1 however 1 because the Anchorage port will operate only 8 months each year and not all shippers will choose to use the Anchorage faaility in preference to Seward. Estimated water-borne freight shipments to the Greater Anchorage area amounted to 582,000 tons in 19541 increasing to 708 1 000 tons in 1956. Petroleum products accounted for over half the tonnage in 1956, as well as for most of the increase. Grocery and food products were 65,000 tons in both 1954 and 1956. Passenger service to ~ailbe1t ports bas not been avai1able sinae 1954. Completion of the port of Anchorage will encourage more ocean sllipping to Alaska. An even greater spur would be a reduction of freigb.t rates. This may not be possible in any signifiaant amount until a steady source of baakhaul is developed in the State. However, a small reduction in treight rates might make possible the economie production of an export product. · A small amount of river transportation originates within the power market area. A private concern operates from Nenana 1 where transhipment is made from the Alaska Railroad to ports on the Tanana and Yukon Rivers. The company uses its own cargo vessels as well as 24 Area Eeonomy and Resources riverboat facilities leased from the Railroad. The vessels operate from May until September 1 supplying missionaries 1 minera 1 prospectera, traders, trappers, fishermen, and natives living on the inland water- ways .. Highway Alaska's development is retarded by the inadequacy of ber highway system. New auto routes are needed to aid in developing remo te areas 1 linking communi ties whose growth has been stunted by inaooessibility and creating new tow.ns. The power market area, however, is more fortunate than the rest of the State in being fairly well covereà. with a primaey road system. These highways are shown on the General Map, Drawing No. 852·906-14. The main high:ways are: The Richardson Highway 1 an impor- tant trucking artery from the port of Valdez to Fairbanks; the famous Alaska Highway 1 providing a direct route to Fairbanks from the continental United States; the Glenn Highway 1 leading from the Alaska Highway to Anchorage; and the Seward-Anohorage and Sterling Higbways connecting on the Kenai Peninsule. with Anchorage. These roads are open all year and most of them are paved. During the summer 1 touriste can drive directly to Mount McKinley National Park over the recently opened Denali Highway. A secondary road system connecte farming and mining areas to the primary network. Further extension of this secondary system is essential to the economie growth of the Railbelt area. Highway freight bound for the power market area over the Alaska Highway totaled 71 588 tons in 1957; outbound freight was 4,049 tons. Althougb no data are available, intra-Alaska highway freight shipments are believed to be substantiel. In addition to trucking over the Richardson Highway from Valdez, trailers brougb.t into Seward and Anchorage by barge are taken by highway to points as far away as Fairbanks. Some general cargo brougnt into Anchorage by boat is also transhipped by truck rather than by rail. Passenger traffic has shown impressive gains. Almost 90 1 000 persona used the Alaska Higbway in 1957, a 16-percent increase over the preceding year.. Regular scheduled bus service goes from mainland united States to Anchorage and Fairbanks. Other bus companies operate witb.in the power market ares. Use of highways is sure to increase as the new State grows. More and more touriste will drive north over the Alaska Highway. New road& con~ribute to expansion of existin~ areas and development .-, . ~ . ~.. . 25 _./ Area Eeonomy and Resources of new ones. A hignway ~om Willow to Talkeetna is now in the final :planning stàge; this road will eventually be extended througb. MCKinley Park to Nenana. A road extending westward trom Fairbanks to Nome is also under consideration. Rail - The Alaska Railroad is owned by the tl'nited States and is operated by the Department of the Interior. The railroad links the main ports of Seward and Whittier with Fairbanks over 470 miles of mainline track; 6o miles of branch trackage serve auch areas as the Matanuska Valley and F.ielson Air Force Base. Daily freight service is available from Seward and Whittier to Anchorage and Fairbanks. 1 In summer, passenger trains make six weekly runa in both directions between Anchorage and Fairbanks; in winter, two or three trips a week eaoh way. Passenger service is not available between Anchorage and Seward. The railroad is completely modern. Duri~g the 5 years ending June 30 1 1958, the Alaska Rail· road hauled ~n average of slightly less than 11 5001 000 revenue tons per year 1 .. o~ wbich about 55 percent was for the mili tary. The average ton-mile t'reight revenue was about $0.0571 or t'our times the u. s. private railroad average. In Alaska, as in other t'rentier areas, one-way freight hauling is expensive. FUture prospects for the AJ.aska Railroad are not so bright as t'or ether forms of transportation. The increase in use of the railroad will probably be proportionatelY less than for air, sea, and highway, as these latter means become more popular. A rail link from the continental United States througb. Canada to Alaska has long been envisioned as a possible development. This dream has recently been given further impetus by the work of the Alaska International Rail and Highway Commission. ~is Commis- sion was established by Congress in 1956 to make a thorougn study of the economie and military need for additional highway and rail transportation facilities between continental United States and central Alaska. A private research institute employed by the Commission is studying the economie advantages of sueh additional facilities, as well as the most feasible routes. The Commissionts final report is due on June 1 1 1961. CONSTRUCTION Construction has been the largest single contributor to AJ.aska 's :rxrivate econorny for· mol"ê than a decade. Expend.itw:ea for 26 Area Economy and Resources military construction have been a significant factor in developing the present basic economy of the power market area. Construction trends in the Greater Anchorage area are indicative of the importance of both mi1itary and private construc- tion. Total construction ex.penditures reached a peak of $79 1 120,000 in 1952 1 gradually decreasing to $39 1 08o,OOO in 1957• Military con- struction handled by the Alaska District Engineer totaled $48,450,000 and $25 1 54o,ooo in these same years. Spending b1 other individuel governmental agencies and the private sector o:t the economy bas been variable. For example, expenditures :tor private housing were large during the early l950's, relatively small for almost 3 years, and then rose again. In general, however, non-military spending has held fairly steady. Time and again1 dire predictions have been made that defense activities would be drastically curtailed. Nevertheless, the technologies of defense -w1 tb seemingly hiah degrees of obsolescence .. have continued to create a need for substantiel con- struction a.etivity. The change from heavy construction to elaborate electronic eq_uipment bas merely changed the type of personnel re- quired. Important defense construction is expeeted to continue for several years, continuing to fortify the State's economy while it establ.ishes mueh needed diversified industry. The task of improving and extending tlle State's road system will req_uire increasing heavy expenditures for highway con- struction. The cities of Anchorage and Fairbanks and the independant school. districts for those communities must continue their large con- struction programs to keep pace with the rising demand for services. Construction of new housing will continue for seme time to provide for population increases and to replace substandard housing. Com- mercial construction should maintain a ~ow but fairly steady level. Local oontractors, particularly in the Anchorage area, have gradually been increasing their share of the teta~ construction work performed. This means that generally much more of the construc- tion expenditure is of direct benefit to the areats economy, because more of the workers will remain as year-round residents, eliminating a large portion of the migratory labor pool. More money is thus put back into circulation locally. Anchorage construction firms are a~so success:f'ull.y compet1ng with companies from the continent,al United States for Alaskan contraots outside the nailbelt area. 27 Area Econ0t111 and Resources M.AMJFAC!URING Althougb. manufaoturing is inorea.s1ng in importenqe to the power market area1 i t mak:èS onl.y a minor contribution to the economie base. None of the industry can be considered as heavy manufaoturing; one large sawmill and a few salmon eanneries are the olose$t to this eategory. Most of the light manufaoturing plants are looated in the Anchorage area, Printil:~S and engraving anêl. small fOOd prooessing pl1)Ilts malte up the bulk of the light manutacturing enterprises, Others irlclude cement products 1 metal pro~cts.t <:lothing accessor~es, and furni ture and bedding. This llght manutacturing is ohief'ly' a nonbasic industry, :tnasmuch as most of the produ.ct is consumed loc ally s ra thel' than exported from the power market area"' Nevertheless 1 these emall industries are economiaall1' important becau&e they supply needs which <ttOUld otherwise have to be tilled t'rom outside sources. Expansion of this type of manuf'acturing is very desirable and is expeoted to continue .. Industries are attracted to a new location by pltntitul naturel resources, low prevailing wages, transportation adyantages, or nearby markets!. Unfortunatel.y 2 Alaska has been able to ofter only' the first: minerale, fish, turs, and timber. tabor and transportation costs are still h:L.gh; the permanent populatj.on provides only a small consumer market; and an industrial market is $llnost nonexistent. Sorne of these disadvantages may be of'i"set by providing cheap and abundant electric power at suitable industriel locations. liow-cost power at a tidewater si te would be a strong inducl,\mlent to a heavy ;lndust.ry such as aluminum or chemicals. No firm p:roposal for delivering such low-cost power in adequate quantities bas yet been maQ.e. Potential. industries which would utilize natural resources of the Bailbelt are diseussed under the various resourQes. Another type of industriel development would utilize imported materiels to produce Soods for local consumption. A tundamental JJ,mita~ion is the relatively smaU market in western Alaska. The smallest plant of economie size migbt have a larger capacity than the Alaskan market ~uld require, whereas transportation costs would severelY restrict such an Alaskan industry seeking to serve markets in other states. Considering these restrictions, the o:pportuni ties for manufaoturing for the present are best fi tted to products ~i<:'h can 1 ,?8 ---------- MILITARY INSTALLATIONS m Wi ldwood Militory Bose ŒJ Whittier Militory Port [!) Elmendorf Air Force Bose m Fort Richardson Ar my Bose m Fort Greely Ar my Bose [!] Eielson Air Force Bose m Lodd Air Force Bose œ Cl eor Military Base GPO 994274 c 0 0 K ;.~() ~-::);.-;t ~ .......... Chakachamna Lake ---- () 1 1 / / / Cf) ,__ <> b. ~ e () © 0 E9 () 25 ARCT/C OCEAN \ C A N A D A GULF OF A L AS KA KEY MAP L E GE N 0 ANTIMONY © LIME STONE ARGILLITE 0 MANGANESE CHROMITE rn MOLYBDENUM CLAY • OIL WELLS (Producing) COAL /'-...... ...__.) POSSIBLE COPPER \1 PERLITE GOLO-SILVER A SHALE GYPSUM LEAD-ZINC SC ALE 0 & ® T I N TUNGSTEN OF M 1 LES 25 UNITED STATES OIL DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION ALASKA DISTRICT DEVIL CANYON PROJECT PROV I NCE 50 KNOWN MINERAL DEPOSITS 852-906-34 .,/ Area Eoonomy and Resources be profitably produced on a small saale for local use and products which are only partially manufactured and can be completed by local plants. A small steel mill is eurrently under consideration tor the Fairbanks area. The p~oposed mill would consist of two plants - a melt plant and a rolling mill. The melt plant would be built around an electria arc furnace utilizing local scrap~ Beaause of the lack of Alaskan markets for scrap, it is relatively cheap, which would offset the coat of ether materiels which would have to be shipped. The principal output of the mill would be reinforcing steel bars, but ether steel products could also be fabricated. MINING Gold 1 more than anything else, made Alaska famous. The yellow metal, however 1 is yie~ding its prominent place to other minerale, such as ooal1 construction materiels, and cil, not only in the State as a whole, but also in the power market area. Metals . Sinoe 1902, when Felix Pedro "struck :Lt rich" near Fairbanks, more than $2301 000 1 000 of placer gold has been mined from the area served by the Alaska Railroad. By far the greatest portion of this was produced in the Fairbanks District. In 1958 the total value of gold and silver production at placer mines in the Railbelt area was about $3 1 500 1 000, As in several previous years, a negligible amount of gold was produced at lode mines. Most Silver was a byproduct of gold mining. Gold mining has been oaught for several years in a squeeze between the fixed priee and rising operating costs. Large blocks of ground previously classed as ore have become economically submarginal. Acoording to its annual reports, a major producer in the Fairbanks area does not expect tc operate beyond 1963 or 1964. Thus 1 the industry that contributed largely to the early settlement and devel- opment of Alaska may become a caaualty of inflation and ohanging economie conditions. This is somewnat ironical1 beaause geologists suspect that many of Alaska's gold deposits are yet to be discovered • 29 ,./ Area Economy and Resources Deposits of at least 9 metals ether than gold and silver are reported to occur in the power market areai Antimony 1 chromium, oopper, lead, manganese, molybdenum, tin1 tungsten1 and zinc. The present _production of these misceUaneous metals is negligible ~ The most signifioant total production has been $2 1 300 1 000 worth of chromite ore and conoentrates produoed since 1943 on the Kenai Pen~ insula near Seldovia. Most of this went to the Government stockpile, Mining has ceased, at least temporarily, because the purohase program bas expired. Exoept in those relatively small areas easily accessible to trans_portation, prospecting for metals ether than gold has been very desultory. Systematic investigation of the many geologically favorable areas undoubtedly will result in the discovery of addi- tional deposi ts of commercially import.13nt minerale. Wi th the proper economie conditions, development of and production from these depos- its would be profitable. Construction Minerale Production of sand, gravel, and stone has recently come to the fore as a major mineral industry of the Railbelt~ Because these materiels are used primarily by the construction industry, their output fluctuates as the amount of construction varies. The mate- rials are used mainly to build roads and airfields, although con~ siderable amounts are ~equired in concrete structures and by the Alaska Railroad for track ballast. Production of sand, gravel, and stone in the Railbelt was valued at about $2 1 800 1 000 in 1958. The use of ether native nonmetallie minerale for construc- tion purposes has been negligible. Sui table raw materiels are availM able in accessible locations, but economie conditions have prevented use except on a miner saale. A new brick plant, utilizing local clays and featuring a downdraft kiln1 bas recently begun operation in Anchorage. Bulk cement is importe! by barge and distributed from a storage plant in Anchorage, The region new consumes about 300,000 barrels annually1 less than one-third the capacity of ·the more economieal size.d plants. An Alaskan cement plant would have tc be very efficient to compete with the comparatively cheap bulk cement importa, Primary ingredients for cement manufacture are avail· able near Cantwell station on the Alaska Railroad. Normal growth of the State 1 plus the extra cement requirements of major construction projeats, auch as Devil Canyon Dam and Powerplant 1 may soon provide the additional demand to justi:f'y utilization of local raw materiels. 30 ""' Area Eoonomy and Resouroes Mineral Fuels The $6 1 9001 000 worth of coal mined in 1958 accounted for over half the value of mineral production from the Railbelt area~ An eatimated 70 percen·l; of the eoal production was soJ.d for heat and power at military bases. The major eoal mines are in the Matanuska tield near Palmer and the Nenana field near Healy. Very little ooal is mined outside the Railbelt. Recent reconnaissance drilling in the Beluga River area 60 miles west of Anchorage indicates that at leest one large bed may be suitable for mining by opencut metbods. This field might provide a favorable site for a minemouth powerplant to generate power for transmission to the Anchorage ares. Future demand for Railbelt coal might be untavorably affected by construction of a large hydroelectric projeot auch as Devil Canyon. On the otber hand1 it may be enhanced by the develop- ment of export markets or the perfection of processes whieh use coal as a source of organic ohemicàls, fertilizers 1 high•B.t.u. gas, liquid fuels, cils, fats, waxes, and paving materiels. Discovery of oil on the Kenai Peninsule in 1957 touched off a land boom similar to the early gold rushes. Exploratory activity was intensified over a large part of Alaska, including the Railbelt. The degree of this activity is indicated by the amount of money spent in the entire State in 1959. Drilling and producing costa amounted to $13 1 940 1 0001 and exploration expenditures totaled $16 1 7141 000. A large portion of these totals were spent in the power market area. Several million acres are now under oil and gas lease in the area. By April 1 1 196o, six producing wells had been brought in on the northwestern Kenai Peninsule. The efficient rate of production is at leest 31 000 barrels per day. Plans are now being made. to con- struct in the near future a pipeline from the oilfields to the coast1 where storage faoilities and a marine dock will be built. Because most of the companies now searching for oil have their ow.n tidewater refineries 1 crude oil will probab~ be sent to those plants in the first years after a major discovery. It will be many years before Alaskan oil consumption will have increased enough to support a refinery in the new State. J'apan and Australie, with expanding industriel bases and rising standards of living, are potentiel market~ for Alaska 1 s orude and refined oil production. Naturel gas has been disaovered in connection Witb. several oil fields. The large at know.n field is the Gubik Gas Field on the 31 MILITARY INSTALLATIONS [i] Wildwood M ·litary Base 0 Whittier Military Port m Elmendorf Air Force Base 0 Fort Richardson Ar my Bose rn Fort Gree ly Ar my Base œ Eielson Air Force Base ill Lodd Air Force Bose [!] Clear Military Base 4 -12 ·GO G PO 9942' 4 C 0 0 K ;:.·~~ 'f-">7--.-,...;~ '0"'--' Chokochamna Lake 25 ARCTIC OCEAN C A N A D A GULF OF A L A S KA KEY MAP SCALE 0 OF MILES 25 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INT ER IOR BUREAU OF RECLAMAT ION ALASKA DI STR I CT OEVIL CANYON PROJECT 50 AREAS CONTAINING KNOW N AND AGRICULTURAL LANDS POTENTIAL 8 5 2 -9 06 ·38 Area Economy and Resou:rces Arctic Slope. Some consideration has been given to piping this gas about 465 miles to Fairbanks~ where it would be used for heating and generation of eleotric power. Development of this project does not appear likely in the near future. Natural gas has also been found in commercial quantities on the Kenai Peninsule. One exploratory well and two development wells have been shut in, awaiting gas marketing facilities. Anchorage has already made tentative arrangements with a private firm for a fran- chise to supply naturel gas to the city. Sumrnarz In the early years, mining in the Railbelt was primarily for gold. Recently, coal production has gained pre-eminence, with stone, sand, and gravel becoming more important~ œhe brightest future appears to be for oil production. Many different minerale have been reported to occur in the Railbelt area1 as shown on Draw- ing No. 852-906-34. Construction of aocess roads ta remote areas would greatly facilitate prospecting and would advance the discovery of additional mineral locations, In general, however, economie conditions must become more favorable to encourage the search for and development of new mineral deposits. A dependable supply of low-cost power (2-5 mille per kilowatt-hour) would be an inducement to establish Alaskan mineral industries which might compete with firme from the mainland states. AGRICULTURE 1 From its very modest beginning several decades aga, Alaska 1 s agriculture slowly but surely has grown to assume important proportions in the State•s economy. In contrast to the few acres cleared by early gold miners 1 there are now modern farms employing the latest techniques. The main oenters of present agricultural production are the Matanuska Valley near Anchorage and the Tanana Valley near Fairbanks. The Matanuska Valley had been sucoessfully farmed for many years before the Matanuska Oolony was established in 1935• Beth before and after this date, the farms were small and many were only 32 -' Area Economy and Resources part-time or subsistance enterprises. Clearing costa were so high that only a few acres a year could be brought into production. Farms are slowly being consolidated, increasing the proportion of full-time farms, About 131 500 acres were cropped in the Matanuska Valley in 1958. The major types of farming are dairy, potato, potato-vegetable, and small poultry. Most of the farm products are marketed in the Anchorage area through the Matanuska Vall.ey Farmers Cooperating Association., Permafrost creates special problems to be overcome by the successful farmer in the Tanana Valley. After land is cleared and stripped for cultivation or structures, subsidence due to melting may occur in fields or under buildings or roads~ Pits that develop in fields cleared for crops require occasional leveling, adding to the high expense of clearing. Permafrost also complioates drainage and farm water supplies. Farming is the main source of livelihood ~or relatively few families, Potatoes are the leading cash orop 1 with commercial dairy and poultry farms contributing substantially to the local farm economy. The intensive growing season with long hours of sunlight favors growing grain. The Tanana Valley Farmers Cooperative Association assista the farmers with the many marketing and supply problems. The military installations at Ladd and Eielson Fields purchase large quantities of produce. A major problem affecting agricultural development in Alaska is the inadequacy of financial assistance for farm settlement and improvement. Potentiel Alaska farmers seldom have enough capital to obtain the necessary equipment to clear and cultivate lands, and sustain their families for the long period that occurs before any income can be derived from farming. Land clearing is still the hardest and most expansive problem facing the new settler. Seme financial aid is being provided, but more is needed. Efficient farming and proper agricultural development in Alaska has been retarded by lack of information concerning land capa- bility, utilization, and availability~ Recent etudies by the Soil Conservation Service and reconnaissance surveys by the Bureau of Land Management indicate that the Bailbelt includes large areas of land suitable for agricultural production. The major areas are the Kenai Peninsule lowlands, the Matanuska Valley lowlands, the lower Susitna Valley, and the Tanana Valley. Table III-l summarizes the resulta of these land capability surveys 1 as well as data on present land utilization in the main agricultural areas of the Railbelt, Drawing No. 852-9o6-38 shows the areas in the Railbelt that contain known and potentiel agricul tural lands. In 1959 1 good unclaimed land in accessible locations could be found only in the Susitna and Tanana 33 .,/ Area Economy and Resources Valleys. In addition to the farms shown in Table III-11 there is in the Railbelt a total of 935 agricultural homesteads which the occu- pants intend to farm but have not yet reported significant commercial sales. Table III-1 Agricultural Land in Railbelt Area Estimated Land Kno-wn additional cropped Number farms êu1tivable cultivable in in 1952 .... land land '1958 Full-Part- Are a (1000 ac.~ (1000 ac.) (acres) time time Kenai Peninsule Lowlands 185 47 1,8o1 10 25 Anchorage area 18 0 1,l26 5 35 Matanuska Valley Lowlands l3l 27 13,556 ll5 120 Lower Susitna Valley 79 19 75 2 5 Tanana Valley ~ 113 4.t294 ~ 68 Total 745 206 20,852 155 253 Various agencies are conducting research programs to provide basic information for establishing and maintaining a permanent and efficient agricultural industry in Alaska. These programs include suoh items as livestock requirements, prospective products and markets, and teohnical problems of development, Other work includes improvement of grains, grasses, and pasture lands; control of in- sects1 plant diseases and weeds;. soil management; and adaptation etudies of fruits and berries. As part of these research etudies, the University of Alaska, in cooperation with the u. s. Department of Agriculture, operates agricultural experiment stations at Palmer and Collage. The Bureau of Reclamation is cooperating with the Department of Agriculture in studying the feasibility of irrigating crops in the Matanuska Valley. Precipitation is usually defiaient 34 - Area Economy and Resources earl.y in the growing season, and irrigationmigb.t be eoonomically desirable to assist crops in getting an early start. The Soil Con- servation Service is alBe st~ing the desirability of irrigation in the Tanana Valle,y. Alaska's present total retail food bill is estimated at $120 1 000 1 000 annually. T.he retail value of commercial farm sales and home consumption is estimated at about $10 1 000 1 000 in 1959. Alaska 1s therefore about 8 percent self-suff'iaient in f'arm-produaed f'oodstutfs. In contrast to this, a realistic goal is 25 percent sel:f'-sufficiency by 1975• This goal is justified by eaonomic c.:onsid- erations, and no climatic or environmental limitations bar its attain- ment. It is estimated that there will be 810 farms by 1975 1 of which 430 will be in the Matanuska Valley and 300 in Tanana Valley. FORESTRY Forests of the power market area are of two general types: the southern coastal foreste and the interior forests. The re- sources of these foreste have scarcely been touched. The predominant commeraial species of the southern coastal forest are wes~rn hemlock and Sitka spruce, with the former predom- inating, Most of th.ese stands occur in the Chugach National Forest, which generally covers the Prince William Sound area. T.he hemlock- Sitka spruce combination is also found in a thin belt along the western coast of the Kenai Peninsule as far north as the town of Kenai. West of the Kenai mountains and a few miles inland from Cook Inlet1 the coastal type forest gives way to eparse White spruce and biroh forests of non-commercial value. Much of this area was burned over in 1946 to auch an extent that naturel reseeding has not taken place. Several commercial sawmills produce lumber primarily from the spruce, with an annuel output of about 101 0001 000 board feet. One of the largest mills in Alaska is located at Whittier. The smaller mills, m~.of which are portable, supply local demanda, A treating plant, now under construction at Whittier1 will have capac- ity to handle annually about 51 000 1 000 board feet of peles, piling, ties, and timbers. MUch of this will be hemlock, Which is little utilized at present. Output of the plant will be sold in Alaska • . The interior forests consist principally of white spruce and Alaska white birch, typically occurring in a mixture. These foreste are widely scattered throughout the interior of Alaska, 35 ./ Area Economy and Resources mainly along the lower slopes of the river valleys on the better drained soils and benchlands. White spruce has been the most widely used timber of the interior forests. Approximately 50 small rough sawmills and a few finishing mills eut white spruce for rough construction lumber, house logs 1 piling, and the like. Select legs, if properly seasoned, can provide reasonably good inside finish lumber suitable for local use. Total annuel production of these small mills, many of which are portable, is about 13,0001 000 board feet. It is not expected that white spruce lumber could be economically exported from Alaska. Nevertheless, it should continue to serve, in part, a growing local market. In arder to capture a larger share of the market, local mills must furnish a more constant supply of lumber. It must be well manufactured, graded1 and air-dried; a fair percentage must be planed and kiln-dried. Alaska white birch occurs bath as a mixture with white spruce and in relatively pure stands. It is a hardwood of fine, even texture and. is suitable for furniture, wood veneer 1 plywood, fine grade flooring, paneling, and dimension stock. The wood 1s similar to that of the valuable birch species found in the northern Great Lakes states. Past utilization of Alaska birch has been relatively minor. Expanded utilization of the forest resources appears to center around the Alaska birch1 to supplement or replace the rapidly disappear1ng birch stands of Wisconsin, northern New York, and south- ern Canada. Tests of Alaska birch from relatively pure stands indi- cate quality comparable with the yellow birch of the northern Lake states, The major markets for birch are in the furniture industry, with canters at Grand Rapids, Michigan, and Los Angeles~ Californie. The overland distance ta Grand Rapids is so long that Alaska birch might not be able ta compete in that market. Los Angeles, however, appears to be a naturel market for Alaska birch because the city is far from the birch producing areas of Wisconsin and New York and is located on an established water transportation route from Alaska, The Alaska Railroad and shipping lines have recently established favorable freight rates for lumber shipments from Alaska ta the main- land states. After a lumbering operation for Alaska birch has become firmly established1 the next step would be ta develop a small hard- wood manufacturing industry within the State. This would be espe· cially attractive in the case of furniture for local ~se, beoause 36 ~- Area Economy and Reaources of the high coat ot shipping furniture to Alaska. Bircb paneling and flooring are other potentiel products. A gross area of about 901 000 acres know.n as the Talkeetna Birch Stand bas been inventoried. This stand occurs on the east side of the Susitna River just south of the Talkeetna River,. The average volume per acre is sligbtly less than 2 1 000 board feet of commercial birch having a breast-higb diameter of 8 inches or more. Application has been made to include this stand in a forest land witbdrawal. Other bircb stands presently unknow.n as to volume and quality exist on the northwest side of K1+ik Arm 1 west of the Susitna River, and in the Tanana Valley east of Fairbanks. Some of these stands may be of higher volume and quality than the presently acces- sible Talkeetna stand. Tbe Knik stand, however, is partially home- steaded1 and is therefore less desirable for commercial development. Other major obstacles which hinder the development of the forest resource are the lack of inventory of many areas, higb risk of forest fire, and lack of forest acaess roads. Tbe trees of the interior forests make e~ellent pulp and form a vast potentiel pulp-wood reserve. If economie conditions become more favorable, the interior forests may play an important role in the rapidly expanding pulp industry. COMMERCIAL FISHEBIES Tbe commercial fishing industry of the power market area is centered around Cook Inlet and Resurrection Bay (the latter is gener- ally considered a part of the Cook Inlet fisheries). For the most part it can be considered a basic industry, since the bulk of the product is sbipped outside the area, Tbe industry is of major importance to the economy of the Kenai Peninsula, aonstituting one of the principal sources ot employ. ment. Salmon are the most important species caugbt and acaount for a major part of the industry 1 s dollar value. Principal gear employed in salmon fishing are gill nets and beach seines. ~aps were also operated in Cook Inlet until 1959· Œhe majority of the fishermen are local residents. 37 ,./ Area Economy and Resources Other local species of importance are halibut1 crab and shrimp. Clams are also plentiful in many areas along Cook Inlet, but their use is primarily domestic. Most of the salmon catch is canned for shipment outside. Other methods of processing are quick freezing and smoking 1 the latter principally for local consumption~ In general, crab meat and halibut are quick .frozen for shipment while shrimp are both canned and frozen. The sea fisheries are also important for their contribution as a local food source. Annual personal use fishing1 crabbing and clamming do not re.flect in recorded catches but represent a signi- fioant value in the local areas. Over the past 10 years the first wholesale value of the Cook Inlet salmon case pack bas averaged about $7 1 300 1 000. An annual average of about $2 1 700 1 000 of this wholesale value representa pay. ments to fishermen. The crab catch for the past 9 years has repre- sented an additional average annual value to the fishermen of about $140 1 000. The relative commercial value of ether species is miner with the exception of shrimp which are fast growing in importance. It is believed by the fisheries agencies that by proper management the salmon runs can be increased. Also there exist potentiel fisheries for species not currently being utilized. Pro~ cessing of fish wastes, particularly for pet foods and possibly fer- tilizer1also offers development possibilities. Therefore it is an- ticipated that production of fishery products will increase in sub- sequent years. SPORT FISR AND W!LDLIFE Hunting and fisbing for sport constitute an industry of considerable importance to the power market area. A substantiel part of this industry can even be considered as basic. Out-of- state hunting and fishing parties and even Alaska residents from other areas contribute signifiaantly to the new money brought in .. Furthermore, Alaska is becoming inareasingly popular with big game hunters and trophy seekers, Quite generally hunting and fishing forays to much of the interior, northern and western sectors of Alaska are outfitted at Anchorage or Fairbanks, T.here is no acaurate measurement of the value of sport fishing and hunting to the area, However, the annual investment in 38 ,.-' Area Eaonomy and Resouraes gear1 food supplies, lodging, guide service and transportation eg_uip- ment and costs alone proba.bly a.mounts to several million dollars. Tbis added to the value of fish and game as a local food supply source points up the importance of this natural resourae. The most important big game species found in the area are moose, caribou, black, brown, and grizzley bear. Dall sheep and mountain goat are also hunted1 however their generally isolated habitat discourages all but the. most ardent sportsmen. Small game to be found are the snowshoe hare 1 upland game birds suoh as ptarmigan and grouse, and many species of migratory waterfowl. Sport f'ishing for salmon is both a saltwater and fresh water activity. Cutthroat, rainbow, Dolly Varden and Lake trout are abundant in many fresh water streams and lakes. Grayling are another species of game tish greatly sought after throughout the area. Northern Pike are found in the water courses of the north- eastern part of the power market area. Trapping provides, in general, only a supplemental winter ineome to those who still pursue this occupation. Principal fur bearers are beaver, land otter, mink, merten, fox, lynx and muskrat. Wolves and wolverine are trapped and hunted for both their pelt and a bounty. WU'RISM AND RECREATION Only a few years ago a vacation trip to Alaska wa.s a major undertaking, generally limited to those with large resources. Today, although still not inexpensive, Alaska travel has been brought within the means of many. As a result, tourism has beoome an important Alaskan industry that is receiving considerable attention. It is a basic industry that brings new money into the power market area and is therefore very desirable. Precise figures on revenue from the tourist trade are not available. In 1957, visitors to Alaska and intra-Alaska vacationists spent an estimated $29,000 1 000 on transportation, service, and retail trade. Probably one-third of this amount was spent in the power market area. Alaska offers many scenic attractions for the sightseer and photographer: towering mountains, luxuriant forests 1 coastal 39 ..,; Area Eaonomy and Resources glacier fields, fiords, lakes 1 and volcanoes. T-he sportsman can select big-game hunting, sports fishin.g, mountain climbing, or 'Winter sports. Anchorage holds a uFur Rendezvous" in Februaryj Fairbanks sponsors a winter carnival and dog-team races in March and a 11Golden Days 11 celebration in July. Anchorage is the gateway to popular hunting and fishing araas on the Alaska Peninsule. Fairbanks serves as operating base for visitors to the Arctic, the Yukon River, the Seward Peninsule, and many colorful Eskimo towns. Mount McKinley National Park was established in 1917 for two principal purposes -to include the highest mountain in the North American continent and its associated peaks, and to protect the extraordinary wildlite native to the region, The McKinley Park Hotel, l.ocated at the entrance of the park at McKinley Park Station, is operated under c,oncession and is open from mid-June to mid-Sep- tember. There are splendid views of Mount McKinley from a road which extends 89 miles across the park. The need for recreational facil.ities is expected to increase manyfold during the next quarter century. In arder to meet the anticipated use, a well-rounded system of public parks should be devel.oped. These coul.d start with simpler types such as view over- looksJ picnic areas, and campgrounds, with subsequent expansion to more elaborate facilities, The Statehood Enabling Act (72 Stat. 339) grants the new State the right to select, within 25 years, 4oo,ooo acres of National Forest Land and 4oo,ooo acres of other public lands, all of which shall be adjacent to established commu- nities or suitable for prospective community centers and recreation .. al areas .. Venture capital is required for new motels 1 hotels, res- taurants, service stations, and commercial recreation developments at strategie locations. As new roads are built, added conveniences tor travelers must be provided in outlying areas. Sites with spe~ cific attractions, such as hot springs, can expect a growing re- quirement for resort-type facilities centered around a modern lodge or comparable accommodations. Since many tourists do not come to Alaska in their oWD. automobiles, there will be an increasing need for local area transportation facilities, auch as rental automo- biles and sightseeing buses • 4o _, CHAPTER IV POWER DEMAND AND &UPPLY Markets for project power would consist primarily of residential, commercial, small industrial, and ether utility type loads in the power market area, which extends from Homer and Seward on the south to Fairbanks on the north. The project would also supply requirements ot large industries which could reasonably be ex:pected to locate in the area when a large block of relatively low cost power becomes available. Utility loads are now served ehiefly by municipal systems and R.E.A. cooperativeso High cost of generation and shortage of supply discour&ge greater use of electric power. Construction of Devil Canyon Project would remove these major restraints, resulting in a tremendous increase in use of power. Even with the new gener• ating capacity now under construction, a power shortage will probably occur by 1965. Completion of Devil Canyon Project by 1969 is an urgent need for the Railbelt area. AREA OF POWER USE The power market area encompasses a land area of about 4o,OOO square miles, toughly one-fifteenth the total area of Alaska. It includes the 11 Railbelt 11 , a strip of land contiguous to and served by the Alaska Railroad, and adjoining areas that probably would be served by project power. This area, equal in size to the State of Virginia or Kentucky, contains about 55 percent of Alaska s present -population. For this study, the power market area is divided into three parts: The Kenai Area includes all of Kenai Peninsula except the southern tip; the Anchorage Area extends from Whittier at the northern end of the peninsula to the Summit station on the Alaska Railroad; and the Fairbanks Area extends from Summit and Paxson to a line about 50 miles north of Delta Junction1 Fairbanks, and Nenana. The power market area includes those areas presently, or proposed to be, supplied by existing utility systems and the areas that would probably be served by Devil Canyon Project, such as the Denali Highway. 41 .,/ Power Demand an4 SupplJ PftESJNT POWER SUPPLY AND USE Both powersupply and use are divided into two general classifications, military and nonmilitary. With a few œinor excep- tions, all military loads are supplied by military powerplan.ts. A few small, isolated military posts are supplied by local utilities, and Fort Richardson and Elmendorf Air Force Base purchase nonfirm energy from Eklutna Project. Military generating capacity is not ordinarily available tor nonmilitary uses; however, interties between military and civilian systems exist in the Anchorage and Fairbanks e.reas, and the Bureau of Reclamation has interchange agreements with the miUtar, at Anchorage. Nonmilitary Utilitz szstems Central station power is presently distributed by three municipally owned utilities, four REA-financed cooperatives, and three private power companies. In 1959 the REA co.operatives served about 55 percent of all eustomers 1 municipal utili ties served 44 percent, and private utilities about 1 percent. source of suppll '!he largest single source of utility power supply is the Federally owned and operated 30 1 000-kilowatt Eklutna Project near Anchorage. Completed by the Bureau ot Reclamation in 1955, this is presently the only source of firm hydroelectric power in the power market area. The agsregate inste.lled capaci ty of all utili ti es, including Eklutna Project, was 81,725 kilowatts in 1959. Of this total, only 75,870 kilowatts was firm capa.city.. About 39 percent of this total t~ capability is hydre, 43 percent is steam, and lB percent is diesel. Chugach Electric Association, an REA·financed cooperative at Anchorage, is building a 15,000-kilwa.tt hydro plant near Kenai Lake on the Kenai Peninsule.. This Cooper Lake Powerplant, to be 42 Power Dem.and and/ Supply •omp1eted in 1961, will operate primarily as a peaking plant, integrated with CEA's 141 500-k:l.lowatt stea.m plant in Anchorage. Table !V-1 shows the installed capacity and firm capacity for each type of generation for all significant utility sources in the power market area. The table includes 1959 capacity plus the 15,000-kilowatt hydro plant now being constructed; no other utility capacity is scheduled for addition atter 1961. Table IV-1 Utility Generating Ce.pacity (TÔ be available in 1961) Area Installed CaE!city ~kw.} Firm ~Eacit~ ~kw.} _ __ Diesel Total Hldro Steam Hydro Steam Diesel Total Ken ai y 0 0 5,410 5,410 11 0 0 5,180 5,180 Anchorage !45,000 14,500 7,790 67,290 1{5,000 14,500 7,790 67,290 Fairbanks 5,625 18,oço ___ l!:Qo _g~,025 0 18!000 4oo 18z4oO Total 50,625 32,500 13,600 96,725 45,000 32,500 13,370 90,870 Y CEA's 15,000-kw. Cooper take Project, to be completed in 1961, will supply both Kenai and Anchorage e.reas. Included in Anchorage area . figures,. Cost of Supply Present coste of power generation by utilities in the powermarket area are rather high. The wholesale rate for energy from Eklutna Project is 10.8 m.il1s per kilowatt-hour. The latest estimate ot cost of power tram the 15 1 000-kilowatt Cooper Lake Project delivered in Anchorage is about 11.0 mille. Average cost of steam generation at a normal load factor is about 20 mills. Diesel genera- tion coste range from a low of about 24 mills per kilowatt-hour to unit rates of 30 mille or more. 43 ,! :lt ,./ Power Demand and Supply Power Use Average use per customer, as well as total power use, bas increased substantially in the last few years.. Records of power sales by utilities in the power market area show that the average use per residential customer increased from 2,480 kilowatt-hours in 1953 to 4,090 kilowatt-hours in 1959. During the same period, the number of customers increased from 20,4oo to 25 1 800. Average commercial customer use rose from 13,780 kilowatt- hours in 1953 to 19,460 in 1959. The number of customers increased about 28 percent to a total of 3,870 in 1959. Total energy consumption for far.ms, street lighting and other municipal use, . public buildings, small industries, and miscellaneous use was 42,000,000 kilowatt-hours in 1959 compared to 16,500,000 kilowatt-hours in 1953. Small industries accounted for about 60 percent of this use. Table IV-2 summarizes the historical utility loads, showing both annual kilowatt-hour use and approximate coincidental December peak ld.lowatts t'or the three subareas in the power market area. The table shows gross utility generation, which includes sales, distri- bution lasses, transmission lasses, and ~owerplant use. Two additional reoorded loads were purposely omitted from this table. These were the power requirements t!:Sf the Fairbanks Exploration Company 1 who operate several gold dredges in the Fairbanks area, and the purchase of Eklutna nonfirm energy by the mill tary. The se requirements were not considered to be general utility loads. The~Placer Gold Mining Company is the only large industry for which data are available on powèr use. Consumption decreased from 35,400 1 000 kilowatt-hours in 1953 to l8,8oo,ooo kilowatt-hours in 1959. Military purchases of nonfir.m energy from Eklutna Project averaged 141 200,000 kilowatt- hours in 1957, 1958 and 1959. These uses occur primarily during the summer and contribute only a few hundred kilowatts to the coincidental December peak. Retail Power Rates Nearly all retail rate schedules in the power market area are based on a sliding scale 1 so that the average unit cost decreases as more energy is used. Residential rates in both the Anchorage and 44 \. cal- endar Year 1951 1952 1953 $195lt. 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1:/ Table IV-2 Historieal Utility Loads Energy Use (1,000 kw.-hr. )" ... Area December Peaks (kw.} Percent Kenai Anchorage Fairbanks Annua1 Annual Kenai Anchorage Fairbanks Area Area Area Total Increase Increase Area Area Area 3,961 '55,44o 22,300 81,701 1,010 12,8oo y 24.665 3().2 5,101 < 14,940 26,325 lo6,366 1,160 16,800 y 34,143 32.1 6,082 . 100,96<> 33,467 100;599 . 1,290 21,200 7,900 13,009 9·1 6,329 U0 1 020 37,769 J.54)ll8 1,390 24,700 8,900 18,905 12.3 7,001 122,898 43,124 173,023 1,530 27,4oo 9,900 25,143 14.5 8,207 14o,624 49,335 198,166 1,870 32,500 10,800 16,200 8.2 9,959 152,911 51,496 214,366 2,300 33,800 11,6oo 16,791 7-8 11.,746 l66,5o8 52,903 231,157 2,500 36,4oo 11,900 25,54o u.o 13,534 183,832 59,331 256,6gr 2,800 4o,4oo 13,000 Not available Power Market Coineidental Peak Total ( 9&f, of"' total} 30,390 29,800 34,990 34,300 38,830 38,100 45,170 44,300 47,700 46,800 50,800 49,800 56,200 55,100 ,.r Power Demand and Suppl.J' Fairbanks areas provicle an inducement for electrie water heating up to a speèif::f.ed monthly blook. Eleo.trie space heating is not encour- aged1 principally because of the short supply' of power. Table IV-3 shows the oost of 250 kUowatt-hours per month residentiel use for the major electrie utilities in the power market area. This table also compares the oost of average residentiel use for each utility in 1958. ~t~ §rstems Most of .Alaska •s major military 'bases are in the power market area. '!he largest of these are Elmendorf Air Force Base and Fort Richardson near Anchorage and Ladd and Eielson Air Foree Bases near Fairbanks. Other major bases in the power market ares are Fort Greely near Big Delta, Clear m1litary base south of Nenana 1 Wildwood m:tlitary base near Kenai1 and the military port of "'Jhittiet". Several isolated Nike and radar sites are scattered tbroughout the general area. Source of SuE& Six of these major bases have steam power generating facili ties to supply their electric power needs.. This will also be true of the base now being eonstructed at Clear.o Steam is used for general. heating purposes at those bases wh:f.cb have steam powerplants. Nearly all bases have some diesel generating capacity; diesel is the only means of producing power aft Wildwood. and the smaUer mill tsry, bases. '!he onJ.y use of hydroelectric generation by the milita;ey is the purchase of Eklutna nonfirm energy by Ellllend.orf Air Force Base and. Fort Bichard.Son. Power Be~uirements No actual militar;y power requirement statistiQs are avail- able; however 1 .estima tes have been made of tbe eapaci ty · needs of most bases. On an average, actual utilization is about 50 percent of 46 '· Area and Utility Kenai Area City of Sewa.rd Homer Electric Assn. Kena.i Power Co • .tr Anchorage Area City of Anchorage Chuga.ch :Electric Assn. Matanuska Electric Assn. Fairbanks Area City ot Fairbanks Golden Valley Electric Assn. Table IV•3 Retail Power Costs for Residential Use Co~t of 250 kw.-hr. per mo. Cost of average use per customer -1958 Cast Average Average C'ost per annual annual per Total kw.-hr. use cost kw.-hr. (dollars) ( C_!~ts >~ -~-_l!w. "'ll!" ·l~~--~J ~.:>.!l~sJ~ . _ _(~~!lts }_ __ 13.50 17.50 28.80 10.00 10.00 13.00 17.50 17.75 5.40 7-00 11.52 4.00 4.00 5.20 7.00 7.10 2,906 1,553 888!/ 4,199 4,408 3,755 2,848 3,351 169.20 5,82 151 .. 92 9 .. 78 116.16 l3.o8 l41.6o 3.'31 145.32 3.30 174 .. 96 4.66 2o6.64 7 .. 26 228.60 6 .. 82 !/ For year 1957; data for 1958 not ava.ilable ,/ Power Demand and Supply installed generatins capacity. Table IV-4 lista the principal military establishments by area, their aenerating capacity by type, and estimated capacit-y requirements. If a military system includes both steam and diesel capaci ty 1 the diesel is used as standby only. It is estimated that in 1961 there will be an excess of about 49 1 000 kilowatts of steam oapacity and about 22,000 kilowatts of unused diesel capacity at military establishments. Table IV-4 shows the above data as i t we.s in 1959 and as i t will be upon completion in 1961 of two mi li tary powerplants now under construction. A e2,5QO·kilowatt eoal-fired steam. plant will be a part of the Clear m.illtary base, and a 2,000-kUowatt nuelear reactor is being installed at Fort Greely. Tbe only electrical intereonneetion between military bases 1s that between Elmend.orf Air Foree Base and Fort Richardson, which is for emergeney use only. EJ.m.endort and Fort Richardson have an agreement wi th the Bureau ot Reclamation for purehase of nonfirm energy from Eklutna Project. Based on the estimated c&l>&city used and an average annual load factor of 6o percent, the energy requirement of the bases listed in Table IV-4 was about 300 1000,000 kilowatt-hours in 1959. In 1961 it will be about 360,000,000 kilowatt-hours. FUTURE POWER REQUIREMENTS AND SUPPLY Power needs were vroJeçted in three separate classifica- tions: general utility, large industrial, and military. Because ot the increasins interdepende,nce between the Kenai, Anchorage, and Fairbanks areas, projections were made for the power market aréa as a whole rather tban for the three subareas individually. In all projections it was assumed that Devil canyon po~er would be available in 1969 at a delivered wbolesale rate of 6 to 8 mille per kilowatt-hour. General Util;tz Regairements .... Tfi1s -elass:ltication. iJleludes the. usual utiU ty . J.oaas such as resideatie.l1 commercial, :f'arm., J1Uilioipal1 publie and goverD~~~.e:nt 48 \ \5 Table IV·4 Military Generating Cspacity and Estimated Utillzation (1959 and 1961) Est:.fmatea utUiaa- Installed caP!citz (kw.) ti on Area and base Steam Di.esëi Total (~) Kenai Area Wi1dwood 0 1,500 1,500 70 Anchorage Area 1,600 Elmendor:f 31,500 33,100 55 Port Richardson 1.8,000 9,640 ~,640 50 Whittier 6,500 0 6,500 -35 Subtotal 56,066 l1,2llô 67,240 Fairbanks Area Ladd 10,000 5,000 15,000 50 Eie1son 23,500 5,500 29,000 50 Fort Gree1y (1959) 3,000 y 0 3,gggy 70 Fort Greely ( 1961) 5,000 y 0 5, 1!1 50 Clear (1961) 22,500 1 0 22,5001. 4o Subtota1 {1959) 36,500 10,500 li7,000 Subtotal (1961) 61,000 10,500 71,000 Total (1959) 92,500 23,2lto 115,740 Total (1961) 117 ,ooo 23,240 140,240 Capaoity used (kw.) 1,000 18,200 13,800 2!300 31i,300 7,500 14,500 2,100 2,,500 9,200 21i,ioo 33,700 59,4oo 69,000 !/ Additi011s to be in operation by 1961 include a 2,000-kw. nuclear rea.ttor at Fort Greely and a 22,500-kw. coal-fired steam plant at C1ear .. .; " Power Demand and Supply agency, and small industrial. Two separate projections were made; one a projection of the historical total load growtb pattern, and the ether a projection by customer classification. The financial analysis is based on an extension of the historical total load growth pattern, using an average rate of increase adjusted to reflect prob- able changes due t o availabili ty of project power. Projection by Load Growth Pattern The bistorical utility loads were analyzed to study the effect of economie condi tiens on the growth trend. Table JY -2 shows the percent of annual increase in energy use by years from 1951 througn 1959. The abnormally bigh rates in 1952 and 1953 vere undoubtedly àue to the rapid buildup of defense establishments. Military construction programs were at their peak. Federal and local agencies, as well as housing and commercial enterprise, were expanding at a fast pace to provide the multitude of facilities and services required. Nearly all construction and expansion in the area were the direct resulta of the military programs • By 1954, military construction programs were well past their zenith and tapering off rapidly. The military program was principally concerned with ope=ating and maintaining the major bases. Civilian facilities bad caught up with, and in some cases exceeded 1 the demanda. The construction industry as a whole continued to decline in 1955 and 1956. However, an increasing percentage of construction work was perfor.med by local contractors, thus increasing the indus- try's value to the local economy. This, coupled with further diversi~ fication of the basic economy, contributed to higher rates of increase in power use. The withdrawal of 12,000 troops from Alaska began during the latter part of 1957. The economie effect of reducing the popu- lation of the power market area by an estimated 18,000 persans was reflected in lower rates of increase during both 1957 and 1958. Population showed a substantial increase in 1959~ althougb it still was less than in 1957· The detrimental effects of the carpenters' strike in 1959, whiCh shut down the bulk of construction througb most of the season, are not apparent in the percent increase of power use over 1958. It is reasonable to assume, however, that the percent of increase would have been higher than 11.0 percent, if there bad been no strike. 50 Power Demand and Supply The average annual rate of increase from 1951 to 1959 was 15.4 percent. However, 1952 and 1953 should be excluded because ot the abnormally high rates due to the unusual amount of military activity. The average annual increase of 10.6 percent from 1953 to 1959 is believed to represent a reasonable average growth rate for the power market area. The base for utility expansion is the recorded use in 1959. It was assumed that service area expansion will be a portion of the annual load inerease. Therefore, unrecorded loads outside listed utility service areas were negleeted in the base. There is resson to believe that power use in 1960 may be as much as 11.5 to 12.0 percent greater than in 1959. 'l'he Alaska Methodist University at Anchorage will open in 1960. A new 13-story, 250-room hotel in Anchorage will have llO rooms completed and ready for occupancy in June 1960. Golden Valley Electric Association will be serving 200 to 300 new customers in the Big Delta area, including three Federal agencies that will require an aggregate ot nearly 750,000 kilowatt-hours per year. Severa! new commercial establish- ments will be completed. Anchorage and Fairbanks are scheduled to spend nearly $15,000,000 on city improvements. The overall construc- tion program will be considerably greater àm.d more accelerated than normal, owing to the curtailment in 1959 of much construction orig- inally scheduled for that year. The recent change in Alaska's political statua bas aroused great ~nterest in the new state. This interest bas been expressed not only by individuals, touriste, and the public in general, but also by many large firm.s and investors. It is too èarly to gage the interest generated in industry and investment capital, but it is reasonable to assume that some of it may develop into more tangible evidence. Considering all aspects of the potential market for power 1 the average rate of load growth over the next several years should not be less than the 10.6 percent of the past 6 years. The avail- ability of project power is expected to encourage an even higher rate for a tew years. Electric space heating alone should acoount for a substantial increase in average use. As power use increases to a total of several hundred thousand kilowatts, the annual rate of increase will probably decline sligntly. However, it should not be less than 10.0 percent during the period required to build up a full load on Devil Canyon Powerplant. 51 ,../ Power Demand and Supply In projecting the utility requirements based on the load growth pattern, the follow!ng conditions were assumed: (l) Utility loads include residentiel, commercial, tarm 1 municipal, public and government agency, ~nd small industriel requirements, plus the losses and powerplant use incurred in supply- ing them. (2) Devil Canyon Projeot will begin supp!Ying power in 1969. (3) ~e load will increase by the following annuel peroentages: (4) 1960 1961-68 1969-72 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977-82 11.8 percent 10.6 percent 11.0 percent 10.8 percent 10.6 percent 10.4 percent 10.2 percent 10.0 percent ~-J.Qa4 tac• wUl. increase gradua1ly to about " ~ \.'ft '-"" and then remain at that value; ~ :i*û ~ 1d.ll not increase qui te as rapidly 'Il& ~-ulfl bine; the next few years. ·ee H..:l.'t4l ~of ~-~ t'le utili ty requirements based on tbe ~4 ~ ,att.._ ~ ~~~-4 in the second colutnns of Tables IV•$ell4194.. ProJection b-I attatbMr ,..ClU&t~'.!!!f The projection by customer classification was based on a population foreoast, estimated population-to-customer ratios, and estimated future average use per customer in each classification. Utility distribution losses 1 as well as transmission losses and power- plant use, were added to estimated sales to obtain total utility load. ~e projection by the customer classification method resulted in total utility loads comparable to but sligntly greater than those obtained by the load growth pattern method. The former method is 52 .-'! Power Dem.a.nd and Supply probably lesa aacurate beaause of the several foreaasts that were required for eomponent items; it is also less conservative. It was therefore rejected1 and the projected requirements based on the load growth pattern method were used in the financial analysis. Derivation of estimated future loads by the austomer classification method are described in detail in Appendix A, Power Demand and Supply. Large Industrial Requirements The past and present high cost of doing business in Alaska, high freight rates, and lack of an adequate power supply have dis- couraged large industries from locating in the power market area. Present non-military generating plants and those u~der construction will not meet the estimated general utility requiroments past 1964, much less offer a dependable supply for large industries. Devil Canyon Project would alleviate this sit.ation substantially, The coat of project power would not be low enough to provide, by 1 tself, an incentive for industry to locate in the povrer market area. .. However 1 the f'ollowing considerations make it reasonable to assume that some industrialization would follow projeat construction: (1) A fairly large block of power 11rould be availa.ble for industrial use at a reasonable oost. (2) The power market area and adjoining areas contain a wid.e variety of minerale 1 timber, and ether resources. (3) Large a.reas of suitable land with no competitive uses are available at little or no cost. (4) The power market area conta.ins a tremendous water resource that is relatively unused at present. The time may be very near when this resource, coupled vith low oost land and power, will be the deciding factor in locating industries .• Verr little potential industrial development aa.n be specif· ically discussed. Placer gold mining has been the major industrial power use in the past. This load has been gradually 4eclining in 53 Power Demànd and Supply recent years. It is estimated that the load will continue to decrease and will substantially cease to exist by 1965. Demands for power at coal mines will depend chiefly on the need for coal at steam powerplants. A.ll. existing powerplants plus those presently under eo11struction will not be able to supply the estimated demand from 1965 until project power would be available in 1969. T.his deficiency is assumed to be met by constru~tion of additional steam plants. After 1969 use of steam generation will be drastical.ly reduaed in favor of less costly project power. Use of power at coal mines is estimated to reach a peak of 10 1 000 1 000 kilowatt~hours annually in 1968 and thereafter reduce to 51 000 1 000 kilowatt-hours a year. The small electric steel mill at Fairbanks is assumed to begi.n operation in 1965. Initial energy requirements are estimated at 8,ooo,ooo kilowatt-hours for a 7~month season, increasing to 30,ooo,ooo for full-year and ex.panded operation in 1969, when project power would be available. Even though major oil fields are discovered in the power market area, power requirèments of the oil industry are expeeted to be very small. Requirements were estimated to increase from l,ooo,ooo kilowatt-hours for pumping in 1963 to 5,ooo,ooo kilowatt- hours in 1969. Even if a small refinery were built, power require- ments woul.d be relatively small. Interest has been shown from time to time in developing the birch foreste near Talkeei4~a, a nitrata fertilizer plant in the Kenai Peninsule, and a cement plant near Windy. A small pilot bi~~h mill at Talkeetna was operated one yea.r by a Washington firm and then abandoned. No specifie prpposals on any of these developments are now available to the public. In spite of the lack of specifie proposals, availabillty of project power is expected to have a significant effect on industrial development in the area. It was assumed that e~ougn large industriel development will take place in the next 22 years to represent a load of 695,000,000 kilowatt-hours by 1982, corre*" spond.ing to a peak load or 100,000 kiJ.owatts at an 8o percent load factor, based on December peak. 54 "" Power Demand and Supply The estimated future energy and. oapacity requirements for large industrial loads are sbown in Tables IV-5 and IV-6, respeotively. Milita!l Reguirements Table IV-4 shows the estimated military power requirements in 1961 as 69,000 kilowatts. Assuming an annual load factor of 60 percent, energy use would be 360,000,000 kilowatt-hours per year. No change in this demand was forecast for subsequent years. Fuel costs for small steam unit generation were estimated to be about 10 mills per kilowatt•hour. Power requirements that would not be a byproduct of steam heating were assumed to be supplied from Devil Canyon Project. This demand was estimated at about 4o percent of total military use, or 150,000,000 kilowatt-bours annually. Allowing 5 percent for transmission losses and pcwerplant use, a gross project generation of l58,ooo,ooo kilowatt-hours would be required. Total Projected Regpirements.and Supply Table IV-5 combines the energy load projections for the three general classes and shows the portion of the total load that would be supplied by Devil Canyon Project. Table IV-6 shows similar data for the total peak load. These data are shown graphically in Drawings No. 852-9o6·35 and 852-906-36, respectively, which also depict the sources of supply to serve the load. The firm capacity of existing utility generating facilities plus proposed additions will be 90,800 kilowatts in 1961 (see Table IV-1). This capacity will be adequate to meet projected peak utility requirements (not including large industrial) only through 1964 and will be short by more than 4a,ooo kilowatts in 1968. Additional capacity must be programed for construction in the near future in arder to a vert a serious power shortage. The potential 46,000-kilowatt Bradley Lake Projeet on the Kenai Peninsula would not supply the Fairbanks area,; i t is doubtful if this project could be completed in time to prevent a power shortage 55 \ '(R Table IV-5 ProJection of Total Energy Load Devil Canyon Power Market Area Unit: Million kilowa.tt•hours ~~·----· ~--· ~~~nu---~----~----M:f..Jitaey' Tota..L. Calendar Nonm.:tli tary lœils load load -----SûPpl.ied Supplied supp1ied supplied Year Large by by by by Utillty industrial Total utiJity ;erojeet proj~c:t;____ prQJect ·-·------~~---~~-~--~-------··---------·-· -~------------~-----· ---·--------------------····--···------------ 196o 287 22. 309 309 .. .. ... 1961 317 22 339 339 1.962 351 19 !(0 '5{0 1963 388 16 4o4 4o4 1964 429 14 443 443 1965 474 19 493 493 1966 524 21 545 545 1.967 58o 22 6o2 602 1968 641 25 666 666 1969 711 42 713 270 1970 789 51 -.S4o 270 1971 876 6o 936 270 1972 972 75 1,047 210 1973 1,077 99 1,176 270 1974 1,191 137 1,328 270 1975 1,315 184 1,499 270 1976 1,449 242 1,691 270 1977 1,594 305 1,899 270 1978 ' l, 753 384 2,137 270 1979 1,928 463 2,391 270 198o 2,121 542 2,663 270 1981 2,333 616 2,949 270 1982 2,566 695 3,261 519 .. .. .. 503 570 666 777 9o6 1,058 1,229 1,421 1,629 1,867 2,121 2,393 2,679 2,742 ... 158 158 158 158 158 158 158 158 158 158 158 158 158 158 ... -... - 661 728 82Q. 935 1,o64 1,216 1,387 1,579 1,787 2,025 2,279 2,551 2,837 2,900 \ Table IV-6 Projection of Total Peak Load Devil Canyon Power Market Area Unit: kilowatts Military Total Calends.r Nonmilitary loads load load Project Supplied Supplied supplied supplied load Year y Large by by by by factor UtUity indus trial Total pr~:l~~t project pr~_J~ct __ project . __ _Jp~rcent) 1960 61,000 1,170 62,170 62,.ll0 1961 67,000 1,170 68,170 68,170 -1962 74,000 1,160 75,160 75,160 ---.. 1963 82,000 1,150 83,150 83,150 1964 90,000 1,130 91,130 91,130 1965 99,000 l,l6o 100,160 100,160 ... -... .. 1966 109,000 1,200 110,200 llP,200 .. .. 1967 121,000 1,200 122,200 122,200 \Jl 1968 133,000 3,000 136,000 13!),000 -:J 1969 147,000 5,000 152,000 55,000 97,000 30,000 127 ,ooo 59.4 1970 164,000 6,000 170,000 55,000 115,000 30,000 145,000 57.3 1971 182,000 8,000 190,000 55,000 135,000 30,000 165,000 57.0 1972 202,000 10,000 212,000 55,000 157,000 30,000 187,000 57.1 1973 222.000 13,000 235,000 55,000 18o,ooo 30,000 210,000 57.8 1974 247,000 19,000 266,000 55,000 211,000 30,000 241,000 57.6 1975 273,000 26,000 299,000 55,000 244,000 30,000 274,000 57.8 1976 301,000 34,000 335,000 55,000 28o,ooo 30,000 310,000 58.1 1CJ77 331,000 43,000 374,000 55,000 319,000 30,000 349,000 58.5 1CJ78 364,000 55,000 419,000 55,000 364,000 30,000 394,000 58.7 1979 4oo,ooo 66,000 466,000 55,000 411,000 30,000 441,000 59.0 l98o 440,000 77,000 517,000 55,000 462,000 30,000 492,000 59.2 1981 484,000 88,000 572,000 55,000 517,000 30,000 547,000 59.2 1982 531,000 100,000 631,000 81,000 550,000 30,000 ;ao,ooo 57.1 y December peak, coincidenta1 witb utility peak. Actual peak would occur in summer in ea~ly years. ./ Power Demand and. Supply in the Anchorage area. No other hydroelectric project of adequate eapa.city eould be constructed by 1965. Therefore, it is assumed that a.dditional steam generating c'paeity would be installed to supply the deficiency until Devil Canyon Powerplant is on the line. Upon completion of Devil Canyon nonproject power sources would. probably continue to supply a.b>?ut 55,000 kilowatts and 270,000,000 kilowatt-hours of nonmilita.ry load, distributed as follows: ~ Eklutna Cooper La.ke ether y ~ Hydre Hydre Steam Peak (kw.) 30,000 15,000 10,000 Energy (kw.-hr.} 143,000,000 53,000,000 74,ooo,ooo !/ Includes only powerplant ea.pa.ci ty which a.lso supplies hea.ting loads. Devil Canyon Projeet, upon eompletion of the first stage in 1969, would assume a gross load of 127,000 peak kilowatts and 661,000,000 kilowatt-hours annually. Of these totals, 30,000 kilo- watts and 158,000,000 kilowatt-hours are estimated to be military loads. Additions to the project would be installed as required by the energy and peak load requirements. Devil Canyon Powerplant•s 580 1 000 kilowatts would be fully utilized by 1982. Load Characteristics Table IV-7 summarizes the characteristics of the load wbich would be supplied by Devil Canyon Project. These data are based on records of utilities in the power market area • 58 "" Mon th January Febura.ry Ma roh April Ma. y June July August September Oct ob er November December Table IV-7 Load Characteristics Devil Canyon Project Month1y Load Distribution (percent of annua1 total) 9·3 8,1 8.3 7.7 7.6 7.2 7·4 1·1 8 .. o 8.9 9~4 10.4 59 Monthly Peak Load (percent of annual peak) 89 87 81 71 67 63 68 71 81 89 94 lOO ./ 3,400 3,200 3,000 2,800 2,600 2,400 ... J~ :J 0 J: 2,000 1-.... .... <( ~ 1,800 1-0 _. :::.r:: 1,6001-~ (/) z 1,4001-0 _. _. 1,200. :::!: 1,000 800 600 400 200 4-7-60 rza ut il ity FIRM ENERGY REQUIREMENTS and SUPPLY I:S:J Large Industriel ~ 40% of Mil itary 5th STAGE >r, k>,..~4 4th STAGE--)Ioo, t--.' 3rd STAGE---· L..~ 2nd STAGE (DENALI DAM)---~ lst STAGE-->-~ Recorded 1 Projected 1 Firm Energy Generation 1 With Interim Capacity l Needed-Assumed To Be Steam 1 1 1 1 1 /~ / Firm Energy Generation With :%/'/1 Ellisting Or Scheduled Capacity //y'//////////////////, 60 65 CALENDAR // Mîscellaneous Hydra ///////////////// 75 852-906-35 680 640 600 560 520 480 440 1 (/) 1- 1- 4001-~ 0 _J 360~ ~ LL. 0 320~ (/) 0 z <! 280 1-(/) :::> 0 :r: 1- 240 200 160 120 80 40 / L 1953 55 4-6-60 Recorded 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 FIRM PEAKING CAPACITY REOUIREMENTS and SUPPLY December Peak Requirements ::--, 5th STAGE---------; / h !l J 4th STAGE J 1 ;) 1 3 rd STAGE-~ '/ ~ 1 1 Li 1 1 ~~; !ki l!f! 1 st STAGE--, fo/,~ ;,tlj_l ~~,~ Projected / 60 Interim Copacity / Needed-Assumed>f To Be Steam 'llo.. Diesel Steam Devil Canyon Hydro Miscelloneous H ydro 65 CALENDAR 70 Y E A R S 75 80 82 852-906-36 . 1 / CHAPTER V W'ATER AND POWER Potentiel energy production at Devil Canyon Powerplant was based on records of Susitna River runoff. Capaeities of Devil Canyon and Denali Reservoirs were selected to provide economie regulation of this runoff. Reservoir and power operation etudies were run to estimate the potentiel energy output. Installed'and depend- able eapacities of the powerplant were also determined. WA'mR RESOURCES The Susi tna Ri ver is the so'!.lrce of water for the Devil Canyon Project. The stream heads in glaciers on the southern slope of the Alaska Bange, and the basin includes a large area of lakes in the Tyone River Basin. Historical Runoff There are only three stream gaging stations in the upper Susitna. River Basin, all established by the u. s. Geologieal Survey. Susitna. River at Gold Creek, 14.5 river miles below Devil Canyon damsite, was established in August 1949. Susitna River nea.r Denali began operation in May 1957; it is 13.5 river miles above Denali damsite, near the Dennli Highway bridge. Ma.claren River near Paxson is loeated one-quarter mile below the bridge on Denali Higb.way; the station was placed in operation in June 1958. All three stations are currently operated by the Geological Survey, and continuous records through September 1959 are available. The water supply etudies for Devil Canyon Project were based on the runoff records of Susitna River at the Gold Creek gage for the period October 1949 through September 1959· Records of Susitna River runoff near Denali were extended to cover this same period by correlation with runoff at the Gold Creek station. Because of the relatively short period of concurrent record, this relationship is poorly defined. A longer record of Susitna River runotf near Denali will be needed for fUture feasibility etudies of Denali Dam. 6o Water and Power The paucity of precipitation and stream gaging stations does not permit a very precise determination of runoff at inter- mediate points between the Denali and C~ld Creek gages. T.berefore, a straight-line relationship between drajk~age area and incremental runof'f was used. A percent.age of incremental runo.ft' between the Denali and Gold Cre~k gag;:;s based on tb.e CN".r.esponding increment of drainage area waD added to tne recorded and estimated runoff at the Denali gage to obtain estimates of historieal runoff at the two damsites. The estimated historical runoff of the Susitna Ri var at Devil Canyon damai te and Denali damai te is shawn in 1l'ables V ... 1 and V -2 1 respecti vely. Period of Study Reservoir and power operation etudies were made for the period from October 1949 througb September 1959· T.be minimum annual runoff during this period oocurred in water year 1950 and the maxi- mum in 1956. For projeat operation the aritical period was the water years from 1949 through 1952 1 with reservoir storage being at a minimum in 1952. Firm energy was limited to possi.ble produc- tion during this period. A rough multiple correlation of MCKinley Park temperature and precipitation data with Susitna River runoff at Gold Creek indioated that runoff in 1946 and 1947 would have been low 1 but not lower than in 1950 and 1951., Further multiple correlation etudies shouJ.d be made to determine the cri tic al period more precis ely for future feasibility etudies of storage requirements above Devil Canyon Reservoir. Water R.'!§l:lts The constitution of the State of Alaska provides that surface and subsurfaae waters are reserved to the people for common use 1 except mineral and medicinal waters, and are subjeot to appro- priation. "Priority of appropriation shall give prior right. Ex.cept for publia water supply 1 an appropriation of water shall be limited to stated purposes and subJeat to preferences among benefi* cial uses 1 concurrent or otherwise 1 as prescribed by law 1 and to the general reservation of tish and wildlif'e. u 61 '"U~~ 11 a., 1 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION HYDROGRAPHie DISCHARGE DATA TablE V-I Run-off of. S_ys ;tna. R/vi!_r-__A..f Z>~v/1 eanvon lJtA. m~dt:_~, ~~ Unit tooo A. F. Drainage Are aS~ 1 o Sq.Miles -----· ------------------------~~-, ---·· ----------- YEAR OCT. NOV. OEC. JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. TOTAL PERCENT MEAN 1 49 Ltf39. os-878.b 1 1949-56 3,,_$/ 144.!1 S3.oS' 59.1~ 1/.ot 41.8 5' 4-B.SCo ~".s:z /lt'J3.?. 7 134/.SS //79 13 lr;,4.S"o SS38.5S 5ï 2.ZZ.I/ 72.tB ";,.13 5S.33 42.,8 4Z.f.,S 9o.31-8/l.. 82. /171..09 1339. 'z /f,.J.4{. 11'38.(,?; 'Z83.84- S1... 32Z.o 4-!S3.!3 /09.b:Z. 9Z.31 53. !J3 So. 71-s /.33 3/3.03 /85'1. Z3 /S",S:SS IZ4-o. 9/ 81Z.44 ~t;,/~. 3:a. 5'3 474.38 195.39 ,g_ tJ8 ~3.1-3 4-'2.fo8 47.3o 9o.zs-1/Z/. 7C. /SSS:t:J4-/198. 4-5' /2Z2.3/ BS7.41 ~9''· 48 54-323.90 /17.34 g'·'f 7S.o3 5Z.D8 <1-4.94-C.8.9S /tJ04.'o IJ43Z.3/ /Zo8.oS !S18.96 724.!1 ''Be.. 91 S! 5Jo.1-3 /53. ~7 tt8.o9 lo 3.49 73.oo ,3.43 fr.7.oo S3~'-1.o J7oS.30 /63S"-13 /52.7.9{:. Bo/.74 7o<J8. 74- sc. J..85!J& /06,/0 7S:t>3 S6.48 52..32 S4./B 53.ao 1ozr;,.s3 !9/Z.tfo !84S:88 /1-SS.Sz. /03/3'7 79S4.5S 51 33S.Sb 17o.4S' /Z3.S"J ~8.o8 7B.t8 ~ 9.z4-'l.ol 7'77.Sr.. 17 Z.3Jl, !S8Z.87 /ZIB.S! ll/4.9o 1179.1/ sg 47,_2./ Z.Z./. 9o !88.4-Z 113. ss 68.zS rD6.33 8s:9B 744.4S" /.tJS'J. 71 13so,z8 /31'Y.87 42(.,{.3 hS'21.S8 S9 Z79. 81 /Zo.8S" 87.4Z. B3.S8 ,a, os S,, 1--1-&4.oo :JS8.78 1'7f-.f7 1!4-foB./2.. t8Z.o.74 1J49. 3<f 763/. bZ.. TOTAL MEAN 339.C.'? lfr.r..t /03.34-Bo.oS' .si:Z.2. 53.1/ 4$.61--79B. 92. !SS9.18 t<f-33. 'SS 1370./4-838.1/ tl.848. JI PERCENT GF'O 994751 BÜRÈA ... .JF RECLAMATION HYDROGRAPHie ü•SGHARGt UAIA Table V-2 Run-off of. Su:s i fnA. !':?.'ver_ a.i D fi>n a.J / l2am s ;t_!!_ ---~---·~--------~-··-~----------~ ------····---Unit /t:>oo A, F. Drainage Are a /2 ç. 4-Sq.Miles YEAR OCT. NOV. DEC. JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. ~EPT. TOTAL PERCENT MEAN 49 . 764.'1 !97./o lct49'-S"o ,/.oB 2Z..4Z. IZ.8S '7.57 5A·t. S.SI ~.88 12913 2'3o.zo 71Z.f8 '22.47 8/.4-7 {9S1S~ SI 34-.oo //. Z4-8.78 7.3'2-S. Sb S,S(, 14.ZC:. /14.4o .329.25' 111.47... l.IS./7 3So.(./ 2.ZC.7.S1 S2 $b.3/,;. 2..1. rz. ''·14 14.39 1.z., 7.oz. 7.<'b Sl.lo ~2z.4o 832.,5 6SS:f6 174,/1 .. 2..7 t;S:3S s, SS.SS' 3o.4o 14-.7' 8.18 s.r1 &.8o /4-.ZS' 3oo.14-433.b8 '33.07 t.-1-2. /0 /~0./1... Z5{,6 ./].. 54-5'.48 17.87 l~.o8 11. 4-o 7.1 1 S.11 lo.07 2.46.4-o SZ.7. 5"3 ~ 32_4-_'/-_ 82/.29 147. S3 zSoz.. 2.1 ss 53. 7+ 1..1.18 17. 'z. IS: Il 11.21 €.78 9. ~4-{oo.33 774.34 8 ro. 82. 813.38 /72.49 ZBG 9 .3o 5(0 4/o. S'~ tS.Z8 1/,fo 7.39 7.12. 7.z+ 7.17 2S4-.31 979.46 987.33 774. O'j '257.+9 3354.89 57 57. z.+ z.'·'z !B.Z8 14-.1'-1/.t;.o lo .. o~ t}.':J4--17/. Z.8 7.9o.4" 13/.98 h40.9Z. 2..~5.1;,2. 2779. 0~ SB (03.14-4-8.o 1 1-.,, D 1 /'},So 1/.8 9 to.S3 /7.7 J /15'.4-7 5'0./C. 6.13. 89 %!.33 /32.33 2/23.87 59 1Z. 33 2.~. 3Z /S .t> o Il. 9 S' 9.o7 b.4·5" ,,~1-11.3. 93 '-o3.()4 513.80 511.34 zoo.13 Z.Z'-3. 9o TOTAL MEAN ,Z.J4-z4:38 15.75 11.92 8. /9 1.+o 10.42-/7o.72 ,4/.0S' 730.49 {,t./.1~ :Zoo.z.B 2. 5'44-. 'J8 PERCENT GPO 99475 1 Water •nd Power No prior rishts of public or private use o-r water from the Suaitna River have been esta'blished. POWER GENERAWN Power would be produced bJ a powerpl.ant at D,evil canyon J;>am. DevU Canyou· Beservoir would partiallY regul.ate tbF inf'J.Gws below Denali Dam, and Denali Reservoir 'WO'Uld almost f'ullr regulate its inflows. gpeJ.""at;pg Plan On the average, 64 percent of the annuel rt.moft at Devil Oat.l)"on damsi te occurs during the months of June 1 JuJ.y, &J'ld Aug\lst, and 88 percent from May throush September. Reservoir ce;Paai tv woul.d. therefore be needed. to store water in excess of the nee&J for power generation in the months of b.igb runoff and release i t 4Uring months of lesa than average runoff o Devil Canyon Reservoir 1 bo;,ever 1 would not be large enough to ·provide the necessary capaci i..')" 1 so an upstream reservoir would be necessary. Denali Reservoir has been. 1ncluded in the proJect plan for this purpose. About 54 percent of the annual inflow between benali and Devil canron damsites occurs during June, July" and .Aqgu$t" and 84 percent from May throush September. In order to me.ke tb• best use of the reservoir capaci t7 and power head at the DevU Capyon si te 1 the toUowins operating plan was adopted~ (l) Perfect ability to forecast inflows ~as aasumed • .Altb.ough this would not be possible under prac!tical oper- ating conditions, a reasonably accurate torecasting proce- dure can be developed. ~e effect of forecast· error on the resulta of the tbeoretical. operation studifls would not be SiSDificant. (2) DevU Canyon Reservoir was k.ept full. durins the winter 1 so tbat the powerplant woulcl operate ~~ the ll18Xi1m.W1 possible power head. During this peripd, water wa.s wi thbawn from De.nali Reservoir to eupp~nt the natural tlows at the powerplant. 62 / Water and Power (3) Devil canyon Reservoir was drawn down enough each spring to provide sufficient space to store the portion of the inflow originating below Denali Dam during the period of high runoff tbat was not released for power generation. If this surplus flow was greater than the active reservoir capacity, the reservoir was drawn down ta minimum operating level, and seme water was spil.led. During this period of dra.wdown and refill at Devil Canyon Reservoir, no water was released :from Denali Reservo5.r. This period varied from year to year with the variations in monthly runoff, but on the average it was from April through September. The entire active capacity of Devil Canyon Reservoir was used in 8 ou·t of t...i.e 10 years of s tudy. (4) Under this operating plan, Devil Canyon Reservoir provided only seasonal regulation cf inflows below Denali Dam. Denali Reservoir provicled seasonal regulation, as well as holdover capacity to store water in years of high runoff and release it in years of law runoff. Reservoirs Sedimentation Estimates of sediment inflow into the reservoirs were based on resulta of periodic sampling of suspended sediment in Susitna River at the Gold Creek station. Suspended sediment sampling data fJOm other interior Alaska streams and three samples at the Denali station were also used in estimating sediment inflow to Denali Reservoir- These sediment records were obtained by the U. S. Geological Survey. Without any upstream storage, the average annual sediment inflow to Devil Canyon Reservoir was estimated at 6,44o acre~feet; after Denali Reservoir is built, this would reduce to 2,530 acre-feet. The estimated average annuel sediment inflow to Denali Reservoir is 11,400 acre-feet. Devil Canyon Reservoir At normal full pool elevation of 1,450 feet, Devil Canyon Rese~ir wouldhave a total initial capacity of 1,100,000 acre-feet, 63 Water and Power of which 8o7,000 acre-feet would be active storage. In order not to exoeed the allowable variation of head on the turbines, the minimum operating level would be 1,275 feet, the bottom of active capacity. Assunrl.ng that Denali Dam would be placed in operation 10 years after Devil Canyon Dam is completed, the estimated sediment accumulation in Devil Canyon Reservoir would reduce the active capacity to 765 1 000 aere-feet after 50 years and 725,400 acre-feet after lOO years. 'l'he power market study shows that Denali Rese!"roir would be required only 3 years after Devil Canyon Powerplant begins operation. However, the changes in active reservoir capacity caused by this revised schedule would be negligible. The capacities at the end of 50 years were used in the reservoir and power operation studies. Denali Reservoir Denali Reservoir would have a total initial capacity of 5,4oo,ooo acre-feet at normal full pool elevation of 2,552 feet. This total includes the active capacity required to regulate the ruaoff at Denali Dam during the period of study plus l,l4o,ooo acre-feet for sediment accumulation during lOO yearsa The initial active capacity of Denali Reservoir would be 5,300,000 acre-feet, decressing to 4,770,000 acre-feet at the end of 50 years and to 4,260,000 acre-feet after lOO years. The 50-year capacities were used in the reservoir and power operation etudies. Power 9J?eration Evaporation There are no records of evaporation in the Susitna River Basin. Records taken at Palmer and College indicate that evaporation :t'rom a :free reservoir surface would average about 13 inches annually. Net evaporation losses should not exceed one-half foot on the basis of fuJ.l reservoirs.. Thzts would be equivalent to annual evaporation losses of 3,8oo acre-feet at Devil Canyon and 30,500 acre-feet at Denali, or 0.6 percent and 1.2 percent of the average annual runoff 64 'W~:~et' and Powe~ at the respective d.amsites. 'l'he errors in estimated runof'f are possibly much greater than these percentases,. so reservoiJ> evapora ... tion was d11ï5regarded in the operation studiès. Power Head With an average tailwater elevation of 875 feet, the average net head. on Devil CanyoD. Powerplant would be 538 feet. Average head losses were estimated at 5 feet. Based on thiS average loss, the maxin:nmt opera ting head would be 570 feet and the minimum operatir.g head, 395 feet. '.the turbine d':sign hee;d would be about 530 feet. Reservoir Releases -........... Controlled releases from Denali and Devil Canyon lleservoirs would be for power generation olll.y. Water would be released through Devil Osny on Po\rerplant to provide energy in accordance 'W1 th the monthly load distribution shown in Table IV ·7. Relea.ses would be made from Denali Reservoir as previously described undet' Operat1l:l§ Plan. Continuous releases for power would be suttieient to maintain fiS1i' l1fe below the powerpl.ant, . Releases requtred for firm energy are based on an 8o per- cent overall e.fficien.cy at Devil Canyon Powerplant for all heads. ~ration Studies Reservoir and power operation etudies 'Wel'e started wi th . full reservoirs at the beginning of October 1949 and carried thro':lsh ·.·• September 3.959.. Energy output was selected. as the maximum that could be attained and still permit the reservoirs to refiU near the end of the study. ~e project operation study included Devil C~on Reservoir and Powerplant and Denali Reservoir, operated as previoWily d.escribe4. Reservoir capaeities after 50 years of sediment depositj.dn we3,"e used 1n this study. Total capacity was 950,000 acre-feet a~ ~il. Canyon , >:: --T 65 Water and Power and 4~850~000 aore-feet at Denali. Owing to ~ack of sufficient active capacity 1 De~ Canyon Reservoir spill.ed in every year exeept two. Denali Reservoir refil~ed wi th a small spill in ~957,. Addition~ capacity in Devi~ Canyon Reservoir to regulate these spi~s would be too expensive to be justified economica.lly. If energy output were increased to ut~ze part of these sp~, into~erab~ shortages in peaking capaoity would be incurred and Denali Reservoir wou~d not refill during the period of study. Gross generation of Devi~ Canyon Powerplant was 2 1 9001 0001 000 kilowatt-hours annually. ~e nonfirm energy with this development would average about 133 1 000 1 000 kilowatt- hours annually. No benefi ts are show for this potenti~ revenue. The operation study is summarized in Tab~e V-3 and is show.n graphically in Drawings No. 852-906-32 and ·33· The potenti~ output of Devll Canyon Powerplant 'Wi thout any upstream storage would be about 9001 0001 000 kilowatt-hours annually, as determined from a separate reservoir and power operation study. This output was compared Wi th the power market study to decide when Denali Reservoir would be required to increase the Devil Canyon Powerpl.ant output to keep pace wi th the load gro'Wth. Very little sediment would be deposited in Devil Canyon Reservoir during the first few years of operation; therefore, the initial total aapacity of 1 1 1001 000 aare-feet was used in this study. Because of the small active eapaci ty aompared to total inflow 1 la.rge spills would occur from June through September each year, permitting generation of sub- stantiel quantities of nonfirm energy. As there would be no :aignifi- cant market for nonfirm energy during the years that the ~oad is building up, the potentiel nonfirm output at DevU Canyon Powerplant during this period was not computed. Energy Output and Powerplant Capacity The optimum energy output of Devil C~on Powerplant, as determined by the project operation study, wo~ be 2 1 900 1 000 kilowatt-hours annually,. The instelled ca:paci ty of Devi~ Canyon Powerp~ant would be 580,000 ~owatts. 66 6000 6000 1-w w LI.. 1 w 0:: 4000 4000 <..> <( LI.. 0 (/) 0 2 2000 2000 <( (/) ::::> 0 J: 1-!:] 0 WATER YEAR EN DING SEPTEMBER 30 RESERVOIR OPERATION 1250 ~ 1250 1000 r-------~------~--------+--------+--------r-------~------~--------+-------~----~hHIOOO 1-w w LI.. 1 w 0:: <..> 750 1 1 ~i 1 1 bi lfl 1 ~U 1 1 rJ4 1 1 F7ll 1 1 ~il 1 1 hfJrl 1 ~~ A'J 1 blt-11 1 I"Y~ 750 <( LI.. 0 (/) 0 2 ~L,.4,.-F"'v/1 Y/}t II'A/Y/)-l] 1 14/Y/h l&r/Y/) 1 I&VSV/}, 1 f1/Y/J 1 \[X/V/n 1&4/Y/J.I lrA74V/), I[.V/I5oo <( (/) ::::> 0 J: 1- 250 r//;ol V"-Gr//;ol H//r///1 W/;or///liV/A'//A l,V/;or/;o'Sl Uf/X///i IV/7r//71 H/7r/70IIX/?r//A ~sq 250 r c <;_<_( c < c (_,(_( < .r c ?_;{_(: c 4 < <._c_{ < r < (,(_f < 4 < C,_<';.f < r < ( .... ([ < r c <;_:..( < 4 t r.,(-~ <" < <'; __ (f: < d 0 WATER YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30 RESERVOIR OPERATION 4-19-60 1-w w LI.. 1 w 0:: <..> <( LI.. 0 (/) 0 2 <( (/) ::::> 0 J: 1- l-w w LI.. 1 w 0:: <..> <( LI.. 0 (/) 0 2 <( (/) ::::> 0 J: 1- fV"\ ~ rV\ ~ L E G E N D Dena li Reservoir Content lnflow to Dena li Reservai r LEGEND Devi! Canyon Reservoir Content lnrlow to Devi! Canyon Reservoir UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION DEVIL CANYON PROJECT-ALASKA RESERVOIR OPERATION 852-906-32 ({) 400 400 ({) a::: a::: IL:::> IL:::> 00 oo :r: :r: (f)l 300 300 (f)l zl-zl- ol-ol- -<( 200 200 _<( ....13: ...J3: :::!o ...Jo ::E....l ~:::! LEGEND ~ Oevil Canyon Energy Output ~ 100 100 ~ 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1951 1958 1959 ENERGY OUTPUT 750 750 1-1- L.tJ L.tJ L.tJ L.tJ Li.. 1 L.tJ a::: 500 u <( Li.. 0 ~ A n Il, IL n ~ n ~ ~ ~ L J Lr L rl L J1 L j l r L IL 1 L E G E N L.tJ D 500 a::: u <( IL ~ Relea se at Dena li 0 ({) 0 250 2 <( ({) :::::> 0 :r: 1- 0 1 1 ({) 250 0 m z <( Spi Il at Dena li ({) :::::> 0 :r: 1- 0 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 WATER RELEASE 1250 1250 L E G E N D 1 1-1- L.tJ L.tJ rsJ L.tJ L.tJ Devil Canyon Power Release IL 1000 1000 IL 1 1 L.tJ L.tJ a::: a::: œ u u Spill at Devil Canyon <( <( IL IL 0 750 750 0 ({) ({) 0 0 z z <( <( UNITED STATES ({) ({) :::::> :::::> DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 0 500 0 BUREAU OF RECLAMAT~N :r: 500 :r: 1-1-DEVIL CANYON PROJECT-ALASKA WATER RELEASE and 250 250 ENERGY OUTPUT 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 WATER YEAR EN DING SEPTEMBER 30 4-20-60 WATER RELEASE 852-906-33 GPO 9_94274 ~' Table V-3 Annual Summary Reservoir and Power Operation Study Unit: 1 1 000 acte-teet (unless otherwise shown Deriali Reservoir · Devi! êanyon Reservoir and Powe!Elant Year Inf'low 1 Content · firm ending Content Mini-Denali Relea.se end Mini· energy Sept. end of mum to Devil Total for firm of mum (million 30 Intlow Release Spill year . content Can:t;on inflow power Spill year content kw.-hr.) 4850 950 1950 1958 2835 0 . 3973 2243 3581 6416 6416 0 950 412 2900 1951 2268 2739 0 3502 13o6 4016 6755 6755 0 950 205 2900 0\ 1952 -a 2765 275a• 0 3515 879 3854 66o6 6536 10 950 185 2900 1953 2566 2372 0 Jl09 1295 4400 6772 6548 224 950 185 2900 1954 2502 2568 0 3643 1252 4185 6753 6610 143 950 185 2900 1955 2869 2585 0 392:7 1186 4229 6814 6579 235 950 185 2900 1956 3355 2632 0 4650 1390 4600 7232 6572 660 950 185 2900 1957 2779 2447 132 4850 2342 4400 6979 6709 'Z{O 950 185 2900 1958 2124 2461 0 4513 2814 4398 6859 6689 170 950 185 2900 1959 2264 26o6 0 4171 2052 5368 7974 6536 14]8 950 185 2900 Mean 2545 2600 13 -... 4303 6916 6595 321 --2900 ,/ Water and Power Dependab~e Capacity The project operation study indicates that Devil CanyQn Powerplant could supply all peak loads except for shortages of 16 1 000 kilowatts (4.1 percent) during May in tour years& Peak requirements were computed by applying the percentages in Table IV-7 to the installed capacity of 580 1 000 kilowatts. This inabi~ity to meet peak loads was due to the reduced power head at the end of April. These shortages would not be serious, and Devil Canyon Powerplant is considered capable of providing the dependable capa city required for peak loads associated wi th a :f'irm energy output of 2 1 900 1 0001 000 kilowatt-hours annually~ If additional reservoir capacity is constructed between Denall and Devil Canyon Dams, lesa capacity would be required in Devil Canyon Reservoir to regulate inflow below the next dam up• stream. This would make it possible to maintain Devil Canyon Reser- voir full during more months of the year, and the 'drawdow.n in other months would be less~ Under these potential ultimate conditions, tbere would be no shortage in peaking capacity. 68 CHAP'.t'ER VI PLANS AND ESTIMA!rES Field and office etudies have been pertormed as the basis for sel{aetine the adopted plan ot development foJ;-Devil Canyon ProJ- ect. Designs and estimates ot project features have been prepared in sutfioient detail to provide a reasonable estimate ot total project oost. PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT Devil Canyon Dam and Powerplant1 the main project featùres, would be constructed on the Susitna River 14 .. 5 miles upstream from the Gold Creek station on the Alaska Railroad. The dam would :f'orm a reservoir to regul.ate partially the inflow below Denali Dam and. would create head on the powerplant. Denall Dam would be located about 115 miles above Devil Canyon Dam. Because of the relatively small reservoir eapacity be .. hind Devi! Canyon Dam, most of the runof'f regulation is provided by Denali Reservoir. !fhis reservoir is also necessar-1 to proJ,ong the lite of Devil Canyon Reservoir by storing most of the sediment transported by the Susitna River above Devi! Canyon. The transmission system would include a switchya;od at Devil Canyon Powerplant1 transmission lines to Anchorage and Fair• banks, and substations at those two citiesa The pro.j ect would be constructed for the sole purpose of generating hydroelectric power. It would be, however, only' the first step in an u.ltimate projeet which would develop all the poten- tiel power head between Denali and Devil Canyon Dams & At !east two other potentiel power sites bave been located between tae two project dams. Development for purposes other than power is not neoessary or is not feas1ble at the present time. The lower Sus1 tna Valley is a potentiel agricultural area that may ultimately util1ze water for irrigation. If this becomes the case 1 water may be S'Upplied more economioally t'rom some source other than the Sus1tœ W.te:r. Even if diversion from the Susi tna Bi ver is the most desirable ~an, construc- tion of Devil Canyon ProJect would not s1gnif1cantlJ hinder or ass1st irrigation development. Present fJ.oo4 damage below Dev1l Canyon Dam 1• 10 small that elimina ting 1 t would not justify inclusion ot tloo4 c()ntrol 69 Plans and Estimates space in Devil Canyon Reservoir. Normal operation of the project for power, however, might result in sorne reduction in flood damage. Thereis no demand to regulate the Susitna River for navigation or for municipal and industrial water supply. Recreational use of project reservoirs may become important in the future. Development for this use need not be undertaken until the demand arises; nothing in the proposed plan would preclude or hinder such future use. The adopted plan of project development is based on feasibility studies of Devil Canyon facilities and reconnaissance studies of Denali Dam and Reservoir. Theee investigations indicated that a powerplant at Denali Dam is not economically justified at the present time. Additional runoff data, water supply studies, field surveys, geologie investigatioz1s 1 structure designs, oost estimates, and economie studies will be needed to select the final plan for developing the Denali site. However, the present studies have been prepared in sufficient detail and with adequate allowance for unknown or partially known factors to indicate that-the project can be built and is economically feRsible. DEVIL CANYON DAM, POWERPLANT1 AND RESERVOIR Devil Canyon Dam, Powerplant, and Reservoir are the key features of the project. They would constitute the initial stage of project construction. The feaSibility design of Devil Canyon Dam and Powerplant is shown on Drawings No. 852-D-6 and 852-D-7. Dam Devil Canyon Dam would be a concrete arch structure rising 635 feet above the foundation. The crest would be 1,370 feet long at elevation 1,455, which is 565 feet above the normal river water sur- face. A conorete thrust black would support the high arch on the left abutment. The earth and rockfill dike required in a saddle on the left abutment would tie into the thrust black. Spillway A gated spillway, located on the right abutment, would discharge 142,000 cubic feet per second at a maximum water surface 70 Plans and Estimates elevation of 1,455 feet. This flow, combined with 8 1 000 cubic feet per second passing through the powerplant (four units operating), would protect against the inflow design flood, which has a peak of 150,000 cubic feet per second and a 15-day volume of 2,0001 000 acre- feet. Outlet Works A permanent outlet would be installed in the dam at eleva- tion 1,018 to supply downstream demands while the reservoir is fill· ing and when the powerplant might be shut down. Maximum required releases would be 2 1 000 cubic feet per second. During the filling period, water would be released through a temporary gate in the diversion tunnel until the reservoir water surface reaches elevation 1,018. Powerplant Devil Canyon Powerplant would be located on the right canyon wall just below the dam. Total powerplant capacity would be 580,000 kilowatts, divided among eight 72 1 500-kilowatt units. Ini- tial installation would be three units. Other units would be added as required by the increase in power load, Reservoir Devil Canyon Reservoir would extend 29 miles up the Susitna River. At normal full pool elevation of 1 1 450 feet1 the reservoir would have a water surface area of 71 550 acres and an initial capac- ity of 1,100,000 acre-feet. The entire reservoir area is in the public domain and has been withdrawn from entry under a power site classification; no right-of-way would have to be purchased. Much of the reservoir area is covered with timber and brush, which would have to be cleared. There are no existing facilities that would require relocation. 71 RESERVOIR S.TOAAGc. ALLàCATIONS ~ ,,~oo 4>' \ . Pur pose Eleva.+ ion 5toh:.9e-A.F. Conserva.. fion 1"150 to 1275 ~ozooo Inactive 1275 +-o sfrea.mbed <;9-'l,OOO i;/00,000 ~0 ~~~/C) \l/.~ 1100~ 5urcha.rge of 5 Feet ("fpro:z.ima.J-ely 40,000 A.F. a.i Mt1~. W.S.[/. 1455) was considered on/y os contributing fo the spillwayca.pa.cityof/42,000c.fs. which in combination wi+h power plant releases of 8,000c:F.s. 60 Ooo~ \' ----':::! ( \ . \ (4units operal'in9) provides protection a9a.inst Ao the inflcw design Flood ho.vin9 a.. peak of 150,000-' cf. s. and a J.Sday volume of 4 ooqooo A.F. // .~o 0/' ~--·---._ "--\ 1 . / / .· / / 1 //\ ./ 1 1 \ '· -oooX ----~ / -~.' / :~-::::> . / ' 1 . . . / / _!;./----..'-. . / // / / / / / / / foot b,ldJe-1\Y. / 'Î /;/f/;:3' '.: ·- // ~ ' 1 . '(/ 1 /." ~ ... rf~~·;//~~~~~ 1 \ ?'/~-· .. \ t// / / / / / / . 11// '/osure structure) } / ~·'1/ ,<:>Clo EI.870-Y6 ,, ~ ~~ / {;r;/ ' ~~)Y. --. .-.J ./ -----1 J ~ -~:0 / ~ [:} '/ 1 ----J ~/ JIJ!lr· . 1 . 1 ~-· __...-/ 1 _ _j \ _/---=-, // ~~ ) %:==-~0 J'-/ / ~----/ / _/ __ ...... ~ 1 '"'Cl / / \~ % 0 PLAN ----~ ---... 2o " ' '"" \ \ r .?à"""" i """---' \ \ \ C 10 \ . \' \ 's \ . \ . <'-s , ""-"o /a 00 -25-- ') zo '" ~s o -~ ~-~~~'·,-~-~--*~~~~ ~ ' '... 1400~ t3oo_ \ 00 -;:;, "o ?o \ ' <b, 30 ____ _ .--- ) ,,~-. ~ • '/o~ ''\. 00 ' \ '6o "" " ~t·<fP 0• 'v' -~ -\ \ '-....._ ao- '?o "--- 2o" ... r l,.f .,· / /ç,n.,/1 • ' • r • ( 1 / •. ~--~tM<Kinl<y 11 \ ' 'f '-' ' ---.....-. ., --~~ ~;.~ \JI:;, 01\ :i~ ij\L (.__ LOCATION MAP w/460 < 16 ~ ~ "" <( "' Q ~ ~ ~ 1440 ~ 1400 3; -~ <.) à:: ~ Il) ;::; ~ ~ ~ 1420 S? !20 '( t;: ,. "" <u lu _J ~ UJ llJ ~ 1400 ~ 100 "" "' "' ct: tu tu Cf) "' lu lu cc ():: uu i ! ._t· !.!~.:: ji+ r+-·---· 5k-.. .... . i ~ ::-::···-r:-=i= . 1 . ~· ~ i 1__..:-- -._, : ! . 1 ' -~----v . ~; - ) ~--· 1. t J --· t :::::;:=:~~r'f-,-~à~fty -: 1 --' Arca--~ ~__v--1 1 :/ . ' ./ \ l ' i~ :~:ir LI_ . ' 1 1 i i , ,--~pillway dischq•ge. ) ' . . 1 ! l 1 1 1 v v, 1 -. " /' r 11 v 1 1 ' i : r ! ! i ' 'V 1 ' 1 1 1 i ! 1 . 1 1 1 i ' . 1 ! ' /3BO 8000 . 1 : 1 ' li : 1 i 1 i . :1: ... i -2. 4 6 8 JO 12.. 14 -....... ~ -....... -...... l ----- AREA·IOOOACRES CAPACITY-100,000 ACRE FEET NOTE Topo9raphy tak<:n From Dwg. 852-0-5. 6-Z8-60~ REVISE:D NOTE: UND ER RéSERVOIR STORA6E: D. ~~ALLOCATIONS CHART UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTER/OR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION DEVIL CANYON PROJE:CT-ALASKA Df:VIL CANYON DAM AND POWER PLANT fE:ASIBILlTY EST/MATE DRAWING GPO 039473 -~ Z'9'•2'9" H.P. Closure bypas; qa.fe ~+ructù~) ~~·r'~/~kf=~~~w======r~~ E/.870·-> 1 t>)~ ,. Max.W.S,EI. SECTION THRU INTAKE STRUCTURE / 1 / 1 1 1 1 ,<(-• "'<::! ;'> 1 1 ,~,~ '' El. 1461 ---, ~~: ' e<-30' .1_ __ , ' 5and_. :;rave.'; / -5è(, ·~~, ?-!.. ' ' ,... ~--.. -~-"';_. t-\->13 .. ,_: -2·/-0t.d ro~k Tt if. .. _,~;J.c ... 0 :":-\\~;;-< · \ •· / ,t-',; • /, i · \"k. ·.)... ~--;:;Ori:J'n::: .Jroun.J SùrfcKe ~ ,, ·':!' ·'·\--; ,;,,;;....._- ·'>/;/ ! ,;.. -~:~,7:?---..,y 'Earfhfilt,\ ...... ~ ;.;;;~__,.,, ' _)_ --/ \ ,o ' r ~~ :·1 ~1 --As.5rJnrJ·J t'opof'rock . {::_?'l SECTION THRU DlkE ,.-4/' Dia. SECTION THRU 5P/LLWAY lOO 0 (! .-1_23'Dia..penstock ~~;8-Y.JS'Adit ~oo_;=Jll;J~~l-~ç'~~~'\ '' c6"Butfer{/y valve· :X.\~~ ' ~~ ., i,~\\ ~~ ;y\~ ll tb"Dia. penstock---\\\V!\ \} \ ~._:'/ ~~ \~- f<!\:\~: 25~· \~\ "' 72,500 KW. :Jen-q-ra .. Tor-~;) il' El./018--}_-#!-i±-~ \\~ ill'.~ -=--; (\:\.. ~·::,qlf 1:~-.?~---#-tl_' ~~~ !~-~ :_., ;,\ ....... ~p ~~-~~~~-. E;BBI-: •. - 5 ECTION THRU PEN STOCK AND POWER PLANT 50 0 so lOO 1.50 1 1 J Founda+ion ..;r-(J qallery/- r---·--------·Axis R.•700' E1.14ss---.'L.::t.:1 EI.I450-_;;;r_~ ;l_,W, ;p·! .. \ ,. ' tl 1 i . l~-"-1--l----1115'R. 1 ' 1 J ' ··1 ; '. ., D \ F'C El. 1 150-.1. , · • • ô Eî. 1 ,.., '1 "' 'l . ' CROWN SECTION OF DAM \ -<--Axt5 of dom j ?EJ 1455' 1 >:: --.~ 1 . ~ . -'-. # ! . '.: .. :J. 0.1; /.0 ·;_,'1 > ', "~ ~:·Q.S: /.0 ~. • ' . ,'-.·f.l.f355 • 1 "i 41•. -,_ _ 1 r _ ~-rn-_ -17'\ t-·"'-'-Foundo...tion 9a.Jiery SECTION THRU THRU.ST 8LOCK UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTER/OR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION DE VIL CANYON PROJE'CT· ALASKA DEVIL CANYON DAM AND POWER PLANT fEA5JBILITY E:STIIVJATE DRAWING SCALE OF FEET SECTION THRU OUTLET </'.J::;-!;'.:'5 ••• __ , • fQ.-(1'":: GPO 837520 ,_/. Plans and Estimates Other Facilities Since there are no communities near the dam site, a perma- nent government camp would be required to house operating personnel. Residences for a staff of 75 persona, together with the necessary streets and utilities, would be located on the left abutment. Facil- ities for collection, treatment, and storage of domestic water would be constructed. Sanitary sewers and a treatment plant would also be required. A 16-mile road would provide access from the Gold Creek station on the Alaska Railroad to the Devil Canyon community. Access to the powerplant would be by one mile of service road from the com- munity and 7,000 feet of tunnel on the left abutment. Temporary facilities, in addition to the permanent commu- nity, would be required to serve an estimated total of 200 government workers during construction of Devil Canyon Dam and Powerplant. Hous- ing would be supplied by trailers and transa-houses. Major buildings would include an administration building, laboratory, warehouse, garage, and fire station. Transportation, tools, and ether equipment are also included. The estimated cost of service facilities includes credits for earnings from house rent and for salvage value at the end of the construction period • . Geology -Devil Canyon Damsite Abutments of the damsite are almost devoid of overburden. The rock is a metamorphosed argillite and graywacke; hard, quartzose, fine grained, complexly fractured and broken by three joint sets. The site appears to present no major geological problems for dam construction. The rock in the right abutment spillway and diversion tunnels appears competent. The earth dike required on the left abut- ment saddle will be founded on a deep, highly compact, partially pervious glacial deposit. Although a surface powerhouse is considered at the toe of the right abutment, the geological situation appears excellent for an underground powerhouse within the abutment. Geolog- ical and laboratory studies were performed to provide adequate data for feasibility designs and estimates. 72 Plans and Estimates Ample supplies of concrete aggregate are availablè close to the dam. Impervious materials can be obtai.ned onJ.y 'b7 ~lective prooessing of glacial debris in the general ares.. SUitable riprap for the earth dike can be obtained in adequate quanti t;tes from talus deposits in the ares., or by quarrying bed rock. Tb.ere are several suitable camp sites within three miles · of the damsite. T.be compacted moraine deposits shculd provide adeq1,1ate bearing for any usual type of camp buildings. An exoellent water supply can be obtained from nearby Cheechacho Creek. Locating suitable construction materiels to build the access road from Gold Creek should present no problems. Extensive sources of materials can be obtained along the route. DENALI DAM ~ RESERVOIR on the basis of avaUable data, Denali Dam bas been selected as the beat potential structure to impound water upstream tr~ Devil Canyon Reservoir. The reconnaissance design of Denali Dam is sho'Wn on Drawing No. 852-D-4 and the description of the structures presented in the following paragraphe are based on that design. Beoause of the problems that may be encountered in constrooting a dam on the border of the permafrost reglon, an unusual amount of field exploration and passibly field research will be required prior to preparation of the final design.. The final design therefore may differ consi4erably from that show on the drawing. Construction of the dam may be oomplicated by the possible requirement for special treatment of the impervious embankment materials.. During the advance p:J,anning stage of the investigations, alternative damsites will be studied in an attempt to locate a more favorable site. Dam - Denali Dam would. consist ot a roUed eartht'ill core wi th sand and gravel t'ill both upstream and downstream. The upstream face would be proteoted by a layer of riprap. The crest elevation of 2 1 564 would be 290 feet above the bottom of tb.e cutoff irench and 219 t'eet above the river bottom. 'l'he dam would be 2 1 0JO feet long at the crest. S;pillway An ungated glory-hole spillway would be locatedî.n the dam on the right aide of the stream channel. It would discharge l81 6o0 aubie t'eet per second at a maximum water surface of 2, 562 teet. This flow, combined with 655,000 aore-teet of surcharge., would proteot against the inflow design fiood1 'Which bas an e&timated peak of 30 1 000 cub:Lo feet per second and a 5 .. month volume of 3,728,000 acre-feet. 7J \ \ ' ' \ \ \ \ \ ' \ \ \ \ \ .,/ P~ans and Estimates Out~et Works The out~et works wo~d pass through the dam on the ~eft side of the river channel. Control and emergency gates would be provided. The outlets wou~d discharge 241 600 cubic feet per second at the normal full pool elevation of 2,552 feet. After lOO years of operation, sediment wo~d be deposited at the dam to an elevation of 2,386 feet; the sill of the outlet works was therefore set at this elevation. Reservoir Denali Reservoir would be about 25 miles long, extending upstream to within 7 river miles of Susitna Glacier. Normal full pool elevation would be 2,552 feet; total initial capaci~ would be 5,4oo,ooo acre-feet, including l,l4o,ooo acre-feet for 100-year sediment deposition. About 61,000 acres of land would be inundated. Sorne of this area would have to be cleared of a light to medium growth of trees and brush. The entire reservoir is in the public domain and has been withdrawn as a power site. A few mining claims near the upper end of the reservoir might be flooded; the status of these claims wo~d have to be investigated. Denali Highway now crosses the Susitna River in the reser- voir basin. It is proposed to relocate this highway to cross the river on Denali Dam. T.he relocation wo~d be 38 miles long, increas- ing the total length by 16 miles. Denali Highway has been placed on the primary system and will be reconstructed to primary road standards at sorne future time. The cost estimate for the relocation was based on the difference between the cost of improving the 22 miles of present road to primary standards and the cast of building 38 miles of new road to the same standards. Actuel cost to the project of this relocation wo~d depend in part on the statua of the proposed improvement to primary road standards at the time the final reloca- tion agreement is made. A law-grade road to sorne placer mines above the reservoir would also be replaced. Other Facilities No large permanent community would be located at Denali Dam, because only a small operating force would be required. Resi- dences and necessary permanent utilities would be built. The relo- cated Denali Highway would provide access to the damsite and the residences. 74 ""'· ' ':':: "" ~ ,\. 0 \_..5U5!TNA RIVER~ GENERAL PLAN .zoo 10() 0 .zoo 900 /VW.5_EP.552Cax W..5J":IZ56ZO/ /i1/!71"/..5.ili'.J86j? .é/.2370 .:Y:_'_ / •/•' '7-:'!7io < " i=: / 1 ' r .! 1 }-<-/80 ->-: MAXIMUI'v1 3EC770N RE53:P\ù!R ALLOCATION PUR POSE ELEVATION "li?clude5 j 140, vùO a/ .-or -:5'eoÎnïéï7 f /1:.-R'::' F.":E.T ~33040~0 __ 100,000 ---------~" 5-f-OO, 000 /l ~-Jr'.::horqe o/655,:}00 o./:' (Mo x. /1/S.f/. /'?:;)6:?,0) :--v;l/7 o sp;llvvas; ol!.oc/;o.rqe ol /6', 600 c. ,~s. profec/:1 ogoi/1:51 l!?e mflow cle.5(5l/ 7 //ood(j:;e<-~k-JO,OOOc/.5., .:3/-;-;w:/.? /o/w;;e .3;728/000o FJ ~-;: Cre5f cl obm : -J;;;b/re Jfry::lc-n:~ <.5'-I:J'f'Oio. P!f!E'.5 m 19r;?ree bor,ae/ condu!l '1 ~,El. 2-4"50 _L __ ,_tz;E5i' ~j::):j"--]'fj;;-èot~clu;.6- ;r;f/; :!t:cl /!11131::5 ' Co11/;-v/ !;oU5e-1 ,-.J1tix;z6cle5 ,-J! t:/. :2354--;./ '/ '~02360 PI?OFILE ON 1 OUTLET WORKS / r-jb;//YVa!l ( , ~ /9;_r ven! ;,'01 ,)POJY!i 1 /~ ff/ 1 '/ • /-L v/t:J 07 û:/Jl) '• ' -J-!9'[);o. Co;;c/u;f 2-700 :i '<l ~ ====~~~~~--c~;;m;;;o,---t--220(; PROF! LE. ON 1 OF DAM PROFILE ON f OF 5PILLWAV LOCATION IV! ri p ~ 2600 () K ~ "-1 i;j r:zJ;r Il 2550 1== ,! 1 1 7 '() ~ ~ 2500 ~ Q: 1::' ~ 2450 1)- ~ 2400 --L__j ~ 2350 ~_____L__-------~------~-------~~-J o s m " ~ 5?/LLW-'iV-OUTLET J.-A/c:f'?KS LJI:JCI-IARGC IN TII0!/5/JNOS CFCF..5. /9REA -CAPACITY-OI3CIIAR8E CUtWES UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION OEVIL CANVON PROJECT -ALA.SKA DENAL/ DAM (W!TiiûLIT PüJ v:::R) RECONNAISSANCE OE5/GN ORAWJNG DENVER, CDLOR/lDO Plans and Estimates Temporary bousing, streets, water system, sewage treatment faeilities, and ether utilities woUld serve the estimated 125 govern- ment employees duri~g the construction period~ Other service facil- ities would be similar to those provided for Devil Canyon Dam and Powerplant. Geoloil -Denali Damait~ ~ae damsite is tn a broad valley croated by glaciation. Bedroak is believed to be more than 200 feet in deptn below the axis. The glaciation has resulted in knob-and-kettle topography with the depressions filled by small lakes having no apparent inlet or outlet~ The moraines deposited by the glacier are composed of heterogeneous lenses of silt and. cJayey silts. Glacial outwash char~els dissected the moraines and left a deposit of sand and gravel. The glacial deposi ts underlying the dam axis are composed of rock flour with large lenses of sand and, occasionally1 of silt. This material iR verJ compact owing to glacial loading. However, permafrost at the site will affect its bearing capacity. Tbe four drill hales in the ab'Utments showed permafrost from the surface to depths of about lOO feet. No permafrost was found in a 176 foot drill hele placed in the center of the river~ Perv:!.ous materi.als and concrete aggregate are plenti:f'ul. The glacial moraines are the only local sources of impervious em'bank- ment materials. Riprap can be obtained from processing ot the fine- grain moraine de~os1ts 1 from processing of extensive talus deposits along the Paxson..Cantwell High1i1ay, or f'rom an outcrop of metaandesite about 1.5 miles doW.Ostream from the dam axis. TRANeMISSION SYS!EI!M A transmission system would be required to carry electria power from Devil. Canyon Powerplant to the major load centers at Anchorage and Fairbanks. ~is system woul.d include transformera 1 switching gear, and transmission lines. !Jlle step-up transformera at Dev1 .. l Canyon Powerplant would. be placed on the l'Owerplant dpcko 1be swi tohyard would be located on the le:tt abutment. 'lb.e capaoi ty of these tacill ties would be 74o,ooo kilovolt-amperes. 75 ,/ Plans and Estimates Two 230-kilovolt, double-circuit, steel-tower transmission lines would extend the 157.5 miles from Devil Canyon Switchyard to the Anchorage Substation. œhe Devil Canyon-Fairbanks transmission line would consist of two 230-kilovolt, single-circuit, wood-pole lines 1 each 193 miles long. Capacities of the Anchorage and Fairbanks Substations would be 550 1 000 and 150,000 kilovolt-amperes, œespectively. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PROBLEMS The two project dams would both be located in remote areas. Problems of access to the sites 1 housing, communications and climate require special consideration. Accessibility The Alaska Railroad passes within 16 miles of the Devil Canyon damsite at the station of Gold Creek. A 16-mile jeep road1 constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation, extends from the Railroad station of Gold Creek to the damsite. This could be used for tem- porary access, until a suitable construction access road is devel- oped. Approximately one mile of additional surface road and 7,000 feet of tunnel would be required for access to the powerplant. The Denali damsite is located within t'ive miles of the Denali Highway which junctions with the Alaska RaUroad at Cantwell, about 8o miles to the west. The present jeep access road to the damsite would be improved for a construction road and upon completion of the dam, would become a part of the Denali Highway. Relocation The principal relocation necessitated by construction of the project would be the 22 miles of the DenP-li Highway that would be flooded by the Denali reservoir~ The 38 miles of new highway construction would utilize the dam to cross the Susitna River. 76 Plans aDd Estimates Rights-of-Way The major features of the project would be located on public domain except for a portion of the transmission lines. The lands required for the reservoirs and dams were withdrawn under Power Site Classification Number 443, and filed February 20, 1958 in accordance with Section 24 of the Federal Water Power Act. This withdrawal included all lands above the damsite and below elevation 2,600 feet for Denali dam and reservoir and all lands above the damsite and below elevation 1,500 feet for the Devil Canyon dam and reservoir. Prior to construction, public lands required for trans- mission lines would be withdrawn. In addition it will be necessary to obtain easements or acquire rigbt-of-way for about 20 miles of privately-owned lands. Houa in§ There are no existing housing facilities near either dam- site. Permanent facilities for operation and maintenance personnel would therefore need to be constructed. Temporary housing, includ- ing utilities would also be built for the Government construction employees. Communications It is proposed that communication to and from all project works would be by radio or radio-telephone. PROJ:OOT COSTS ProJect costa are composed of the Federal investment in project teatures, the annual cost of operating and maintaining the project, and providing for periodic replacements of worn out equip- ment. 71 Plans and latimates Construction Costa Feasibility cost estimates have been prepared for all proJect features except the Denali Dam and Reservoir. IJ.'he cost estimate tor the latter feature is of reconnaissance grade. The project -would be developed in five stages. A detaUed breakdown of construction costs is shown on the Official Estimate (PF-l) following this page. In summarr~ the cast of each stage is estimated as follows: Stage 1 Stage 2 s·tage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 $288,590,000 1341747,000 12,434,000 51,899,~000 n,2o4.goo Tbtal Const~~ction Cost $498,874,000 Included in this total construction cost are investment ltn proJect features, cost of service facilities required during construc- tion and permanent facilities required to operate the projeet. The cost of project investigations is also includedo Total Federal investment would include the above construc .. tion cast plus simple interest on expendi tures during construction. ~-'t;t~tt~cm. Dl' ail-' stages of construction, an estimated $28 1 216 1 000 of interest computed at 2! percent will have been added to construction aosts making a total investment of $527,090,000. Q;Pet:ation and Maintenance The annual cost of operation and maintenance woUld increase as eaah stage is com:pleted.. It is planned that the powerplant would be tully attended witn a personnel requirement at the project of 75 employees. In a.ddi tion1 line crews would be stat1oned in the vic in .. it-1 of Nenana and Palmer. œhe estima.ted annual cost ot operation and maintenance can be summarized as follows : lst to 4th year 4th to 6th year 6th to lOth ;year lOth to l3th year l3th year on 78 $ 930,000 1,œo,ooo 1,290,000 1,820,000 1,910,.000 Forrn pr -! U-57! Surea•J of Rf>c larnat ion "cc iocto ___ Q_EfiL_Q@.JQli ________ _ --(..FF!C! &.i. ESfiMAil SUMMARY ($1,000) o,te of Estimote: __ _!E:r:_i;L_2_9~J.~§.Q__ -----___ .:_ ---- p • ._,~.;!r~d by:_S_!,_!P_È!_n_!!_e1-~----Ar-;;r':''IIPI t~: ---------~~-____ _ SheeL!. __ oLL __ Cost Classification ~ESC1?!PT!'JN \,h .. 3r1t i ~l' 1 i ! Lt.'\! tst::·ate.r" t ~~~~~=]~. 1 é-1 r:on- tra-::tçr t.h.ter-ia1s ancl_ 't ~-.:, >. r· l1 e~ fll' Govt. L"ibor by C,av,.rnfl'IE"nt force-s s,.r~ i c<> .h~ilitio:<; nvest i gat ions, Engî.1eerln9 and Oth<>r Costs Previo~.~s Official_ fsti~te- Ill 1 --l.LL-------~-------+-----1'L-----I-''--'----'r---'"-'---t---'-'-l ~~-~" "" 1 lOI t-<10) ~ 1111 1 -~~------== ·~··~ -1~~---:t_" ~~=:::_~-~+---+ 1 1 1 , ..... y ~=~~~ r -~-:=--= ==-+--~ ~-----=f : O.rll ,...,.. ""' ... ,.,_,, ====-~ ~~~~-=--==--~y-· =""·""' _,. '"""' '·700 l5 '"" Denali Dam and Reservoir -------f --::.=::_----~----:--1.3.3,917-ll4.932-.3.890 15,095 --l il,Ol Devil Canyon Powerolant ---::_---=---==~-=---=--_.:--+=~_:::-:_ __ -:_-----=-:ui-:Œ~ -~l~~ :n 28~ US9 1Ul8 ~~~ 13.01 Devil Canyon-Anchorage_Line No. __ l_ --------------+-----__ _ __ __21,,_62h_I_24J2J:L~~---JJ.7 2.6S7 1 f---ll·02 Devil CanYon-Fairbanks Line No. 1-:-:------------=--=-=-~-r~=~-=~-~--== =-~--=-~ _ _::::~_iQ~2J2_~-=t=iJ1;1 7 192 1.186 ~:: =~==== ~:: :: : --_--~~ ~ l_~~·~a~~~-~-"8-j----=:2+:~ .... :: ... ~6'---1-------l 01.01 01.02 13,06 Devil Canyon SwitchYard -:_____ ----r----'l_,_i.6k ___ i,2ld_' __ _i..5o0 81 1.673 ~3.07 Anchorag~;~ Substation -~~ ___ ,---_-_--~-__-_ ~-:_::-j:-b_cm==i,}__oo-i.l..oo 86 2.217 ------------1 ---------------~----:. -----r------------,-1---· -H.Ol Devil Canyon General Prooerty _________________________ f-----1..153.__ 6.756 __ .997 ].5.02 Denali General Prooertx_ ______ .. ------~---=--=--_[=--~~~~~= -~~=-~ ~~~~83_---_12_~ ~:.rn---o7_ i __ TOTM_~------------__ _ _____ -----+-~-~-=i.'l_$~6i.B._j_~l-5 1 so,468 1 1 9,o:n:=::=!=s'4258- -------~ ~::t==:=-r -l=.::.::=t~ +---------+-- __ ---·-----------=-----=-~---=~~--~--~-·· --= -~ . ====~==--= GPO 9947151 form PF-l r"'""'------_.P!!!'[I_!._Q!N.J.QN _____ ---------( :.-!i7 J Bureau of R&clamai:ion GFflC!AL tsliMAIE -----------------~---~-~------ INITIAL STAGE Date of Estimak ____ --~Ei:_\_~~,-~9_6_9 ___ -------- Pr·enMf'd by:_S...t.J:JW.fll.!'{~_!!l:_ ___ A:oon>ve1 by: -~---~-----~-------($1,000) Sneet -~--of_ L __ L~bor ~nd Mat~rîals nl/es:uga 10ns, 1 1 ~'l.t~rifJl s eod Laber by Engi neertog Previous: Cost -,luant i ~Y Jni t 1 Total by con-Su;:.pl ies .GovPrnment Service and Other Offic!a1 Classi fil::dtî-nn DESC'? l PT lON C<:~st E..st:~ate trac tor f!v Govt. force'i Faci 1 ities Cnsts Estirnate- Ill 121 131 (4.), l':.) ((,) ,_, IBI 191 l lOI ! Hl 01 RESERVOIRS AND DAMS ,01 Devil Canvon Dam and Reservoir ""---·--f---142;081 1:24 235 -2700 15 146 .i2 Clearinll Lands ! 8,770 ;-35 Dams 113 270. ,01-Dam Structure "and Dike -" {90 584) • 02-Soillway ---·--·-. (21 700) .03--outlet Works {986) .50 Roads Railroads and BridŒes ___b195 01-A"'"ll"" iload t.o Dam f?"1?~\ 0:;>. ~Service ·llo"d t.o Snillwav --~0Q) f--" ll POWERPLANTS -HYDRO .01 Devil Canvon Powernlant oO,l81 ~8~'i 1--_1$ ?811 1 ~RQ 1 ~f..7 .·n Structures and Imnrovements ·------I----ZW!6~ "?~0 .l6 Waterwavs 7 0011 c--,-----~~ ,01 Power Features in Dam ""- ..{z>.8 7.;160 .02 Powernlant Items __ __JJ,lO '7ii."o) ,1.1 Turbines and Generators ""-f----.,:1.22 ~ .1.8 Aceessorv Eleetrieal Eauinment ---66~ 1 O?o ,J.Q Miseellaneous Ecuinment t----_...1.20 8?0 ,'>0 Roads Railroads and Bridlles ---~ -"---------"-f--" H TRANSMISSION LINES. SWITCHYAfiD AND SUBSTATION -~ t----,____ __ t--:;i 851. --1---.01 Devil Canvon-Anchoran Line No. 1 21 72!L. 22 LJ..? . 2 6~7 ,'10 Land ànd RiJ>ht.s --1------" 22 ~2 Clearing !---·-"----+------f---" '178 -----··-·- ·"2 Towers and Fixtures f-------"--1------"-" !---·-"-· ---" ~435L 1----· ·"1.. Overhead Conduotors an~ Deviees 1---" ~----~00 t-------,---f----t----c-------9~~"i?-f--.02 n~..ri l ~~nvnn-Ji'gl ,.h~n w-~ ln.!~ lJn _l_ __________ -·-------___10..132 -t-f--" 19:? 1::ls6 ~w r ... nn ,.,:,n Ri "ht ... f--·--- ~? f'1 ao-< -" f--- '>,}.? ~<;-<t Po,.,,. ~~n Fi rl.ur .. ,. -" --f-----.72( ~-..~ ~ Ann · n .. ,; "Il" -f------:no ---·------·· .os Fairbanks Substation ---J----2 908 t-· 5~ 1 820 48 ~w ~ii Structures and Improvements ---~-"'"'---<;O .51 Station .EQuioment Electr_iç__ -"-~~0 1 770 ----" ---·· . --·- .06 Devil Canvon Switchyard J, .R'IR_"_ 1 120 ?.?ii~ <11 852 ·33 Structures and I -160 1b'i 1 .51 Station EQuioment Electric 960 2 680 l GFIO 9947!'!! Form PF·-1 !3-37 J tlur~r.u of RetiJ..,~tion P•e"ced by;_S_t§JÙI.!lll.~~lj;z_ Cost Cl.iiSSi ficat1on Apprn\ed hv: ----------------- DESCRIPTION - OFFICIAL ESllloiAil INITIAL STAG& (.1,000} ,Juantîty :Jnit Cost- Total lStl"·3.t~;" 1 t<.;ecto ____ j)1j:l[IJ,_Q.~Q.f! _______ --------- DM.e of (sti,.te: _____ Ap.!;l,.l_gg_,_:J:'t_6Q ___________ _ l~i~;:~Ï~ 1 ~bt=~~Jl•; l..'lbcr hy ~-~.1 ~·~~~ ] ~~·rR!~~~ ~~~~;~;ent -'Pf'<•'- FJ.~i 1 i ti Sheet_] __ of _7 __ _ nve$tig.,tions, Cngineertng ilnd OthP.r Costs Previous {)fflr:ial [still'Jate ~-'"· 121 13 TRANSMISSION LINES, SWITCHYARD ANDSÛÏÏSTATION '(Continued~) •• ~ " "=l:~:-~t "ll-E. ----~~· 1 ~ 1 .07 Anchora~~:e Substation . ~ 1------5~ ?Al__f--_ _2AQ_ ___ j--_3.22 ~-86 . 962 _ ---'- • 33 Structures and Improvements . ____ f----____l,lQ ___ f----_1,_0 l .51 Station_ Eaui~ment Electrio_~-=~------------____ -r::~.Jl.lQ__t___J..,J,2.J=------------+------1-------l --------------~---------+-----~------~ ------ Ill • 01 Devil Canvon Communi tv --L'15~ _ __g.,. . 6 ___ 997 15 GENERAL PROPERTY -- 1 ----~-t---'-'---f=E-----3 1 1 1 1 !!; ~!:~::;.~a~~ Improvemenh '-,-. _=f=idL ? -----.. TOTAL STAGE ---t--=i==1=2Bs:590-tn3.5~-:~ 1 5.143.1 33,707 ~. __ _ r---------+--~------'-'--------------+--------+-------=t== __ t Il + 1---=r= -1 1 . 1 ~ --JJ-------1-----_--1 - 1-----+-------c-------~--------+----+---*------+----- 1-------+--------------~------'---~-· ·~+------+--~=1=~-~t= __ J=__ 1 1 .1 1 1 1--------------t---------:------c-------+-~-1 t= -E:=~±-1 1 1 1 1 t--~--1------'-----,------------~----· ----1-- 1----11---- - ~-----~------+------~~--------+-------r-------r------_, --~~-----------------t----t-------lt-------+----+------+-------+------+--------+-----1 GPO 9947!51 Form PF-l (_3-57 J 611re~.u of Reclarnatlon Prep"n~d by:~'!_e_p~n.~.!~t..z ____ Arp!"::ve(J by: ----------------- Cost Classification DESCRIPTION GHîCIAL ESf!MAIE SECOND STAGE ,.1,000) <)uantity Unit Cast T0tal lo;t;"11ate T ~~~~~~.~~~ 1 ty c;on- tnrtor '"-·'ect: ______ Jl]i;I[[J._(è.~_YQ![ ____ _ -- Dote of wtirn<>te: ____ ~~1 201 1960 ----------;:;::.-::f_~f-::1::-~ Materi.1ls :J.nd "'rpl ies !Jy Govt. t.1bor rv :.OvPrrtnent Fortf'"i 0 revious Qlfici al Estinv'lte tl!! ----- 1 1 Ill 1 l 01RESERVOIRS AND DAMS 12 '" -----l--1 '-'--Jl---~---l 1 f.' +.-----..'."---•u• ... ---------t------.0? ----1 1~.0Q~ n .. ~nali Dam and Reserv~oir ~ -1 f'r"'fU 1 '•U't' 1 1 Re1ocation of Existing Prop~ _ • 01 Relocation of Denali Highway :l: ~~'<~;:',:"~ ot'Hœ< to """"--~ Min" -~. .~ . ~~ 1 1 .Ol ;: "=·~ ··-· ·+·--+---lf . -~ --- _ _ ,Q2~illway __ --+-----'---___jf------lf ·~0~-0nt.l At. WnT"k~ ~ • ~l +-~-~ ---+~-~------~-----r--~ fù 1 aF.N-:i.ilAT _ .0? Den~li 0 ::mn M !\'>.() 7'>.'1 Q'l "~-~() 1 ~ .lQ? 1---. -1-------+- L-~-=t=-1-----+--+----+'---+---------+------J r-------+-~~ --.::l_··-------+-_~--=---*"±-=±=. 1 1 1 1 1 ~- =+= ~~--If---+-------+---+---+----f--'--~~---------l --r--- --t---C------=t= f r GPO 9947!!11 1 Foc, PF-i ; -~-~-;'! fh:re1!1LJ of ',r,r_:.'l'"•lti."l'l ~· -~: \rt~ j t.y; Ste2_h_!l_!__~~1_!;;y: Cost Liassi ficati0n '1.,,.,,, ---__ D]!:yJ]._:_Q..o1_N_JQN_ ____ --------------l Es~~W,,[ _ --------------------~---~-----_! THlRD StAGE n.,te of "t'mate: April 20; 1960 ~ ($1,000) -----------------:;;:;:_:;_--~~-=.z::~-i .'l.,'f.•'"""•P·r cy: 1 . Lli~O' .1'1:1 !,b_tprin> •"~estigatio".s, !1 ! 1 ' """t"'~' ., 1 •r>d llb'lr t, t.''1r~eerirq ji 1 1 ~ 'r;it Tr'Lt' • r --·s]r• ..o0V•r~•~en' ' 1 Ylll "tl") r 1 If"' r;.r L•f.S('d(Pii)N 1 J,.;:~~ut; C~'it 1 ,tr<'"at,. 1 1,.,. t'lr ~ ->Ov+. hnt>s 1 ._ t~ + -~1 1"""--------JEPOWERPLY.D ....... J?r"'~""'~~~~~-~~-_=------··~-·--_···~ --~~= l~=~--=1;t_--_. ;·~:=fiijl:mt::-_= t~z. 1_;_~~-~-~-.] ..::,~~=~~~:,:=:==~-~~l~-.-±= ···= ====t=~= -~·-=.=~ ~--~_~-=F_-=r-_--_=~ '=· =. -~ --"':"!-----!--stru~tures~~QY!I!!l__~-----------~~t::-_:::__~~-~=~ ::---=-r-= -------------- ·" --~-t~~~-Eq-~-·~·::::·=~~-~~~~=--:_-~----------=-·=---=~j==-=~=.-~-·=· ----=-----~~----__ :_::_----r---i4-n ------- -:li.: ..... i:::r.::~: -===·-==·····=·t=~~===t=-1 . -~'l==-=J'. -------_ ----- r==--7____ An-~0-lr_&_g~~:-st_a_t_i_o-:------:-~-=----:-_-_--_~~---~--~~--~t-. ---~~~ ----. 76j--· --~~__12 .·.···' -----------=~:-::. ...31____ -~~.I.!LJmd..lmprQyments _ __ _____ __ _____ _ _______ Jl\L~ __ __.u_+----+---- _q S ation uipment, El~~rt_c ___ :____ _ _______ , ---,-----________ _ ___ 1~,~;6!!,04~-_!1=+----+----+------+- 1 --=--~--~~--~:==t=---==±=t~-~i~iid--?,5151 ,. -+= 1,93j-~-~---l TOTAL STAGE -----------------4-----t--t-----+--. 1 ---j--± 1 --------li-----------1-----~-------,-----+----i -----+--il------+-----+- ll------l--------1-----. ------1------l-----11------- --1-. --------+----Il--------+---+ +---------+------------ 1----+------------+~----~:~=-~-=---+----~~-=-~=+------+-----+-----+-----+-±= j ------:+=---------------r-----"--l---,----=+=-------;-------1--------- _____ . --~~t·= -~ . --·=•F t ~.:::=. --. ------~-----:-==-J _· ---·· -------------------------· __J_ ------------!----. 1 1--------=;;::::=t_.~i~-±.= ~·:~ ·~ 1.:::.~-; ·-c----~----~;1 .1~-----------~=--=----$-=---=---------·! 1 -~ ==-----~-~---==-~-=+------~ -_ --=-t-----f---------f ·-~·· ~-=-~-~.::: ---~--~J-==---~~~~=t~--1---~~;;;=~ GPQ gg411:î1 r;-o,.., Pr-1 1 ~"~-57) ,,, '""''---!l~'Q:!!_C~WlL ________________ _ t'!1.Jreau o-r !<ec laf'lat ion O~F!CI!\~ ESliMAIE FOURTH STAGE {$1,000) D'te of (,Hm•teo ___ 4Jltl.1_~Q,é..1,9j,Q _________ ----- Pre-p.1red ny:_!'t.,.!r!._h!l!_~'-l!:r_ ___ Appmve1 tl'/:------------~--Sheet~.f:,:.__of_.'J __ Co-st Classification DESCRI PT! 'JN , ;~i~;~;~~ / M:\t!~~'1 b 1 ~flhor t.y f 1 ln~~~i~.~=~~~~s, 1 Pr~vious 0uantîty J unit 1!1 Tt;tal 1 h:>con-1 'o.r.rli"'"> CcNPF,I'\f'r'lt 1 1 and 1Jther 1 Officiai Cost tst"'late 1 tractor rw G.t:lvt. Fnrcf><; · Costs ~stirnat~ r 11 Ill POWERPLAIITS-.-HIDRO i21 : J~.L __ ~ __ J.:J_ ~----~1 ___ 16_1 -t-:~~r-"'-_ ~-···_--E--' _· "_' -"il -1 · 01 Devi1 canv..n Powerp1ant ,---v-u~~=,., =:bA>:c. ~ ' -~ .ü Turbines and Gener, ators . . -----f-------__ ~-2,28],_ 0 ______ L_____ ----le-----.j o4S Aécessory E1ec,tric Equi)llllent -~--__ _ _____ _ __ :):12-._ Q_ =t= J 13 TRANSMISSION LINES.· sWrTCHYARD AND SUBSTATIONS -----j---=~--~--__ -,_-__ ,_j.' __ -__ +------1!-l .m DeVi1 CanYon -Anchorage Line No. 2 1 , ____ t--_2.1...52-Z. ~'1~1---__2? -7 · ?Q? 1 • ~0 Land .!Uld Rights +-.----·----· ------1-----____ii..l--1--. '32 ClearinJZ Lands +-________ -+.-_TilL+-~-~-+---~--+-~ ~ __ Towers and Fixtures . ~-__ --j--l5_,35.Q_e----+-~-~--!-·-----+--~~--+ ~ Overhead. Conductors and DeViees ___ __ -3-:;;;;o ___ _ 1 . : .01.. Devi1 CanY0n-Fairbanks Line No. 2 -==1=-=--=---~~ -~1o:S09t-~~-L,-------'----"'-,-_-,1~~~+------J ..1Q_~L!md ~d Rights ---------------------t---t----·-----t--,_., :/_j__ ___ =i== .32 C1eanng Lands ______ _ _______ 1 ___ 111.-L-~~;=-l= ___ -1--~~1--------.53 Po1es and Fixtures -j---__ T ~SQ_ ---- 1 ·54 Overhead Conducto.n ""'"""'•'• -t---~ ~:.:_~~ c -:_ J· 4,~ 1 ~ -:_ __ ~ _ ---~ ·-----+---- .05 Fairbanks Substation __ _ _____________ .1,_02_6.r-__ __ï3.l) _J..,2~0 ==t= --566- ·33 structures and Improvements f-. ---t---------1--____Q_Q_ 60 î · t--:j .51 Station Eauinm.ent Electric __ ---------+------------+--0 _ -4l!'ZO-!--==r=-___ = __ -------------r-------tt--· -----1-------1------1-·~---+------1 .06 Devil Canvon_ SwitchYard ---=="'=~-~=+---_:...2.;5--:-635 ' _ _::-~!-----_---+~--,_.-, ~ Structures and Imnrovements __ __ _ _ _ __ _____ _ --65..+-----t---~t-~---t------l ;;il Station Eauinment E1ectric · _____ --t--lt--------__1.405-i----~----4-~----1-----~-11----~--1 " -----!------------------1--··--·-----ll-------1 .51 Station Ec!uitllllent Eiectric ----·-------_ ~== + _ _::::::::= --~~~ . 670 2 7'50 __ ~-. ---------~t--. --. j" . ; 1 TOTAL STAGE =--~=~~~=f=~_=_=-_.:__ .. ' ---+~--=-ii-:I_--..12._2-=.§_86 ==~184 1 -_--··+-l--~,-.,,-- 1-------+-~--~~----------------------=-=--==~+ -=~~--=--,t---.:__-_----=~-.-:,__-------+ ___ji___..________j r-=:f~= ~~~=L-t--4-f f f9 1 F ----~=t------+------1+------- GPO 9947!1 t f<;;"r>~ Pr~1 ~ _ .JlElli1._ CANION_ ___ ------·~-:Oi; èvr"'f!U ,J • ~.'p( 1 ~ro~t i 0'1 Pr('pc'l.rt>d tv:_~e!l.!_e!!__!t!~.l ___ Ar:::rêl"'~d Ly: ----------------- (Jff!CIAL ESltMAIE FIF'rH STAGl!. ,,1,000} D•te of (,timate: April 20, 1960 -----------------;:,-=_=-z_-:_:f-::.L~ Cost Classificd.tion_ GESCRIPTION T ;,luantity !Jnit Cast Total lstil"lat"! labor ,3-nd IT'.'!.t~rial s cy cor'\- tr3ctor Materi'lls and Suf.lp] tes by Govt, L"l.bor by ÛOvflrnmeT1l Forc~s SPrvi.::e Fa~;i 1 iti~s •westigatinns, ~ Engineering Previo\ls and Other Official Co:;,ts Csti~Y~at!! ~~-~L'--~WNTS -HIDRO w '" 141 • l" 1"01 "' f lsl 1 loi ' "o' 1 "" ...Ql__ ~.J. Canyon Powerplant . 'i 298 - 1 21f7 3 1?0 81.1 .1.1___ ____JJ,jrbine'Ll!Jld Generators . __ _l 1 2l? '3 005 f-------.1.8 Accessocr Eleetric Eguipment ----====----=~-_ 70 165 J ___ _ -1 1 '3 ""'' UNES SWlTCHYJ\RD AND SUBSTA'fiONS ! _ 1 .Oî Devi1 Canv<1n -Anehora,ge___Line No~ 2 . . ! 'L:>QL. 2-'ll.Jl -1 -'l'il. 1------------51. Ov .. rhead èonduej.ors .and Deviees __)_ 2.940. t=:==:=_ 1 Fairbanks Substat.ion .05 5o5 ~IL 3~~ --____.'ill_ 1 .33 1 Structures and Improvements • 51 Station Equipment, Electr:Lc 'f' _ !-- - ~205 --15 12_0 à9o 3~~ 1 èS 825 p:o7 . 1 An<!b~~ubetat!~!!_-t== 1 Il 1,621±= 42IT ,33 Structures and Improvements .51 Station Equipment, E1eetric !-----+-----________ TOTAL STAGE 11.204 4,912 4.600 115 1;692 , @t1·li.IJIII --+ . 1 . t=~-==t== F= --+--~+-~~-~--~~-+---~~--~r-~ G'PO 994751 Plans and Estimates Provisions for Replacements Annual provisions for replacements were determined on a modified sinking fund basis at 2~ percent interest. This annual project cost would occur as follows: lst to 4th year 4th to 6th year 6th to lOth year lOth to l3th year l3th year 0:1;1 $180,000 180,000 230,000 360,000 4oo,ooo CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE The data and studies summarized in this report were ade- ~uate to determine the physical feasibility of the selected plan of development and a reasonable estimate of project cost• However, an orderly scheduling of preconstruction activities is essential to selecting the optimum plan of development and the best designs for project structures. After the project is authorized, about two years should be allowed for advance planning and preconstruction activities on Devil Canyon Dam and Powerplant. Construction funds would be used to finance this work as soon as they become available. One field season would be required to obtain the necessary additional information on foundation conditions and construction materials at Devil Canyon damsite. Field data on the access road from Gold Creek station would also be obtained. Further detailed studies are needed to select the most economical design for Devil Canyon Dam and Powerplant. Preliminary layouts indicated a good possibility of placing the powerplant underground; this will be given further consideration in making comparative layouts1 schemes, and estimates. The access road from Gold Creek station to the Devil Canyon site would be constructed during preconstruction work on Devil Canyon Dam. The Devil Canyon community would be built immediately thereafter. The first stage of Devil Canyon Project would consist of Devil Canyon Dam, the entire powerplant structure, installation of three generating units, necessary equipment in the switchyard1 one 79 Plans an4 Estime.tes ' transmission line to Anchorage and one l1ne to Fairbanks 1 and neces- sary :taaUities :tn the Anchorage and Fairbanks substatio~US. Oon- struation of this initial stase would take about 6i years1 with the first senerat1ns unit goin& on the line sllortlY befox-e the end of the sixtb year. !~he estimated scheclule :tor this stase is: shown on the control schedule1 Form PF-24 Completion or the entire project would probabl~ take place in four addi tional stages. !lhe timing of these stages would depend on the aotual growth o:t the power ~oad. !lhe estimated grovth of the load and time of installins the additional stases are shown on Draw .. ings l'lo. 852-906-35 and 852-906-36 in Chapter IV 1 Power Demand and Supply. The faaill ti es included in eaah of the last four stages are described briefly below. The second stage would be construotion o:t DenalJ. Dam and Reservoir and appurtenant :tacilities, s~ as road relocatious and :taailities for operating personnel~ Detailed investigations and pre- construction activities Will be required. prior to startins this con- struction. · Duri:og the third stage two more generat1,ng un.1. t11 would be installed in Devil Canyon Powerplant, along w:i:th additi~ facil· ities in the switabyard and both substations. IJ.'he :tourth stage would :tnalude two more uni ts iJl the power- plant and add.i tional transmission :tacilities. Tlle second DevU Canyon-Fairbanks transmission l1ne would be completed. 1tle steel towers for the Devil Cseyon-Anehorage Line No. 2 would be: e:r~ted and one circuit would be strung. Additional equipment would be installed. in the swi tahyard and substation&. ~; In the fifth and final stap of development1 the eighth unit 'WOUld be installed .in the powerpl.ant, and the aeconct c~uit would be strung on the Devil Canyon-Anchorage tine No. 2.j With the addition of tacilities to the switchyard and both substatJ.ons, the proposed development would be complete. PROJID!t' FOBMU'LA'riON A reconnaissance investigation of the Susitna NoveJr Basin publ:l.shed in a report of that name in June 1953 was the basie. tor selecting the Dev1l Canyon proJect as the initial develppinen't. ao tEGENO: Types of Activity PrfW)"nstruçt ion Construction ô : PROGRAM ITEM z w 3 ~ ,, Ùl8 41 Ol..Ql_ 51 _Ql....Q2_ 61 11.01 71 H.Ol 91 1~.02 10 fi• n.m 12 131 l..1..1li._ 14 l51l..3.....05__ 161 1.'l..1l6_ 171 13..0'Z... 18 nt 191 ___l5__..__02_ 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Notes: 2 ~ Jl("ffiJF.R n~.oPMENT 1 PROORAM _ Devil C.vtvon Dam_ and.___fu _ Denali Dam and Reservoir "' o Pn "" ?~n MO' .. • Un. 1 navil ('.., -.. ?'ln 1n .. • Wn. 1 rl.vil !'.JI ?~0 1fhJ .. 'Nn -"" r~ ___ FA·" ?::J(} __ _JfR[_ ù1n.__2_ -·~ ~ nawil ~ --'larll_ o. mr r"'O~'I' TOTAL TOTAL ORI.IGATIONS 'il!lUlOO 1 KW ??.linn KW 1 ~;;m_.c;no J n.r..l~!hl 1 _.lOO.OOQ_ ~08l.o00 221.. 390 900,000 j3,o6),000 8,335,000 15,000,000 1 '30,9!)0,000 1 37,;00,000 1 38,320,000 8th 1 4 Ls .I.OO..OCIQ_ ~917.ood 207~-870 I.HO llthl 5 IORO_l'IIYI !Jcw. \,,,._na;:. rvvl l':l;Q ?'ln 250,000 !1+,150,000 4,200,000 5,000,.000 9~000,000 1 .24,2;0,000 1 28,000,000 19th, 6 l.c:? • .c; J ML J ?J._Af;J. IY"Ifi ~Q !:!M. 50,000 200,01X1 350,000 aoo,ooo 4,000,000 J ll;,5QO,OOO 1 7 ,91.4,800 200,000 2,000,<X)Q 5,500,000 1 2,165,.3.30 50,000 300,000 500,000 lQ' Mt-1 10.'7'.1? .fYY <70 JO 19thlll 1.1;'7. Vi 1 ?J •. AAJ..nnc 12 -"'-]_Q___ç(1Q_t1(1( 'tc""' 16thJ 13 to• 600,000 100,000 ~?l._Q__ood 1 01;,0 --""'- 1.50,000 1,000,000 --"ldLLOO_ ___!L],IJ •. rni .... ___ 'Z...21fi .. 200,000 1,250,0ÇX) _]_2-00'Lood 1 Mo «n 200,000 !1+,648,000 2,892,830 1.4,50,000 112,261,000 116,077;830 21,750,000 1 47,850,000 {.;Q_?ocl ...(,;Q_?Qii 1:2:,261,000 jl6,077,8:30 1,4.50,000 21, 750;000 147,850,000 l..Q8.211.__2Q~ 0 1..-ôA:.~li •. ?Ô; l,~SO,\l!IÎI 12,261~000 jl6,077 ,830 21, 7~,000 1 47,850,000 1/ Recommended: {Projte1" Htad) (Da1"e) Recommended: !Regional OirPcf"Qrl lOatel Recommênded: _010"'""'"''"'"'' ,,,., • .,;;;;,;;;.,;;;;m,Cis<iF""•""''""""'' _ !Dilti!T Approved: (Commis;;ionel") (Dote) Revised: ____ S./..1.9/~ŒteJ·-------SllfEf __ l._oF •• -l.SHEfTS <no Mn 1,250,000 1 953,950 _AI.l.OI'Y\ 2~000,000 1 .l,6SO, 790 """ 2,250,000 1 1;5)5,340 '11.0 non 250,oop )00.000 ??lt-'71.• 84,500,0001 80,870,210 ~ 84,500;000 )80,870,210 .25' 84-,soo,ooo j80,870,210 1 ...... ., ... Fonn PF-2 IJNITI::O STATES OfPARTt.IENT OF THf INTERIOR SUREAU Of RECLAMATJON' 14 19thll5 19thJ 16 19th1 17 18 8th 119 20 21 " 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 " April 1955 CONTROL SCHEDULE FOR THE PROJECT OR UNIT u.,ka Di strict 5/12/60 .\luka .O,ICl DATE !leGION 0 GENERA~ INVESTIGATIONS 0 OPERATION Cl MAINTENANCII!: Iii COI'l9TRUCT/ON 0 OTHE~ GPO 994751 Plans and Estimates Preliminary investigat~n of designs and costs for dam heights to elevations 1,430, 1 1 455, and 1 1 480 feet indicated the optimum Devil Canyon dam crest elevation to be about 1,455 teet. This elevation will be turther refined prior to construction. l!he Den.ali dam height was principally' determined by the amount of reservoir capacity needed to provide regUlation and hold· over storage for maximum power output at Devil Canyon powerplant .. Reconnaissance estimates of combined power output were made assuming powerplants at both Devil Canyon dam and Denali dam. Completion of the feasibility oost estimates for DeVi.l Canyon and reconnaissance oost estimates for Denali indicated power faeilities at Denali wou.ld increase the overall unit power oost above that required for the facilities proposed in this report. Further investigations of Denali~ however, will again consider this possi- bili ty in the ligb.t of more complete water supply and fi.eld data. This report 1$ based on a feasibility investigation of the Devil Canyon dam and po~rer.plant and a reconnaissar~e investigation of the Denali dam. 8J. / CHAPTER VII F I N A N C I A L A N A L Y S I S The Devil Canyon Project is proposed as a single purpose hydroelectric power development. Foreseeable flood control benefits which might be realized are insignificanto Recreation and sport fisheries improvements that may result from such a development are considered incidental. All costs of operation maintenance, replacement and amor- tization of investment would be borne by application of a 7.89 mill rate per firm kilowatthour. A 50 year, 1.32 to 1.00 benefit-cost ratio bears out the project's economie feasibility. Analyzed over a 100 year economie life the benefit-cost ratio is 1.72 to 1.00. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT It is proposed that the project be developed in stages so far as practical to avoid investment in facilities that would not be utilized for several years. This stage development can be summar- ized as follows: lst stage construction (available lst year operation) Devil Canyon dam and powerhouse 3 -72,500 kw generating units 380,000 kva switchyard capacity 275,000 kva Anchorage Substation capacity 75,000 kva Fairbanks Substation capacity 1 -double circuit, 230-kv, steel tower trans- mission line to Anchorage 1 -single circuit, 230-kv 1 wood pole trans- mission line to Fairbanks 2nd stage construction (available 4th year operation) Denali dam 3rd stage construction (available 6th year operation) 2 -72,500 kw generating units 180,000 kva switcnyard capacity . ' 82 .. . - Financial Analysis 4th stage construction (available lOth year operation) 2 -72,500 kw generating units 180,000 kva switchyard capacity 275,000 kva Anchorage Substation capacity 75,000 kva Fairbanks Substation capacity 1 -double circuit, 230-kv, steel tower trans- mission line to Anchorage -(string only one circuit) 1 -single circuit, 230-kv, wood pole.transmission line to Fairbanks 5th stage construction (available 13th year operation) 1 -72,500 kw gener.ating unit String second circuit on 4th stage, 230 kv, steel tower transmission line to Anchoràge PROJECT REPAYMENT The project, when fully developed, will be able to pro- duce 2,900,000,000 kilowatt-hours of firm energy annually. If this total annual potential could be usod every year from the first year on, an average unit rate of 7.59 mills per kilowatt-hour would suffice. However, the power market study indi- cates a probable 13-year development period before full utilization of project power. This delay in use necessitates increasing the average unit rate to 7.89 mills per kilowatt~hour in order to repay investment allocation to each stage within 50 years. Annual Revenues All revenue would be derived from sale of firm energya Although the project has a firm capability of 2,900,000,000 kilo- watt-hours it is estimated that five percent of this, or 145,000,000 kilowatt-hours, would be used in operating the project and lost in transmission. The ultimate net annual salable energy is therefore 2,755,000,000 kilowatt-hours. It is not assumed however that this total amount of energy could be sold every year of project opera- tion. The power market study indicates the following annual sales probability of project power: 83 Year of Operation lst 2nd 3rd 4th "5th 6th 7th 8th 9th lOth 1lth 12th 13th Project Sales Kilowatt-hours 628,000,000 692,000,000 783,000,000 888,000,000 14th through 62nd 1,011,000,000 1,155,000,000 1,318,000,000 1,500,000,000 1,698,000,000 1,924,000,000 2,165,000,000 2,423,000,000 2,695,000,000 2,755,000,000 Annual Revenue Deductions Financial Analysis Gross Revenue at 7.89 Mills per Kilowatt-hour 4,954,920 5,459,880 6,177,870 7,006,320 7,976,790 9,112,950 10,399,020 11,835,000 13,397,220 15,180,360 17,081,850 19,117,470 21,263,550 21,736,950 Annual revenue deductions fall into three general classifi- cations: Operation and maintenance, provisions for replacements, and amortization of investment. Qperation and Maintenance The annua1 cost of operation and maintenance is made up of the cost of laber and material normally required to keep the project operating in good condition. This cost increases With ea~h stage.of·· d~velopment· due to the added.facilities. Distinction is made between cost of operating and maintain- ing the generation plant, transmission plant and administrative and general expanses. These costs created by the five stages of development are summarized as follows: Generation Transmission Administrative Plant Plant and General Total Sta~ $ $ $ _j lst 370,000 440,000 120,000 930,000 2nd 450,000 440,000 130,000 1,020,000 3rd 590,000 530,000 170,000 1,290,000 4th 720,000 860,000 240,000 1,820,000 5-:,h 790,000 870,000 250,000 1,910,000 L4 .,/' _,; -·· Financial Analysis Provisions for Replacements During the payout period of the project, it will be necess- ary to replace some major parts or facilities. Funds for such fore- sean replacements are provided by a 50-year modified sinking-fund at 2.5 percent interest. By stages this representa the following annual revenue deduction: First through third year Fourth through fifth year Sixth through ninth year Tenth through twelfth year ~hirteenth through sixty-second year $180,000 180,000 230,000 360,000 400,000 AmQrtization of Investment Capitalized project costs inc1ude construction costa and interest during construction. The latter is compiled at the annual rate of 2! percent simple interest on cumulative construction in- vestment. Since the project is to be developed in stages, a proport- ionate share of construction costs of dams, waterways, powerplants and related facilities is allocated to each generating unit. This allocated cost is then carried at simple interest until the unit is installed. Upon completion of each stage of construction, project in- vestment costs allocated to that stage must be amortized within a 1 50-year period at a compound interest rate of 2.5 percent. Investment and costs to be repaid within 50 years, for each stage of development may be summarized as follows: Stage Project Investment Plant in Service. End of Year ·Simple In-Coat to Allocation terest on be Repaid From Prior Allocated in 50 yrs. Total Undeferred Stages Costs @ 2o5% 1 l ... $ $ $ l 1 308,480,000 173,180,000 0 0 173,180,000 2 141,480,000 57,280,000 0 0 57,280,000 3 12,590,000 12,590,000 87,800,000 8,449,000 108,839,000 4 53,190,000 53,190,000 87,800,000 17,229,000 158,219,000 5 .7l,./.52z..')'JQ )-.LJ~OzOOO 43,900e000 11,907,000 67,157,000 Tot "··~· _;,~7 ,J':O ]00 )U? 1 590,000 219,500,000 37,585,000 564,675,000 ,Qt:: -' ,/ Financia.l Analysis Averaf!.e Rate The only source of revenue is sale of project firm power, therefore the unit power rate must be sufficient to pay all annual revenue deductions. An average rate of 7.89 mills per kilowatt- hour will meet this requirement. This rate would be the same at both Anchorage and Fairbanks a.~d would apply to wholesale energy delivered to utilities at sub-transmission voltages. This rate consists of the cost of generation, 6.09 mills per kilowatt-hour, and cost of transmission, 1.80 mills per kilowatt- hour. Average Rate & Repayment Study The entire analysis of project repayment is demonstrated on the Preliminary Average Rate and Repayment Study following this pageo The 62-year totals of project operation can be summarized as ~ollows: Total Sales, Thousands of Kilowatt-hours Total Revenues Operation & Maintenance Expanses Provisions for Replacements Total Operating Revenue Deductions Net Revenues Interest (Compound) ' 2.5 Percent Per Annum Principal Payment Surplus at End of 62nd Year Total Repayment & Surplus Benefit-Cost Analysis 153,875,000 $1,214,073,750 $ 110,950,000 $ 22,900,000 133,850,000 $1,080,223,750 $ 515,061,572 $ 564,675,000 $ 487,178 $1,080,223,750 Direct project benefits and costa were analyzed for an economie life of 50 years and for one of 100 years. Benefits are determined by the cost of power from the most likely alternative to Devil Canyon project development. 86 " TO!Al.S l r \ ' DEVIL CANYON PRQJECT PREI.I.KIKARY POWER SYSTEM AVEaAGE RATE AND REPAYMSNT STIJD! AVERAGE POW&i RATES üSED '!'0 (:OVli:B. REVEHUE DEDUCTIONS AND 'l'IlE RE'I't'RN OF COS'l'S 'l'O BE OOHNE .BY POiŒli Al.A.S.U DlSTRICT DEVIL C.U."roil PROJECT 10 ll 12 13 1 ,. 1 , 1 16 l 17 1 1• 1 ,. T 20 :u :12 Operat.ing liervetn~• DoroucUot 1 1 =~Mr 0per4ti(lf'j md Pt"ort,o;ioo~ KaintfJllWIC• r•r -~ Replaeeme::~t. ' • l.llOtOOO 1 ),81.4.9;;!0 1 1 4.329,500 -~ (4&,560) ~-)08,iBQ~{OO -~---i7J,664,5-.o-:1 3.JB2,500 jl35,300~000-j~=-~-Q--/ l970 1 ' l,llO,OOO 4,349,880 4,)4l,él.l. B,2H JOB,480,000 173,656,314 6,765.<n1 l 135,)CoO,IX>O 1 :315,?:2~,?~ ! 1971 2 l,_llO~OOO ~,o67,B70 4,3410408 1 72.6,462 .!.49,960,000 2"30,~,85.2 ~O,l47,SOO ~ ~9,SOO,OOO 1 459',857,352 ! 11972 J J.,200,000 .. ,806,320 5,755,246 $1,074 449,960JOOO :?30 0 J.5S,17S .~.5,635,.000 . .:..o9,500,000 41.·5,293,776 · J.97) 4 1,200,000 6,776.7'10 s.m.9<9 J 1.=.m 47o,m.ooo 337,974,957 1 "·""'"" i lJ>,?OO.ooo 1 4"·'"'·''7 l 1 1 1974 5 930,000 180,000 o:::+ 930§000 } 93ùt000 1,02o,ooo 1 020 000 180 000 1,290,000 230~000 1,290,000 230,000 1,290,000 230,000 1,290,000 230,000 1 820 000 )60 000 i;~~;~ ;6g:~ 1,910,000 400,000 1,910,000 400,000 1 1 1 1:23,87S,(l()) 153,875,000 \1.2141073,?50 1,214,073,750 1 120,950,000 !22~900,0CO 1 13.3~850~000 ll,OB0,223,75.0 1 5l5,o61,572 1 564,675,000 CCrliDI'l 1'7 -S:illpl~ "im.U'Ut ~ul.cl. bè e~ on dotf•l'1"*4 ~"'l; ilwùtllllmt. As t.hen de!"erreà rep&111mt. rupci.'! ar. NClaa:lli!ieci to t~l&nt ill eM"rtca aec~s, •ç~\.ed itl~ eharse:s t.he..-.oa llfi:luld also M capit.a.llzed.. Colu.~. .lS .. l propottiOPa.te et.r. of eonstru.dion cost1 of a-, -teTIA]'S, powerplants and re1ated. !.acilitiu is all.ocat.ed t.o e(lcb gftlvat.ing liZiit.~ 'tbese ùloe.at.ed coll!lts are tben capitali:ted at the ti:lte the mrlt<"> .t~n iMtll11~. l'roj*Ct i.Jiveo&Uiomt coll\11 ere &llocat.ed. u follow: Tot!Ù Proj.et Dndefen-ed. Alloc&tecl ~ lnTest.ment Investment Itrl'utlsaent. l iJoo.~oo.ooo $1?3,180,0!X> $173,180. 000 2 l4l~,ooo-57,28C~Cl'Xl 57,280,01Xl 3 1.2,_$90,000 12,590,000 tn,BOO,OOO ;. 53.190,0JO ~.3.190,000 87,800,000 5 t5M;Mg:~ .~:;~g;~ dJ~.~ ToW.. ~ 20 -•~ t'"èt<:mtter;: in 't.b.e 62nd ,._,.. .. ld. efJIIP).ete AE~-:M.izat.ion C>t' p:'()J.et ~!Jte .and. prcrrid.e a "Surplus ar 14!7 .178.. 564,67S,OOO 4E7 .ne 1 rorJJ...S ,.,..,.,... ,., _$ Da~o:-: ~ R~; ..Y~./13~ tlec:t.rical Ellgineu "Wstrict Manager Â4<d->t"d-46 .&.Ji!)~: Financial Analysis Cast of Power from Alternate Source It was assumed that the most likely alternate power development that would provide a comparable black of power would be a coal-fired steam plant. Such a plant would probably be located at the mine mouth. Since the Anchorage area poses· the largest load center, the Matanuska coal fields are assumed to be the location for such a development. The Devil Canyon project would perform two distinct func- tions. It would supply electric power and energy ta the power market area and provide a transmission grid that would tie all utility systems in the area together. To be comparable, the alter- nats source must also serve these two functions. It has been assumed that such a plant would be built joint- ly by more than one consumer owned utility. Sinoe the Anchorage- Palmer area is the largest load center, a probable combination would be the City of Anchorage, Chugach Electric Association and Matanuska Electrio Association. On this basis part of the financing would probably be from REA loans and part raised through sale of MUnicipal bondso For this study it was assumed that an average interest rate of 3 percent would apply. Basic plant data would be an ultimate generating oapacity of 580,000 kilowatts with an annual net sales of 2i,755,000,000 kilowatt-hours. Other data assumed are as follows: Fuel·i Heat Rate BTU/pound of coal Cost of Fuell.$/ton (Average 1958 value of Matanuska Coal) Powerplant Investment $/KW Transmission Plant Investment $/KW ll,OOO $ 12.18 262 135 The transmission plant would include switchyard, two trans- mission lines to bath Anchorage and Fairbanks, and substations at Anchorage and Fairbanks. The unit oosts of steam power were developed as follows: 87 "'' Financial Analysis Fixed costs -powerplant (5.25%)($262) Fixed costs -transmission plant (5.25%)($135) Operation and Maintenance charges (excluding fuel) Subtotal Generation plant Transmission plant Average rate per kilowatt-hour (excluding fuel) Cost of fuel per kilowatt-hour Total unit cost per kilowatt-hour Direct Bencfits $/KW-;yr. 1,3.76 ?.OS 3o57 1.6S 26.09 5.22 mills 5.55 mills 10.77 mills Primary bcnefits of the Devil Canyon project are equal to the market cost of a similar black of energy from the most likely alternate source. The cost of this alternative power would be about 10.77 mills per kilowatt-hour. It is assumed that the power market for the alternate source development would be the same as that for Devil Canyon. On this basis the average annual sale of energy and its worth at a 10.77 mill rate would be as follows: 50-yr. Life Average annual sales KWH 21 416,300,000 Average annual worth (benefits) 26,024,000 Costs: 100 yr. Life 2,585,650 ,ooo 27,847,000 For purposes of project justification, all project revenue deductions were converted to average annual costs for a 50-year and a 100-year economie life. These costs can be summarized as follows: 88 ,./ Averege annual operation & maint emme e Average annual :provisions for replacements Average annusl :payment to in- terest & :principal Total average annual costa Benef::Lt-Cost Ra ti os Financial Analysis 50-yr. Lif~ 1,760,000 362,000 17 J 6oo, oo_Q 19' "'{22' 000 100-yr. Life 1,835)000 680,000 u.,62o,9QQ 16,135,000 The benefit-cost ratios reflect only :primary benefits. The benefits., costs and ratios summarize as follows: 50-~~~ife !952.:lE:_~if~ Total average annv.al benefits 26;024,000 27,847,000 Total average a:nnual costa 19~722,000 16,135,000 Benefit-cost ratio 1~32 to 1.00 1. 72 to 1..00 Ind:i.rec t Be nef:!. ts .Any benefit accruing to the locale, state or nation from development of the Devil Canyon project, and which is not determ:tned by the producti.on cost of alternate sou:rce power, is called an inG.irect benefit. Although such benefits are not used in the analysis of :project feasibilityJ they do re:present a sub- stant:tal economie factor. The most important of these are difficult to evaluate. Among benefits listed as ind:Lrect would be the .lower cost of living due to the .lower cost of e:tectricity; the decrease in cost of doing business in the area; ·the :probable greater diversifi- cation of the economie base of the area resulting from availability of a large black of reasonably :priced powerJ and the value of a dependable hi.gh voltage transmission system to tie the principal load areas together~ 89 _,' Financial Analysis Each of these benefits as well as many ethers not listed would have a notable affect on the local and State economy Availability of electric power is one of the most im- portant ingredients to the expansion of any area's social and economie structure. Conversely, the lack of electric power is one of the greatest deterrents to such expansion. 90 OBAPJ!ER VIII :REPORTS OF OTHER AGENCIES Various Federal and Btate agencies are vi tall.J i.Jlterested in Devil Canyon Project1 either because of the eftect the project would have on their fields of 1nterest or because of the effect the:Lr operations migllt have on the projeot. Reports were requested t'rom those agenoies tbat were considered to have the maJor interest,. Reports obtained from some e,gencies were also valuab~e in ;preparing Ohapter III, Area Economy and Resources. All these reports of other agencies are appended at the end of this report and are summsrized briefly in this chapter. Th.e United States Fish and Wildlife Service bas been con- ducting etudies of the project area intermittently sinoe 1952. !lbeir appended report., concurred in by the Alaska State Department of ~11sh and Gama, discusses the possible ettects of project develop .. ment on fish and 'Wildlife which utllize the waters or lands involved,. No evidence has been tound which would indicate that anadromous tish m:tgrate through or above Devil Canyon. However 1 :project development could have some effect on downstream migrations and. spawning. It is recommended the.t the project design incor;porate :f'acilities for main- taining a li.,·e stream at all times below Devil Canyon dam.; Releases from Denali reservoir for :f'ish would only be required durillg the period Ootober to April.. Nei ther of the reservoirs created will suitably replace watertowl nestin,g and rearirlg habitat destroyed by inundation. It is possible, however, that they will be well utUized during periode of bird migra·tion. A large portion of the Denali impoundment area is presentl.J used as 1dnter range by the Nelchina caribou berd. Movement patter.œ ot the berd, however 1 indicate loss of tJ:ûs range 'tdll not seriouslf ~ect the species. Some losa of small game and fur animal habitat will also result from project construction. ~e Bureau of Mines report discusses the mineral produc· tion and mining aotivities in the area under the probable ~nfluence of the project. Gold. and coal have been the most important mineral products; however, gold production is gradually decreastng and may become negligible unless economie conditions change. Cons~ruction minerale 1 on the other band., are becoming more important. . Oil and naturel gas have been discovered on the Kenai Peninsule, b~ the production potentiel is yet unknown. Favorable geological, forma- tions indicate ~t additional discoveries in other parts of the RaUbelt llJ8Y be expected. 91 ,/ Reports of Other Agencies The Bureau of Land Management report describes the forest resources of public domain lands in the power market area. The typical interior forest is a mixture of white spruce and Alaska white birch, althousn pure or near pure stands of each may occur. Cotton- wood, aspen, black spruce, and tamarack also occur but are of no commercial importance. Small portable sawmills, concentrated in the Anchorage and Fairbanks areas, supply part of the local demand for lumber. Annual harvest is a small percentage of the potential annual eut. Spruce can continue to supply part of the local market, but only the birch offers promise of entering into the export market. The National Park Service report mentions the very limited recreational use of the proposed reservoir areas at the present time. This miner interest is due principally to the relative isolation and difficult access to most of the area concerned. It is not likely that development of the project will have any marked effect on the recreational potentialities of this wilderness. The wide annual fluctuation of the reservoirs will 11mit their value for recreation purposes. Seme loss to scenic value of the upper Susitna valley might be experienced when Denali reservoir is partially empty. This is not believed to be of significant importance however. Further investigations of the archeological values of the Denali reservoir area are warranted. Preliminary archeological investigations of the Devil Canyon reservoir area however indicate little or no early human use and settlement. A letter from the Corps of Engineers points out that present flood damage is caused by ice jams in the spring. Damage occurs primarily to the Alaska Railroad and is estimated to average $8,000 annually. Assignment of benefits to flood control would require that reservoir space be reserved and operated in accordance with rules and regulations prescribed by the Chief of Engineers. The prospective flood control benefits are too small to justify inclusion of flood control as a project purpose. The District Engineer there- fore suggests that any reduction in flood damage obtained from normal operation of the project for power be described and included as an incidental benefit. The forest resources of that part of the Chugach National Forest which lies in the Railbelt are reported on by the Forest Service. The Kenai working circle can support a eut of about 15,000,000 board feet annually; possibly an equal amount can be brought in economically by water from the Prince William Sound working circle. Three large sawmills in the area have an annual 92 ,.)' ,/ ,/ Reports of Other Agencies capacity of about 22 1 000,000 board feet, with an approximate eut of 8,500,000 board feet in 1958. Two portable mills added 500,000 board feet. Total value in 1958 was about $855,000. A new treatM ing plant at wbittier will handle 51 0001 000 board feet annually. The abundant scenic, hunting, and fishing resources of the Kenai area assUl·e a growing increase in recreational use. ~e Ut:dversity of' Alaska cooperates with the U. s. Depart- ment of' Agriculture in maintaining an Agricultural Experiment Station and Extension Service. The report of this agency discusses the avail- ability of' land in the Railbelt that is suitable for agricultural production. Alaska is less thau 10 percent self-sufficient in f'arm- produced foodstuffs. A realistic goal is 25 percent self-suf'ficiency by 1975. With almost a million acres of known or estimated cultivable land in the Railbelt area, there are no climatic or environmental limitations that would prevent attaining this goal. Continued sur- pluses in the continental United States, however, militate against opening new farmlands, even in small amounts and at the end of' long supply lines. An accompanying letter presents data on potentiel irrigation in Alaska. By the year 2000 1 about 4o,ooo acres might be prof'itably irrigated applied at a rate of about 5 or 6 inches per year. 93 CHA'PTER IX CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONCWSIONS The plan of development of the J)evil Canyon projeot, as proposed in this report, is feasible. The plan is not eomplex and all aos·ts are alloaated to the production of power. Denali Reservoir is an essentiel feàture of the plan of development for two ressons: {l) To provide the additional storage aapacity required to regulate the Susitna River runoff for near- optimum ene:rgy cutpu·t, and (2) to prolong the useful lite of Devil Canyon Reservoir by storing most of the sediment transported by the Susi tna Ri ver. The area tha.t would be served by the projeat has more than tripled its utility power requirements in the past 8 years. Estimates of future load growth foreaast a shortage of power by 1965 des pi te availabili ty of powerplants pl."esent1y under construction. Annual power requirements are now increasing in such mag- nitude that it is no longer practiaal nor desirable to build small capacity plants. Even a development the size of Devil Canyon is expected to be fullY loaded witbin a few years after its eompletion. In the power market area it is not a question ot Who should be permitted to develop suchahydroelectric project. It is rather a question of who is able to do so. The existing utility systems are unable to finance a construction coat of this magni.tude. No private proposal for a major power development appears likel;y. ~e 1.32 to 1.00 benefit-cost ratio demonstrates the economie feasibi.lity of Devil Canyon project development. A strong and more di verse eoonomy in Alaska would not only serve the best interests of the State but of the Nation as well. Availability of a large bloak of power is a primary need in sustaining ana expanding the economie growth of Alaska. Development of Devil Canyon project would bring about an interconneated power system capable of serving the entire railbelt area and do much to help satisfy this growing need. 94 It 11-recommended tbat: Conclua:Lona ana. ~œmen4at1ona ~ONS 1. 1be plan of devel.opment pro_poaed in thil ~rt be approved. 2. The Devil Canyon ProJeet, Alaska, be autb.~zed tor con- struction and operation by the Beoretarr ot the Interior :tor the purpose ot hydroelectrio power development, sub· stantiall;v in agreement With the plana set to:r:th in the report, With such mo4it:Lcatione ot1 omtss~ons trom, or additions to the work as the Secretall')" Jll81· ~ neces- sary to carry out the purpose of the pl,'OJe~t. · ' {, J'ollowing authorization of the proJect by the Congress1 :J.t 1• turther recommended that: 1. Funds be provided to expedi w the advance pl.anQ:J.:Q~ investigations for the proJect. 2. Construction of the initial stage be Ulldertaken at the earliest possible date. 3. That additional deta1led etudies of fish ~ W$-ldlite resources affected by the project be eond.ueted. as neeessary after the proJect 16 autbo~ized 4\ accord.ance wi th the Fisb. and Wildlife Coordination Act, 4S Stat-.. 4ol, as amended: 16 u.s.o~ 661 et seqo; afl4 that auch reasonable modifications in the authorized. pttoJect facilities be made b7 the Secretary as he mq find appropriate to conserve and develop tb.ese ~sources. 4. 1bat Federal lands and proJect waters in ~ proJect area be open to free use for hunting and fishing so lons as ti tle to the lands and structures ;remains in the Federal Government, except for sections reserved for satety 1 efficient operation_. or prote~t$-on of public property. , 5, 'lbat leas.es of Federal land in the projeot area reserve the rigbt of' tree public access for huntine and f1shins .. .. ,.;~" 1 ;; /) ,-, . ~;;:~(/~· Alaska Mstrict .Manager · 95 / CHAPTER X SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS A supplemental analysis is required by Senate Resolution 148, 85th Congress. The following sections supply the requested information in corresponding sections of the resolution. SECTION 1 The project, described in detail in Chapter VI, Plans and Estimates, would have an economie life in excess of 100 years. Periodic replacements normal to project operations would maintain, in good repair, equipment with a shorter economie lif'e. Studies of 100-year sediment deposition in the reservoirs indicate active capacity in Devil Canyon reservoir will still be 90 percent of' initial active capacity after 100 years operation. Denali reservoir would retain 80 percent of' its initial active capacity. There is no reason to believe that the dams and powerhouse structure will not endure f'or 100 years or more. SECTION 2 The estimated costs of' construction, operation, maintenance and replacements are illustrated and explained in Chapter VI, Plans and Estimates, and Chapter VII, Financial Analysis. They are based, f'or the most part, on the Bureau's past experience with such costs. SECTION 3 Benefit-cost ratios were determined f'or both 50-year and 100-year project economie lives~. Using primary benefits (the only ones to which monetary values could be assigned) ratios developed were 1.32 to 1.00 for 50 years and 1.72 to 1.00 for 100 years. Benef'its, costs and their relationship are discussed in Chapter VII, Financial Analysis. 96 / Supplemental Analysis SECTION 4 Intangible indirect benefits that would accrue from project development are balieved to be of considerable magnitude. Although the project would be single-purpose, generation of power, the availability of such a block of power would help to fill this primary need of modern economie, industrial and social progress. Indirect benefits are further discussed in Chapter VII, Financial Analysis. SECTION 5 It is believed that the optimum plan of development of the project has been proposed. Future upstream dams would fully regulate the river runoff above Devil Canyon permitting that re- servoir to eventually be maintained full at all times. This in turn would permit some additional firm generation at Devil Canyon. This factor was considered in determining the rated head for turbines. SECTION 6 All project costs are allocated to the production of power. There is no opportunity for significant uss for other purposes. SEeTION 7 As proposed, the project would be constructed and operated by the Bureau of Reclamation. Interest in the Bureau's investiga- tions program and particularly in development of the Susitna River has often been expressed by local individuals and groups. This is evidenced by past advances to the Bureau of funds and assistance for stream gaging and other investigations requirements by public utility systems in the area. For several years resolutions passed at the annual meeting of the Alaska Rural Electric Cooperative Association have urged the Bureau to continue its investigations of the Susitna River leading to a request for Congressional authoriza- tion of Devil Canyon Project. 97 Supplemental Analysis The dire need for a large dependable source of power is reeognized throughout the power market area. SECTION 8 Since all eosts are alloeated to power the single repay- ment schedule involved is ineluded in Chapter VII, Financial Analysis. SECTION 9 No taxes would be forgone by Federal development. There is no proposal for private power development of this magnitude. The benefit-cost analysis in Chapter VII diseusses the alternative to project development. 98 66 United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Juneaut Alaska A Detailed Report on Fish and Wildlife Resources affected by the DEVIL CANYON PROJECT Alaska May 1960 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE BUREAU OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES BOX 2021 JUNEAU, ALASKA ALASKA REGION (REGION Il) ADDRESS ONLY THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR May 2, 1960 Memorandum Ta: From: District Manager, Bureau of Reclamation June au, Al as ka Regional Director, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries Juneau, Alaska Regional Director, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Juneau, Alaska Subject: Devil Canyon Project, Susitna River Basin, Alaska This is our detailed report of our studies concerning effects of the Devil Canyon Project upon the fish and wildlife resources. Both facilities of the project, the Devil Canyon Dam and Reservoir and the Denali Dam and Reservoir, are located in the Susitna River Basin of south-central Alaska. This report has been prepared in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U. S. C. 661 et seq. We have studied the fish and wildlife resources in connection with this project for effects as well as with a view toward rnitigating those losses which may result from project construction and oper- ation. Further, we have explored the pos sibilities for enhancement of these resources. This letter, which briefly summarizes our findings and contains our recommendations, is supported in detail by the attached substantiating report. Big game, small game, fur animals, waterfowl, and both resident and anadromous fish will be affected by project construction. Ap- proximately 61,000 acres of land will be inundated, most of which is moose range. Although the Nelchina caribou herd presently utilizes the impoundment a rea as winte r range, only about 33, 000 acres is considered to be of good quality for this usage. Movement patterns of the herd are such that it is believed the species will not be seriously affected by project development and operation. ""' ----------------------------------------------------~--~~~~~------._=-~~~--~--~---'~ Some los s of small game and fur animal habitat is expe cted in the project area. Harvest of these species, which is presently light, due primarily to inaccessibility~ may increase in adjacent areas with project development as a result of improved access. Some waterfowl nesting and rearing habitat will be destroyed by in- undation. Similar habitat will probably not develop around the reservoir perimeters due to fluctuating water levels. It is possible that the two impoundments will receive more use by migrating birds than the water bodies destroyed by inundation. Fish present in the project area will be affected in a variety of ways. Below the Devil Canyon and Denali damsites, alteration of natural stream flow and temperature patterns will produce unknown effects on the fish present in these areas. At Devil Canyon, the planned operational releases are considered adequate to preserve fish habitat, During the period of dam con- struction, initial reservoir filling, and in the event of an unfore- seeable cessation of power production, however, water releases will be necessary to preserve the downstream fishery. Therefore, a recommendation for minimum flows is made. These minimum flows, as weil as power flows during project operation, should be released gradually to avoid flushing or scouring the channel. The Susitna River below the Devil Canyon Dam serves as a migration route for salmon ascending to the spawning tributaries. Releases of water either calder or warmer than normal stream temperatures could affect the attraction of salmon to such tributaries. The Bureau of Reclamation should explore the fea.sibility of modifying the intake structure to permit drawing water from selected temper- ature strata in the Devil Canyon Reservoir. Under project operation, no water releases are planned from the Denali Dam from about April to September of each year, depending on runoff and power requirements. Stream dewatering in this sec- tion could be deleterious to summer fish usage, However, it is believed that fish populations here are minimal due to the turbidity of the Susitna River. Also, this section of stream is l.ocated very dose to the headwaters and thus there are few tributaries above the damsite to which fish movement may occur in summer months. For these reasons, no minimum release during the period from 2 ------------------------------------------------·------------------------------------- April through September. incl.usive, is requested from the Denali Dam. Winter habitat will. probably improve in this area as a result of increased flows. If the Denali Reservoir proves to be rel.atively clear in the winter, enhancement of this area as fish habitat may result. During the period of construction, initial reservoir filling, and project operation, a minimum flow is recommended from Oeta- ber through March, inclusive, to maintain the downstream fishery. These minimum flows, as wel.l as the flows for power during project operation, should be released gradually to avoid the flushing or s couring of the channel. Loss of stream habitat through inundation will be partial.ly offset by creation of two large reservoirs, However, the plan of operation indicates rathér wide fluctuations in the impoundment levels and these fluctuations will probably limit fish production. Also, since glacial silt tends to remain in suspension., it is probable that these waters will be turbid. The degree of turbidity is impossible to pre- dict at this time, although it may be generalized that the greater the turbidity, the less productive the waters will be of fish life. Investigations of the Fish and Wildlife Service both above and below the Devil Canyon damsite fail.ed to reveal any evidence that anadro- mous fish migra te through or above De vil Canyon. Therefore, no recommendation for a fish ladder or ether fish passage deviee is included. However, the possibility exists that the Louise, Susitna, and Tyane Lake system, as well as certain other lakes in the basin, could sustain a red salmon run. Also, the many clear-water streams tributary to the Susitna River above Devil Canyon daxnsite may possess a potential for spawning and rearing of ether salmon- ine species. Additional studies to determine potential spawning areas are planned by the Fish and Wildlife Service in the future. Should these studies indicate a reasonable probability that the area can be developed for production of anadromous ;fish, and should it appear justified economically, then sorne type of fish passage facility may be recommended for DeviL Canyon Dam at a later date, This report and the following recommendations have been endorsed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game as indicated in the letter to us dated May 6, 1960 from Acting Commissioner Walter Kirkness of that Department, a copy of which is appended to the substantiating report, 3 In order to minimize adverse effects to fish and wildlife resources with project development and operation, it is recommended that: 1. During project development, reservoir filling and operation, a minimum flow of not less than 2, 000 c. f. s. be maintained at all times in the Susitna River below the Devil Canyon Dam. However, should the initial reservoir fHlin.g occur during the period October through April, inclusive, only 1, 000 c. f. s. would be required. 2. During the period of construction, reservai r fil ling and pro- je ct operation a minimum flow of not less than 150 c. f. s. be maintained in the Susitna River below the Denali Dam for the period October through March, inclusive. 3. Abrupt changes in the volume of water discharged be avoided at both dams; such changes should be made gradually or in a series of slight increases or decreases. 4. The foUowing language be incorporated in the recommendations of the report of the District Manager of the Bureau of Reclama- tion: a. 11 That additional detailed studies of fish and wildlife re- sources affected by the project be conducted as neces- sary after the project is authorized in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 48 Stat. 401, a.s amended; 16 U. S. C. 661 et seq.; and that such reason.- able modifications in the authqrized project facilities be made by the Secretary as he may find appropriate to conserve and develop these resources. n b. 11 That Federal lands and project waters in the project area be open to free use for hunting and fishin.g so long as title to the lands and structures remains in the Federal Government, except for sections reserved for safety, efficient operation, or protection of public property. 11 c. 11 That leases of Federal land in the project area reserve the right of free public access for hunting and fishing. n 4 --5. The report of the District Manager, Bureau of Reclamation, include the preservation and propagation of fish and wildlife resources among the purposes for which the project is to be authorized. The analysis of project effects as set forth in the substantiating re- port is based on engineering data available April 12, 1960. The Fish and Wildlife Service should be advised _of any changes in engineering plans so that the effects of such changes on the fish and wildlife resources of the project area may be determined. Very truly yours, ~ -P,(ht Il /ldl-tflt_- URBAN C. NELSON - Regional Director Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife 5 ar~ Regional Director Bureau of Commercial Fisheries ~ 1!0d3:1! DNI~ VI~NV ~ SS:fiS ,/ TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Project Location of the Project DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA ......•.••.•.••..•. Physical Features ..................... ., •• 111 •• Commercial Features PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT ........ , ........ ""'•• Engineering Features -Devil Canyon ...... . Engineering Features -Denali .•.....•..••. Operation -Devil Canyon ...•..••.•..•...• Ope ration -Dena li ..... " .................... ., FISHER Y ···············*••••,.•········"····· General ............... ~~~ ... .,. ..... '* ••........ Without the Project -Devil Canyon ...•..... Without the Project -penali ••..•.....•••. With the Project -Devil Canyon ....•....• With the Project -Denali ...•..•.......... WILDLIF E .............. oe ............ ~~ ...... , .... .. Without the Project -Devil Canyon .....•... Without the Project -Denali .•....•.••.•.• , With the Project -Devil Canyon ..•.••.•.... With the Project -Denali .....•.•......... DISCUSSION ••••••••,ww•••••••••~•••••e••••••• i Page 1 3 3 3 4 4 7 9 9 9 9 12 13 13 13 15 17 17 19 19 20 22 22 24 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------·------ ""' "'/ .-' Table I. Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5. Figure 6. LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Engineering and Operating Data Susitna River Basin Location (Map) Project Location (Map) Devil Canyon Damsite (Photo) Denali Impoundment Area (Photo) Schematic Map Hydraulic Barrier ta Salmon (Photo) ii Page 12 5 10 11 11 14 16 . ./ !J"~! ~· PREFACE l. This is a detailed report concerning the probable effects of the Devil Ca:nyon Project upon the fish and wildlife resources of the project area. The overall project consists of two primary features; the Devil Canyon Dam and Reservoir, and the Dena,li Dam and Reservoir. These features are considered as separate facili- ties throughout this report. Engineering data and operational plans ~n which this report is based were obtained from the Bureau of Recl~mation on April 12, 1960. 2. Fish and Wildlife field investigations have been conducted intermittently in the project area since 1952 and, in part, concur- rently with Bureau of Reclamation feasibility studies. The fish and wildlife resources that will be affected by the Devil Canyon and Denali features are discussed as they would probably exist without and with project development. 3. No major water development project exists in a subarctic location which will provide a ba.sis for predicting the effect of the Devil Canyon project on the fish and wildlife resources. Further,. only limited information concerning life histories and populations of the va:rious species involved is available. Thus, only generalized predictions of project effects are possible. 4. Appreciation is expressed to the ma:ny members of the various branches of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife and the Bureau of CommerciaJ Fisheries for supplying needed informa- tion during the preparation of this report. 5. Since January 1, 1960, the State of Alaska has assumed control of the fish and wildlife resources of the new State. Staff members of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game have indica- ted a desire and willingness to contribute further information in the continuation of studies of this project. 6. Previous reports prepared by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service that pertain to the Devil Canyon and Denali features are as follows: A Preliminary Report on Fish and Wildlife Resources in Relation to the Susitna River Basin Plan, Alaska. 1952 1 .v "'" A Progress Report on the Fishery Resources of the Susitna River Basin, Alaska. 1954 A Progress Report on the Wildlife Resources of the Susitna River Basin, Alaska. 1954 Progress Report, 1956 Field Investigations, Devil Canyon Damsite, Susitna River Basin, Alaska. 1957 Progress Report, 1957 Field Investigations, Devil Canyon Damsite and Reservoir Area, Susitna River Ba.sin, Alaska. 1959 1958 Field Investigations, Denali a.nd Vee Canyon Damsites and Reservoi.r Areas, Susitna River Basin, Alaska. 1959 2 / INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Project 7. The purpose of the Devil Canyon Project will be to pro- vide power to interior and south-central Alaska. Ultimate power capa.city of the Devil Canyon Project will be 580, 000 kilowatts i however, the initial capacity will be limited to 217,500 kilowatts. Location of the Project 8. Devil CanyonProject, con.sisting of two dams and reser- voirs, will be tocated in south-central Alaska, about midway between the two population centers of Anchorage and Fairbanks. More specifically, the Devil Canyon damsite is located on the Susitna River 14. 5 miles upstream from the Alaska Railroad sec- tion at Gold Creek or at river mile 134. This development will provide the source of power generation. The Denali damsite will be located on the Susitna River at mile 248, or 15 miles below the Denali Highway crossing of the Susitna River. The reservoir formed by this dam will provide for water storage and regulation of flows to be utilized downstream at the Devil Canyon site. 3 ,/ DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA Physical Features 9. The Susitna River Basin lies in south-central Alaska, north of the farthest inland projection of Cook Inlet between lati- tudes 61 o -64° north and longitudes 146° -153° west (Fig. 1). The total drainage of the basin comprises about 19, 300 square miles of relatively uninhabited lands. The basin is bordered on the south by the waters of Cook Inlet and the Talkeetna Mountains~ on the east by the Talkeetna Mountains and the Copper River plateau, and on the west and north by the Alaska Range. 10. The main stem of the Susitna River from its source in the Alaska Range toits point of discharge into Cook Inlet is about 275 miles long. It flows southward from the Alaska Range for about 60 miles; thence~ in a general westerly direction through the Talkeetna Mountains for about lOO miles, and then south for the remaining 115 miles to its mouth at Cook Inlet. 11. Principal tributaries of the lower basin have as their origin glaciers high in the surrounding mountain ranges. These streams are for the most pa.rt turbulent in the upper reaches and slower flowing in the lower regions. Most of the tributaries carry a heavy load of glacial silt. 12. The Yentna River, one of the largest tributaries, begins in the mountains of the Alaska Range, flows in a general southeast- erly direction for approximately 95 miles and enters the Susitna River 24 miles upstream from its mouth. 13. The Talkeetna River bas its origin in the Talkeetna Mountains. It flows in a westerly direction and discharges into the Susitna River 80 miles upstream from its mouth. 14. The Chulitna River heads in the Alaska Range and flows in a southerly direction, joining the Susitna River opposite the Talkeetna confluence. 15. Principal tributaries of the upper Susitna drainage are the Oshetna, Tyone, and Maclaren Rivers. For the most part, these trï'?utariès have numerous feeder streams that drain many clear-water la.kes. 4 .ALASKA. -0 ~ ~ -~ ~~ ~ 0 ~ --~ ~~~ Figure l. Susitna Ri ver Basin, Alaska 5 16. Stream flow in the Susitna Basin is characterized by a high rate of discharge from May through September and by low flows from October through April. High discharges are caused by snow melt, rainfall, and glacial melt. Streams carry a heavy load of glacial silt during the summer. During the winter when Low temperatures retard water flows, streams are silt free. 17. The Alaska Range to the west and north, and the Talkeetna Range to the east make up the high perimeter of the lower Susitna River Basin. The Alaska Range is made up of sedimentary rocks, sorne of which have been metamorphosed and intruded by granitic masses. The Talkeetna Mountains are primarily granitic.. The floor of the lower basin is largely covered with glacial stream de- posits. 18. The upper basin, predominantly mountainous, is borde red on the west by the Talkeetna Mountains, on the north by the Alaska Range, a.nd on the south and east by the flat Copper River plateau. Valleys are floored with a thick fill of glacial moraines and gravels. 19. The climate of the Susitna Basin is rather diversified. The latitude of the region gives it long winters and short summers with great variation in the length of the daylight between winter and summer. 20. The lower Susitna Basin owes its relatively moderate climate to the warm waters of the Pacifie on the south and the bar- riers of surrounding mountains. The summers are characterized by mode rate temperatures, cloudy days, and gentle rains. The winters are cold and the snowfall is fairly heavy. Talkeetna, repre- sentative of the lower basin, has an annual mean temperature of 33. 2 °F., a.nd an average annual precipitation of 28. 85 inches. 21. The upper Susitna Basin, separated from the coast by high mountains, has a somewhat more severe climate than the lower basin. The nearest weather station at Mount McKinleyPark has an annual mean temperature of 27. 5°F., and an annual preci- pitation of 14. 44 inches. 22. Spruce, bir ch, as pen, cottonwood, willow, and alder are found throughout the lower basin up to about 2, 000 feet. These 1 are interspersed with low muskeg vegetation on the floor of the 6 basin and grassy meadows on higher benches. Understory of tim- bered areas consists of moss, ferns, high and low bush cranberry, devil's club, wild rose, blue berry, currants, grass, a.nd wildflow- ers. Above timberline, thickets of alder and willow occur inter- spersed with grassy meadows. Above this zone vegetation consists of moss, lichens, and wildflowers. 23. Spruce occurs throughout the upper basin up.to the 2, 500-to 3, 000-foot timberline. Low, scrubby, black lspruce grows on the poorly drained bottomland, while the larger white spruce is found on better drained sites. Dwarf birch is distributed throughout the upper basin, and willow occurs along water bodies. White birch and alder occur in limited amounts. The understory includes blueberry, law-bush cranberry, Labrador tea, crowberry, fireweed, masses, and lichens. Muskeg is interspersed throughout the bottomland and tundra is present throughout better drained are as. 24. Mount McKinley National Park, containing about 3, 030 square miles and second in size only to Yellowstone National Park, lies sorne 50 miles to the northwest of the project area. It wa.s created by an act of Congress in 1917 and has as one of its objec- tives the protection of the great herds of mountain sheep and cari- bou in this portion of the Alaska Range. Mount McKinley, the highest mountain in North America, is the principal s cenic feature of the park. This lofty peak rises 20,269 feet above sea Jevel, and soars sorne 17, 000 feet above the surrounding forested plateau; it is the only mountain in the world to rise so high from its own base. 25. The Denali Game Reserve, ex;tending from the north side of the Denali Highway to the crest of the Alaska Range and from the eastern boundary of the Maclaren River drainage west- ward to a point 10 miles east of Cantwell, was established in 1957. Currently, the reserve is closed to the taking of big game animals. Commercial Features 26. The population of the basin is chiefly concentrated along the railbelt with scattered settlements of trappers and miners throughout the entire basin. The proposed project features are located approximately midway between Anchorage and Fairbanks, 7 the two largest cities in the State. It has been estimated that thes'e two a reas contain about 125, 000 people or about 60 perc;ent of the entire State's population. 27. The Alaska Railroad is the only overland means of trans- portation through the Lower Susitna River Ba.sin. The Denali High- way passes through the headwater portion of the upper Susitna Basin. Although other secondary roads are being developed, access to remote areas is still possible only by air and boat travel. 28. Economie activities are chiefly centered in the lower 100 miles of the basin along the railbelto The commercial fishery utilizing the Susitna salmon runs is located in Cook Inlet. Placer and lode gold, tungsten, and construction materials are produced in this lower area, but only in limited quantities. Coal a.nd other minerals are present but have received little attention due to high development costs. Much of the basin is under lease by oil inter- esta. Portions of the lower basin are suited for agriculture and forest industries, which still await ful.l development. 8 PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT Engineering Features -Devil Canyon 29. Devil Canyon damsite, located on the Susitna River at mile 134 (Fig. 2), will be the initial development. The dam, rising 635 feet above its foundation and 565 feet above the normal water surface of the river (Fig. 3), will be of a concrete-arch design. Although the ultimate installed power capacity will be 580,000 kilowatts, the initial capacity will be 217,500 kilowatts. 30. The reservoir will be about 29 miles long and between O. 25 and O. 75 mile wide. At a normal full pool water surface elevation of l, 450 feet, it will have a .surface area of 7, 550 acres and an initial total capa city of l, l 00, 000 acre -fe et. During a 100-year period, the average minimum operating pool levet is estimated at l, 284 feet. m. s. l. At this level, the reservoir would have a capacity of 205,000 acre-feet and a surface area of about l, 900 acres. The dead storage pool will have an initial surface area of 2, lOO acres and a storage capacity of 293, 000 acre-feet, at an elevation of l, 275 feet. Engineering Features -Denali 31. The Denali Dam will be an earth and sand/ gravel struc- ture about 290 feet in height above ~e bottom of the cutoff trench and 219 feet above the river bed. Id location will be approximately ' 15 miles downstream from the Susitliia River crossing of the Denali Highway, or at river mile 248 (Fig/ 2). With normal full pool \\,. water surface elevation of 2, 552 fe~t; a reservoir 2 to 6 miles wide and about 25 miles long will be created. This will cover about 61, 000 acres and store 5, 400, 000 acre-feet of water (Fig. 4). For a 100-year period, the average minimum operating pool level would be 2, 484 feet m. s. l. ; at this elevation, the reservoir will cover 34, 000 surface acres and contain 1, 650, 000 acre -fe et. Initially, 100,000 acre-feet of water will rem.ainJE the dead pool., which will cover 300 acres at an elevation of 2, 3~ feet. The dead pool storage will decline to zero over a 100-year period, due to sedimentation. Operation -Devil Canyon 32. Maximum monthly power releases from the Devil Can- yon Dam will occur during December when an average of 10,525 c.fs. 9 \. \ (J 1 1 1 l N ,.,.,.., ~, 1 ', , ....... .,. .. '1'0..,. ... ..... Na Wo Ll ~·S. SUSITNA RIVER BASIN F igure 2, Devil Canyon Site Denali Site Pr oject Loc:.üi on Map ~ zo 15 10 5 0 Z5 Mitn ......... ......... lmwl 1 SC ALE U. S. B. R. Photo Figure 3. View of proposed .ùevi l Canyon 0amsite, showing rapids and river gorge. Photo by Ja ck Lentfer Figure 4 ·. Upper section of Denali impoundment area looking north from Denali Highway bridge crossing of Susitna River to headwate r glaciers. · 11 will be discharged. Minimum monthly power releases averaging 7, 930 c. f. s. will occur during July. The average annual release will be 9~ 125 c. f. s. Operation -Denali 33. Water will be stored in the Denali impoundment during spring a.nd summer for release in the faU and winter. Only incre- mentai flows will occur for about a six-month period inthat section of the Susitna River between the two impoundments. The month of maximum dis charge will be December when an average of 9, 400 c. f. s. will be released. The average release from the Denali Dam during the period of operation will be 6, 800 c. f. s. 34. Salient features of engineering and operation are pre- sented in Table I. TABLE I PERTINENT ENGINEERING AND OPERATING DATA DEVIL CANYON AND DENALI DAMS AND RESERVOIRS Height of Dam (feet above foundation a.nd bottom of cutoff) Maximum Pool Elevation (feet m. s. l.) Surface Area (acres) Storage Capacity (acre-feet) Normal Full Pool Elevation (feet ms.L) Surface Area (acres) Storage Capacity (acre -fe et) Average Min. Op. Elevation(feetm.s.l.) Surface Are a (acres) Storage Capa city (acre -fe et) Top of Dead Pool Elevation(feet m.s.l.) Surface Area (acres) Storage Area (acre-feet) Average Min. Monthly Release (c. f. s.) Average Max. Monthly Release (c. f. s.) Average Release (c. f. s.) _!_/Does not include spills 12 Devil Canyon 635 1, 455 7,750 1, 140, 000 1, 450 7,550 1-, 100, 000 1, 284 1,900 205,000 1, 275 2, 100 293,000 7,930 Denali 290 2,562 65,000 6,055,000 2,552 61,000 5,400,000 2,484 34,000 1,65o,oB2 2, 36FI 300 100,000 -0- (July 1 ) (April-Sept) 10,525 9,400 (Dec) (Dec) 9, 125~/ 6,800 (when re- leases are made) .-' FISHER Y General 35. During the warmer months of the year, the Susitna River is silt-laden throughout its entire course due ta its glaciaJ origin. Sport fishing is thereby limited ta the clear-water tribu- taries and areas in the main Susitna River near the mouths of these tributaries. The principal fresh-water sport fish present in the Susitna Basin are rainbow and lake trout, Dolly Varden char, and grayling. Other species of lesser importance are bur- bot, sucker, sculpin, and two species each of stickleback and whitefish. King, red, pink, chum, and coho salmon are found in varying abundance in major tributaries of the Susitna River below the Devil Canyon damsite, Du:dng the past 10 years, the first wholesale value of the Cook Inlet salmon case pack has averaged over $7,300,000 annually. Of this, the Susitna River system is estimated ta produce annually 38 percent or about $2, 774, 000. 36. Sport fishing pressure in the Susitna Basin is light, with the primary limitation being that of access. Many lakes and rivers afford landing sites for float-equipped airerait, and fisher- men using this method of transportation are frequently rewarded with limit or near-limit catches, The Alaska Railroad, the pri- mary means of access ta the Lower basin, parallels the Susitna River from Nancy at railroad mile 181 to Gold Creek at railroad mile 263, and crosses many fine fishing streams tributary ta the main river. During the summer season, trains make unscheduled stops at these streams to accommodate fishermen. The comp.le- tion of the Denali Highway in 1957 opened the upper Susitna Basin to fishermen. The Tyane River, originating at Lake Louise and flowing northwest to the Susitna River, is proving increasingly popular with boat fishermen. Without the Project -Devil Canyon 37. The areas affected by this proposed project feature are bes.t discussed when considered as two separate sections; from the confluence of the Susitna, Talkeetna, and Chulitna Rivers at river mile 85, upstream to the Devil Canyon damsite at river mile 134, a distance of 49 river miles, and the Devil Canyon impound- ment area about 29 river miles in length (Fig. 5), 13 ,_. ~ CHULITNA\ RIVER YENTN RIVER ......_.,!:: ·-...........~ ,..::.:~;:::;:::::.:i;'::.'"-.,. / ,,-~--.+,-•·c"(··"~•~·•"-""''+"'""•'ll;.';c"•'*-'"'~'~ COOKINLET PORTAGE CREEK ! 1 / DENALI DAMSITE AND RESERVOIR (2 5 miles long) ~ DEVIL CANYON DAMSITE . AND RES ER VOIR v 49 miles (2 9 miles long) -...... ~ T ALKEETNA RIVER Figure 5. { CLEAR W AT EJ3.,. CREEK """'~"· ./ -~~" ~\ TYONE .... ,, RIVER -..,.,., Schematic Map showing principle tributaries and distances . SUSITNA RIVER BASIN -38. That section of the Susitna River downstream from Devil Canyon to its confluence with the Talkeetna and Chulitna Rivers is. fed by a few clear tributary strea.ms which furnish habitat for rain- bow trout, grayling, lake trout, Dolly Varden char, and burbot, a.nd spawning and rearing grounds for the five species of Pacifie salmon. Portage Creek, 3 miles below the damsite, is the last tributary up- stream on the Susitna River where sign.ificant numbers of spawning salmon have be en noted. It is not known how extensi vely the main stem Susitna below the damsite is utilized for spawning, but such usage is probably light due to the silt-laden water and the relatively muddy, sandy nature of the channeL Sport fishing between the darn- site and confluence of the Susitna, Talkeetna, and Chulitna Rivers is limited to the mouths of a few clear-water tributaries, It is pre- sumable that no significant changes in either fish spawning or sport fishing will occur without the project. 39. The Devil Canyon impoundment area is a rugged, narrow canyon with several rapids and a few clear-water tributaries, the largest being Fog Creek and Devil Creek. Grayling, whitefish, burbot, suckers. and cottids occur in the se tributaries and in the main river. Due to a paucity of sizeable tributary streams and re- moteness of the area, sport fishing is practically non-existent. Little change is anticipated in fish populations or fishing pressures without project development. 40. Investigations conducted by the Fish and Witdlife Service intermittently from 1952 to 1958 failed to reveal the presence of adult or young salmon above the proposed Devil Canyon damsite. No actual waterfal.ls or physical barriers have been observed in or above the Devil Canyon area which would preclude salmon from utilizing the drainage area above the damsite. However, the most logical reas on for the absence of salmon from the area is the probability of a hydraulic black re sul ting from high wate r velocities for several river miles within Devil Canyon (Fig. 6). It is doubtful. that the area above Devil Canyon wiU become accessible to and utilized by anadromous fish without project development. Without the Project -Denali 41. In the Denali area, the affected sections are considered in two parts; the area from the head of the Devil Canyon Reservoir to the Denali damsite at river mile 248, for a distance of 85 main stem miles, and the Denali impoundment area, which is about 25 miles long. 15 ,., ..... Figure 6. Fhoto by Dick Hensel Pas si ble hydraulic barrier to as cending salmon se veral miles above Devil Canyon Damsite . Note slide lower right. 42. From the Devi l Canyon Reservoir upstream to the Denali impoundment, several tributaries enter the Susitna River. The larg- est of these are the Maclaren River, which is glacially turbid, and the Oshetna and Tyane Rivers which are clear. Srr.aller streams in- elude Oeadman, \Vatana, Kosina, J ay, Goose, Coal, and Clearwater Creeks. In this section of the Susitna, only burbot have b een cap- tured during the summer. Clear tributary streams contain grayling, whitefish, burbot, suckers, and cottids. Lake trout are present in certain of the tributary drainages which contain deep lakes. Fishing pressure on the mainstem Susitna is negligible and limited to the mouths of some of the clear-water tributaries. It is expected that this pressure will s how only a slight increase without the project. 43. In the :Oenali irr.poundment area, the major tributaries to the Susitna River are Raft, Butte, Windy, and Valdez Creek s which are clear and Boulder Creek which is turbid. The clear streams contain grayling, whitefish, burbot, suckers, and cottids. Lake trout are found in some of the small lakes adjacent to the river. Anadromous fish are not present. Stream fishing, principally for 16 -~ grayling, is not extensive and is generally confined to the mouths of clear tributaries. Sand Lake. easily accessible from the Denali Highway, is fished for lake trout. Opening of the Denali Highway has provided accer;~s to this area and establishment of tourist facili- ties and traits portends increasing fishing pressure. With the Project -Devil Canyon 44. In that area from the confluence of the Susitna, Chulitna, and Talkeetna Rivers to the damsite at Devil Canyon, it is doubtful that any significant changes to the sport fishery will occur. However~ the Susitna River in this area serves as the migration route for salm- on ascending to the spawning tributaries. Releases of water, either colder or warmer than norma.l stream temperatures, could affect the attraction of salmon to such tributaries. Possible flushing and scouring action that would occur as a result of sudden changes in discharge from the Devil Canyon Reservoir may alter production of insects and other fish food. 45. From available records of water contribution of the Susitna, Chulitna, and Talkeetna Rivers$ it appears that the project will have no effects to the anadromous fish runs or sport fish below this confluence to the river's mouth at Cook Inlet. 46. In the reservoir to be formed by the Devil Canyon Dam, it is doubtful that any significant effects will be sustained by the fishery resources. Inundation of the lower portions of clear-water tributaries may have a limited detrimentf:!.l effect on sorne species. However, this may be offset by elimination of falls near the mouths of sorne of these streams which will be flooded, thereby permitting increased fish movement and utilization. Although the reservoir will improve ac cess, fluctuating wa.ter levels and turbid wa.ters will limit both fish production and Jishing pressure. With the Project -Denali 47. In the area from the Devil Canyon impoundment up- stream to the Denali damsite little change in the overall fishery is anticipated, even though water will not be released from the Denali Reservoir from April through September. This will result in virtual dewatering of the 11 miles of the Susitna River between the dam and the mouth of the Maclaren River. This section currently n, / "'> - contributes little to game fish production. Under project develop- ment, it may serve as a wintering area for fish. Reduced flows will have less effect on fish movement and food production below the mouth of the Maclaren River, and these effects will become progressively less severe downstream as each tributary adds more water. 48. Fall and winter flows in this section of the Susitna River may consist of turbid glacial water stored in Denali Reservoir~ in contrast to the normal clear water at this time of year. This pos- sible change from dear to turbid water could affect the wintering habitat with attendant effects to the fish species utilizing the river. Should releases from the Denali Reservoir be relatively clear, winter fish habitat may improve since flows will be substantially increased. Improvement is particularly likely if these releases are controlled to minimize fluctuations. 49. The Denali Reservoir will inundate 25 miles of the Susitna River, several small lakes, and 13 miles of the lower por- tions of several clear-water streams which presently support an expanding sport fi~hery. However, the middle stretches of these streams will become accessible due to the availability of the reser- voir for boat travel and float-plane landing. The Bureau of Recla- mation estimates that only about 14 percent of the inflow will be glacial, with the remaining percentage being snow-melt runoff and spring-fed waters. Retention of water in the reservoir throughout the summer months will permit sorne warming to occur. The degree of turbidity to be expected from the glacial inflow is not k.nown; however, observations elsewhere indicate thél;t glacial silt tends to remain in suspension rather than settle out. Further observations generaUy indicate that turbid lakes are not only less productive of fish life than clear lakes, but less attractive to sportsmen. There- fore, the degree of turbidity will partially determine the fishery productivity and utilization of the impoundment area. Fluctuating water levels will further limit fish life by restricting food produc- tion in the shoal areas of the reservoir. 18 .-" _,.,, ~ WILDLIFE Without the Project -Devil Canyon 50. The dominant vegetative caver throughout the Devil Canyon impoundment area is spruce. Law bottomland along the main river and the tributaries supports black spruce-aspen stands. White spruce occurs on the steep side hills in conjunction with paper bir ch, dwarf birch, black spruce, and occasional stands of aspen and cottonwood. Dwarf birch is present in the rolling country on each side of the canyon, while willow occurs infrequently through- out the entire area. The understory includes blueberry, low-bush cranberry, narrow-leaved Labrador tea, crowberry, fireweed, masses, and lichens. 51. Game populations are limited'in number along the steep canyon walls which comprise most of the area ta be flooded. A few moose and black and grizz.ly bear are present. Segments of the Nelchina caribou herd periodicaUy range throughout the impound- ment area. However, at no time of the year are caribou resident ta the area nor is the are a located on any re cently-utilized migration route. 52. A limited number of spruce grouse inhabit the area. Ptarmigan would probably be present during peak population periods, 53. Beaver, present in sloughs along the river, are probably the most abundant fur bearers. Other species of fur animais present in sparse numbers include land otter, mink and fox. Wolves occa- sionally travel through the area. Other 'lur bearers that may be present are lynx~ marten, wolverine and muskrat. 54. Waterfowl use of the area is limited to a few mergansers which nest in tributaries ta the Susitna River. 55. Hunting .and trapping in the impoundment area are virtu- ally non-existent due to inaccessibility and low populations of wild- life. This condition can be expected to remain without project development. Even with road building and settlement of the region, game species would probably not be sought in the impoundment area due to law numbers and difficulties associated with hunting the steep canyon waUs and traveling on the relatively turbulent Susitna River. 19 -- Without the Project -Denali 56, The upper section of the Denali impoundment includes extensive river bottomland containing abundant sedge and willow vegetation. Below the mouth of Valdez Creek, the area narrows with sedge and willow in the river bottom, and spruce, dwarf birch, and a heath plant formation composed of blueberry, low-bush cran- berry, Labrador tea, and crowberry on the side hills. The im- poundment area spreads out below the mouth of Butte Creek and contains lakes, potholes, and marshes, separated by higher well- drained land. Spruce and dwarf birch occur throughout with heath plants and lichens as an understory on the better drained sections, and sedge and willow along water bodies. 57. The Denali impoundment area supports a moose popu- lation of slightly less than one moose per square mile throughout all seasons of the year. Without the project, and based on moose productivity studies elsewhere in Alaska, the moose population will probably increase for the next several years and then stabilize at a higher density levet. 58. The Denali impoundment area is located within the range of the Nelchina caribou he rd, estimated to number over 50, 000 animals. Scattered bands and stragglers may occur any- whe re throughout the range, including the impoundment a rea, at any time of the year. However, the principal calving and summer- ing grounds lie outside the impoundment .area to the south. Histor- ically, wintering grounds for the main segment of the Nelchina he rd have been the Lake Louise Flats. An unexplained, westward shift in winter range use has been evident in recent years. As many as 20, 000 caribou have been observed in Monahan Flats for limited periods. This is an area of about 400 square miles which com- prises about 2 percent of the total Nelchina caribou range. That section of the impoundment area north of Valdez Creek includes the eastern one-eighth of Monahan Flats. Intermittent caribou utilization of the Monahan Flats, which includes the northern sec- tion of the impoundment area, will probably continue without project development. Sedge and lichens, which are highly important win ter food plants for caribou, are generally in better condition in this locale than in areas utilized by wintering caribou in past years. Therefore, Monahan Flats is a desirable wintering area. The re- mainder of the impoundment area is utilized less by caribou than this northern section. 2.0 59. The southern half of the impoundment area is in one of the most popular big game hunting regions in the State, due to its accessibility from the recently completed Denali Highway and the availability of moose and caribou close to the road. The northern half of the Denali impoundment is part of the Denali Reserve, an area now closed to hunting. This reserve extends east and west for 80 miles and is situated on the north side of the Denali Highway. Several moose are harvested each year from within and adjacent to the open section of the project area. Without project development, hunting pressure for moose in the open areas will increase. Should recurrent suggestions to open the Denali Reserve and/or an either- sex moose season be adopted by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, additional increases in the moose harvest will follow. 60. That section of the project area lying south of the Denali Highway is part of a region which receives rather intensive hunting for caribou during the first part of the season. The harvest, whlch varies from year to year depending on the distribution and move- ment of the caribou,would probably not be increased either by fur- ther Uberalization of the present limit (3 caribou) or extension of the season. Hunting pressure, however, is expected to increase without project development. Should the Denali Reserve be opened to big game hunting, hunting pressure for caribou could be expected in the northern half of the impoundment area. 61. The area supports both black and grizzly bear; their harvest is mainly incidental to other big game hunting. 62. Spruce grouse, ptarmigan, and snowshoe hare. who se numbers fluctuate periodically, are present tliroughout the area but have not been abundant in recent years. Hunting for these species has been light and generally incidental to big game hunting. Hunting pressure may be expected to increase somewhat with an increase in human population, but harvest will still be largely dependent upon bird numbers. 63. Wolves, red fox, wolverine, beaver, muskrat, and land otter are present in the area. Other fur bearers possibly present include mink. marten and coyote. The present annual fur harvest probably does not exceed 20 beaver taken by one or two year-round residents near the Denali Highway crossing of the Susitna River. The potential fur yield is far greater than this and, with increased settlement, trapping would probably increase substantially. 2,1 ..,, 64. The impoundment area furnishes nesting and rearing habitat for waterfowl. Species nesting in the area include the trumpeter and whistling swan, Canada goose, scaup, baldpate, green-winged teal, mallard, pintail, bufflehead, goldeneye, old squaw, harlequin, shoveller, canvasback, white-winged scoter, and American merganser. Migra.nt waterfowl use the area for feeding and resting during bath spring and fall flights. 65. Waterfowl hunting at present is negligible. Without project development, the area would continue ta furnish nesting, rearing, and res ting habitat. Hunting pressure may increase with an increase in human population. With the Project -Devil Canyon 66. Limited amounts of moose, caribou, bear, spruce grouse, and fur animal habitat will be inundated and destroyed. Fluctuating water levels and the precipitous topography of the area will preclude creation of new game habitat. Access ta the area will be improved by a road from the Alaska Railroad section at Gald Creek to the damsite and by creation of the 29-mile long reservoir, which will furnish a surface for boat and plane opera- tion. This improved access will undoubtedly attract sorne hunters and, perhaps, trappers, and result in an increased yield of the presently lightly harvested game of the surrounding area. With the Project -Denali 67. About 61, 000 acres of land will be inundated. Most of this is moose habitat, the use of which varies according to the season. Since it is unlikely that the surrounding area can support the displaced animals, the moose population of the impoundment area will be lost. With project development, a new raad will be constructed around the lower half of the reservoir. This raad, as well as the lake itself, which will afford boat and plane operation, will add ta the accessibility and harvest of moose from the range surrounding the project area. 68. About 33, 000 acres of good caribou winter range, which receives intermittent winter use by the Nelchina caribou herd, will be destroyed by inundation. An additional 28, 000 acres of less valuable range, which receives intermittent use throughout the year, will also be inundated. Although substantial numbers of 22 - t"':'"-' caribou occasionally use this overall area~ the range that will be destroyed is apparently not of major importance when compared with other segments of the Nelchina range. No main caribcn.travel routes will be inundated. Improved accessibility as a result of project development will probably increase the caribou harvest in the surrounding area. 69. Spruce grouse, ptarmigan and snowshoe hare habitat will be inundated and lost by project development. 70. A minor hazard to game an.lma.ls may be created if a series of ice shelves is formed around the perimeter of the reser- voir as water is drawn down during the winter. 71. Inundation will destroy fur bearer habitat and areas used by waterfowl for nesting and rearing. A fluctuating waterline will preclude creation of alternate habitat around the reservoir shore- Une to replace these losses. The impoundment will furnish in- creased resting areas for waterfowl, particularly during the faU migration. With a lake for boat and float-plane operations, the area will probably become increasingly important for waterfowl hunting .as the population of Alaska increases. 2.3 -· DISCUSSION 72. The Devil Canyon P roject, if constructed, will result in relativety insignificant lasses to the fishery resources of the Su- situa River Basin. 7 3. Reservoirs formed as a result of the Devil Canyon and Denali Dams will inundate about 54 miles of the main stem Susitna River, a minimum of 15 miles of clear-water tributaries, and some lake habitat. Fluctuatingwater levels in bath reservoirs will limit maximum development of impoundments for fish habitat. A further restriction to optimum fishery habitat development will be the turbid waters caused by glacial silt runoff. The degree of this turbidity cannat be predicted on the basis of availabte data; how- ever, fishery production will decrease in proportion to turbidity. Although access will be improved by project development. only limited increases in sport fishing are anticipated where the clear- water tributaries enter the impoundments. It is anticipated tha.t the paucity of clear streams, the fluctuating water levels, and the presence of better fishing in adjacent areas will preclude high usage of the impoundments by anglers. 74. If water released from Devil Canyon Dam· for power gen- eration is different in temperature from that of the natural river, the attraction and migration of salmon and other fish to the tribu- taries between the confluence of the Susitna, Chulitna, and Talkeetna Rivers and the dam may be altered. Limited spawning and other fish usage of this area would be reduced by the introduc- tion of cooler water, while warmer waters would result in increased fish food production and fish utilization in this area. For these reasons, water releases should be made. if feasible, from a reservoir level that corresponds as nearly as possible to normal or warmer than normal river temperatures. 75. The releases indicated in the Bureau of Reclamation Operating Plan for the Devil Canyon Dam will be adequate to sus- tain fish habitat in the Susitna River downstream from the project. However, during dam construction, reservoir filling, and through- out the life of the project, flows of not less than 2, 000 c. f. s. should be maintained. If the initial reservoir filling occurs during the period October through April, inclusive, the minimum flow requirement would be l, 000 c. f. s. Sudden changes in water dis- charge should be avoided to prevent scouring of the channel. 24 76. Stream ecology and fish life will be modified in the 85 miles of the Susitna River between the Devil Canyon Reservoir and the Denali Dam. The plan of operation caUs for water above Denali Dam to be impounded during the spring and summe r and to be reteased during the fall and winter. Changes will be most pr·o- found in the 11 miles of the Susitna River from the Denali Dam to the Maclaren River. However, during the summer months when such flows will be st0red, this section of strea.m apparently re- ceives little usage by fish; therefore, this summer dewatering may be of little consequence. Below the Maclaren River, it is most likely that summer fish usage increases. Water records lndicate that incrementa! fl.ows from the vari0us tributaries in this section are normaUy greater than the flow of the Susitna River at Denali Dam. Even. without flow in the Susitna River from Denali Reser.- voir, the amount of water from the tributaries is believed adequate to sustain fish habitat and fish life. 77. Du ring the fall and win ter months ~ flows between Denali Dam and Devil Canyon Reservoir will exceed normal flows without the project. Such increases will probably be of benefit to wintering fish populations in the Susitna River, particularly if the flow from Denali Dam is relatively clear. However, if this water is glaciaUy turbid, it pnay be of less value than the normaUy clear water which currently occurs. 78. Although minimum year-roun.d releases from the Den.ali Dam would prebably reduce the changes in the stream habitat, such alteration of habitat without minimum flows will not be particularly adverse to the fishery resources. Therefore, minimum flows are not required during ,spring and summer months when the project is in. operation. In arder that fish habitat may be preserved during the cQ;nstruction. and initial filling period and project operation, flows of not les.s than 150 c. f. s. should be maintained from October through March. When the project is fully operational, flows released from the dam for power generation downst:ream at Denali will be adequate to maintain the winter fish habitat. 79. . Although the re have been two reports of fis.h above the Devil Canyon Dam that could have been salmon, no.verified report exists of salmon above this site. A strong p:robability exists that a hydraulic block (comprised of swift water for several miles) pre .. vents the movement of anadromous fish to .the Susitna River drain- age above the Devil Canyon damsite. It may be that, with sorne 25 special water condition which might exist periodically, an occa- sional salmon is able to traverse the area. There are no indica- tions, however 9 that any significant numbers of sa.lmon or other anadromous fish will be blocked by construction of the Devil Canyon Dam; therefore, no fish ladder or other fish facility is recommended for inclusion in the plans for the Devil Canyon Dam aJ this time. 80. Above the DevH Canyon damsite~ there are many dear- water tributaries and lake systems that may be utilized by salmon for spa.wning and rearing purposes. Elimination of the hydraulic black by inundation together with sorne type of fish-handling deviee might make it possible to bring the middle and upper Su- sitna drainage area into salmon a.nd steelhead trout production. Detailed .studies will be conducted to determine the feasibility and. opportunities for enhancement features to utilize these potential spawning areas. 81. Limited amounts of wildlife habitat will be destroyed by inundation with attendant lasses to the wildlife species dependent on these habitats. Because of generally low populations and poor accessibility, these lasses are considered to be of a minor nature. The topography of the reservoir perimeters as weU as the season, duration, and severity of fluctuating water levels in the two reser- voirs make mitigation of such limited lasses by development of replacement habitat improbable, It is possible that, as a result of project construction and operation, access to currently remote areas will improve with increased utilization of the game and fur species by hunters and trappers. 26 -/ DF FISH AND GAME ::') ..JANSON, .JR., CORDDVA 'l.MAN 1 SRCWER, PDINT BARROW OVSCN, KODIAIC STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF' F'ISH AND GAME M. HAYR, f'"AIRBANKB 229 ALASKA OFFICE BUILOING .JUNEAU, ALASKA -1. MARTIN, NAKNEK SELF"Fl.OGE, KETCHIKAN STRAND, PETERSBURG C. L. ANDERSON, COMMISSIONER Hay 6, 1960 Mr. John T. Gharrett, Regional Director Bureau of Commercial Fisheries and Mr. Urban C. Nelson, Regional Director Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wild1ife U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Box 2481, Juneau, Alaska Gentlemen: STATE OF ALASKA WILLIAM A. EGAN GDVERNOR The Department has reviewed the report of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service dated May 4,1960 concerning the Burèau of Reclama- tion's planned Devil Canyon Project on the Susitna River Basin. We agree with your findings as to the effect of ~he project on fish and game, and concur in the recommandations for the protection of these resources as outlined in this report. WK:kp Sincerely, ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME WCLŒ-v/f~ Walter Ki.rkness:, Acting COmmissioner UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of' Mines Region 1 Mining Industry in the Area inf'luenced by the Proposed Susitna River Hydroelectric Project INTRODUCTION Hydroelectric power from the proposed Devil Canyon-Denali Project on the Susitna River will be available for distribution through- out the so-called Railbelt region, which includes the area adjacent to the Alaska Railroad between Fairbanks and Seward as well as the Big Delta, Kenai Peninsula, and Prince William Sound areas. Mineral resources, especially gold, played a major role in the economy of' the region since the discovery of' the gold placers near Fairbanks in 1902. The Alaska Railroad was built to connect the thriving min- ing camps of' the Fairbanks and Yukon River placer mining districts with ocean transportation at Seward. Completed in 1923, the railroad of'f'ered dependable service and reasonable f'reight rates that were of' great assistance to the mining industry in reaching and maintaining a paramount position in the region's economy. The development of' a dependable supply of' low-cost power will have a similar benef'icial ef'fect on present and potential mineral industries. The construction and operation of' extensive defense estab- lishments has replaced mining as the basic activity in the Railbelt but many men are still employed by the mineral industry; a large amount of capital is invested in dredges and ether mining plants. Principal products of' the mining industry are gold (placer), ooal, and sand and gravel from large, widely distributed deposits. Except for the above-mentioned commodities, comparatively little is known of the mineral production potential of' the region; because of inaccessibility and diff'icult prospecting conditions, large areas remain unexplored, This condition prevails to a large extent in the reservoir areas included under both the Devil Canyon and Denali dams. The Denali reservoir site includes at least a part of' the Valdez Creek gold placer deposits which have yielded slightly over a million dollars in gold since ~~eir discovery in 1904. Production from the Valdez Creek district!/in recent years has been negligible. g-RS.nsome~ -Alfred -L., Kerns, William H., Names and Defini tiens of' Regions, Districts, and Subdistricts in Alaska: Bureau of Mines Inf'. Circ. 7679, 1954, 91 PP• Bureau of Mines Economie conditions rather than exhaustion of the deposits are believed to be responsible for the lack of activity. The recent completion of the new Denali Hïghway has greatly improved access to the Valdez Creek district and will reduce operating costs as well as stimulate pros- pecting. No mineral production has been recorded from the area to be inundated by the proposed Devil Canyon dam or from the immediate vicinity of the reservoir site. However 1 access to this area is particularly difficult and little prospecting has been done. Because of the above-mentioned conditions a comprehensive evaluation of the mineral resources of the region, including possible deposits that would be inundated by the proposed reservoirs, would requive extensive field investigations; this report, therefore, is neces- sarily limited to the following general discussion of mineral production and mining activities in the area under the probable influence of the proposed project. MINERAL PRODUCTION Although nowin decline, gold (largely from placers) has been the principal mineral product of the Railbelt. The total production of placer gold is given by region in table 1, 11 Placer gold production from the area served by the Alaska Railroad up to and including 1958." Copper production, formerly an important factor in the economy of the Prince William Sound district, is presently nil. The present production of miscellaneous metals such as lead, zinc, anti- money, and tungsten is negligible throughout the Railbelt as well as elsewhere in Alaska. Coal production in the Matanuska and Healy fields has been expanded to meet rapidly increasing milit~ry and civilian requirements. The greatly accelerated construction of Alaskan highways under the Federal Aid Program promises to elevate the production of sand and gravel to a position of major importance throughout Railbelt. Table 2 gives the mineral production (including sand and gravel) from the area served qrthe Alaska Railroad up to and including 1958. 2 Bureau of Mines MINING Gold Virtually all significant lode gold operations in the Rail- belt have been suspended because of present unfavorable economie condi- tions. In the gold-placer fields, only the more efficient and lower cost operations are still in production In 1959 five dredges were active in the Fairbanks area, one in the Fortymile district, and one dredge in the Circle district. Several small placer mines continue to work. The major producer in 'the Fairbanks area uses a combination of steam and hydropower to generate electricity for the operation of dredges and auxiliary facilities. The hydropower is a recent devel- opment financed by private capital and utilizing the Davidson Ditch as a source of water. Gold lode and placer deposits are widely distributed through- out the region; placer deposits are especially extensive in the Fairbanks district. Proven reserves of placer gold are being rapidly depleted, however, and a large potential reserve is becoming a sub- marginal resource because of the constantly increasing cost of produc- ing a fixed-price commodity. The survival of the gold mining industry, therefore, depends on a better priee and/or lower costs such as may result from improved processes, cheaper power and a more stabilized economy throughout the region. Coal Coal-bearing formations extend over extensive areas through- out the region and coal reserves are known to be large. The coal, ail of which is of Te~~iary age, ranges in rank from lignite to high- volatile C bituminousgj--depending on the degree of metamorphism. Extensive deposits occur in the Nenana and Matanuska fields, through- out large areas along the Beluga River and on the Kenai Peninsule. The Matanuska field is currently the principal source of coal for the Anchorage area. This coal is classified as high-volatile B and C bituminous. The coal requirements of the Fairbanks area are now supplied from mines on Healy and Lignite Creeks in the Nenana field. These coals are mainly sub-bituminous B in rank although sorne gj Coal classification, types of coal, etc., is discussed in Mineral Facts and Problems, Bureau of Mines Bull. 556, pp 116-17. 3 -!="" Table 1. Placer gold production from the area served by the Alaska RailrQSd up to and_jncluding 1958 To and including To and inclu- District Region 1936 (u.s.G.s. 1937-58 ding 1958 Bull. 907) (~ncl.) Anchorage, Valdez Creek, Yentna-Cache Cree~, and $2,889,oocE $6,62o,ooo?l Prince William Sound !/ Cook Inlet-Susitna $3,731,000 Moose Pass, Hope, Seward Turnagain Arm, Homer 57 ,ooogj 2,270,ooogj Girdwood Kenai Peninsula 2,213,000 Bonnifield, Fairbanks, Delta River, Hot Springs, Kantishna, Rampart, l02,3811 00QY 222,625,ooo'# Tolovana Yukon •-\i ver 120,244,000 Total . . • . . • • .. • . • . . . . . $126,188,000 $1o5,327,oooY $231,515,oooY ~ Prince William Sound district is in Copper River region; old records show it in Cook In1et-Susitna. ?J Includes placer silver. \11 Table 2. Value of mineral production !"rom 'tne area servt:u uy "'u.c ........... "'A"" '" ......................... , ~.t' v--~---~-----"" _,, _ Commodity Gold: Placers Lodes Subtotal Silver (mainly from alloys with gold) Chromite Copper (Prince Wm. Sound) Coa1 Sand and gravel Miscellaneous, inc1uding lead., antimony, tungsten, copper and ether Total To and including 1936 (U.S.G.S. Bull. 907) $126,188,000 12,517,000 138,705,000 845,000 9,835,000 225,000 1937-58 (incl.) .!/$105' 327 ,ooo §} 14,537 ,ooo 1/g/ 119,864,000 <:JI) 73,405,000 §/ 494,000 ~Inc1udes placer silver. gj Inc1udes lode si1ver, copper, 1ead, and zinc marketed from 1ode go1d deposits. 3/ Included with gold. Total to and including 1958 .!/$231,515,000 ?! 27,054,000 !fgj 258,569,000 845,000 y 2 1 227,0GO 37,511,000 d3,24o,ooo 21 23,110,000 §! 719,000 4o6,221,000 ~ First recorded production in 1943. ~ Includes production 1951-1958 on1y; prier years ~ production figures included in pub1ished records with "Miscellaneous". §j Antimony only; all ether mis cellaneous included w1 th 1ode gold. Bureau of' Mines beds are sub-bituminous C. Coal from beds cropping along the shores of Cook Inlet (Kenai Peninsula} was utilized by whaling ships enroute to the Arctic Ocean and by early Russian settlements in that area; there are no mines in operation on the Peninsula at the present time. Comparatively little is known of' the deposits in the Beluga River area although recent reconnaissance drilling by the Bureau of Mines indicates that at least one large bed (over 50 feet thick} may be suitable for mining by open-eut methods. The Beluga River and Kenai coals are similar in rank to those of' the Healy Creek district of the Nenana field. Total production of coal from the region is valued at over $83 million; most of' this has been produced within the last 20 years. Subsequent to 1942, the construction of numerous large military bases in the Railbelt and the resultant increase in civilian establishments required a rapid expansion of coal producing facilities. At present, the industry employa more than 200 men in surface and underground operations. Most of the coal is used in centrally located plants for the generation of electricity and heat for distribution to both military and civilian establishments. A small1 steadily decreasing amount is used for domestic heating purposes. Future demand for Alaskan coals may be enhanced by the devel- opment of export markets or by the perfection of processes currently under study --some of which are now being used on an industrial scale --which use coal as a source of organic chemicals, fertilizers, high-B.t.u. gas, liquid fuels, oils 1 fats, and waxes. Minerals of Construction S?nd and gravel is abundant throughout most of the Railbelt region and deposits usually are locally available to supply the needs of the construction industry. The building of roads and airfields constitutes the principal use of these materials, although considerable amounts are used in concrete structures and by the Alaska Railroad for track ballast. Demand may be expected to increase sharply because of accelerated highway construction under the Federal highway aid program and because of continued growth of both military and civilian facilities throughout the region. With the exception of' sand and gravel, the use of native nonmetallic minerals for construction purposes has been negligible. 6 Bureau of Mines Raw materiels suitable for the manufacture of cement, lightweight aggregate (haydite) and clay products are available in quantity at various reasonably accessible locations throughout the Railbelt, but economie conditions have prevented utilization except on a minor scale. Some brick have been produced from local clays. A new brick plant featuring a downdraft kiln has recently been placed in operation in Anchorage; common, roman and fire brick are manufactured for the local market. Cement in bulk is now imported by tank barge and distributed from a plant in Anchorage. Present consumption of the region is about 300,000 barrels annually, which is less than one-third the capacity of the more efficient-sized cement manufacturing plants. Because of the high costs inherent to Alaskan operations, a plant of the greatest possible efficiency would be essential to provide the necessary competition with the comparatively cheap bulk cement importa. Normal growth of the new State plus the extra cement requirements of major construction projects, such as hydroelectric dams, may soon provide additional demand justifying utilization of local raw materials. Copper Alaska has produced a large amount of copper, principally from the fabulous Kennicott mines but a substantiel amount has also been produced from the Prince William Sound district (table 2) which will be under the remote influence of the proposed power development. This district eontains numerous copper prospects as well as several potentially large deposits that are presently submarginal in grade but which might be profitably exploited under more favorable economie conditions. In the larger known deposits, eomparatively small amounts of eopper occur associated with usually massive concentrations of iron-sulfide minerals (pyrite, pyrrhotite and marcasite). These minerals, which contain from 46 to 60 percent iron and from 39 to 53 percent sulfur, are becoming increasingly important sources of sulfur, sulfur products, and iron. Under favorable economie condi- tions such as may be stimulated by the continued growth of heavy industry in the Pacifie Northwest and the Orient, exploitation of the Prince William Sound copper-iron-sulfur deposits will become commercially feasible. The availability of cheap, dependable power would be a major factor in the development of successful mining, milling and local smelting operations. 7 Bureau of Mines Miscellaneous Minerals Higb-grade antimony ore has been produced from mines in the Kantishna and Tolovana districts. Several deposits appear to have substantiel reserves; however, higb mining and transportation costs and fluctuating markets have handicapped production and have retarded both exploration and development of the deposits. Tungsten deposits in the Gilmore Dome and adjacent areas near Fairbanks produced some higb-grade ore during World War II. The granitic-metamorphic contact zone in which the deposits occur extends over a considerable area which has not been adequately investigated. More than $2.25 million in chromite ore and concentrates (table 2) have been shipped from mines on the Kenai Peninsula near Seldovia (Red Mountain) since 1943. Practically all of the shipments were to the Government stockpile. The area contains a potentially large resource of low-grade chromite-bearing material as well as a substantiel tonnage of metallurgical-grade chromite. In addition to the above-mentioned metals prospects of lead, zinc, and manganese have been reported from various areas throughout the Railbelt but there has been little or no production of these metals. Except in those relatively small areas easily accessible to transportation, prospecting in the Railbelt region for metals other than gold has been very desultory. Systematic investigation of the many geologically favorable areas undoubtedly will result in the dis- covery of additional deposits of commercially important minerals. Petroleum and Natural Gas The discovery of cil on the Kenai Peninsule in 1957 resulted in a land leasing boom and intensified drilling activity over a large part of Alaska, including the Railbelt region. By November, 1959, three producing cil wells had been brought in on the Kenai Peninsula and several others were reported to have substantiel reserves of gas. The Kenai field is in the early stages of develop- ment and the production potentiel is as yet unknown. Geological formations favorable to the existence of oil are known to underlie large areas in and adjacent to the Railbelt region and additional discoveries may be anticipated. 8 UNITED &TATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management Forest Resource of The Devil Canyon Project Power Market Area Most of the forest lands within the power market area of the Devil Canyon Project are currently on public domain lands. The major exception being the Kenai Peninsula where roughly the eastern half of this area is within the Chugach National Forest and the northwestern one-third is within the Kenai National Moose Range. The altitudinal limits of tree growth are usually between 2000 and 3000 feet, with the better stands occurring along the streams and better drained bench lands. Within the area under con- sideration there are vast areas above the limit of tree growth, as well as extensive areas of muskeg which support a forest cover of very low density. The distribution, composition, density and volume of the forests within the Area are largely a result of fires, with 80 per- cent of the forest cover having been burned over one or more times within the last 60 years. These fires in some areas have resulted in denudation; in other areas a complex mosaic of forest types has resulted. The typical interior forest stand is a mixture of white spruce and Alaska white birch. The spruce-birch type is loosely defined as containing any admixture of the two species but usually is about evenly distributed on the basis of stem count (not volume} per acre. The spruce-birch type is found throughout interior Alaska on the better drained soils and benchlands. In this type, the birch is usually of moderate size and runs from medium to heavy cull-·the dominance and competition of the spruce apparently weakening the birch and making it susceptible to the inroads of forest diseases. Toc, forest tires cause heavier damage to the white birch than to the heavier-barked white spruce. The spruce-birch type, within its range, is a sub-climax forest type, but has maintained itself over wide areas due to prevalence of wildfires. The white spruce type--pure spruce or near-pure spruce stands--are typically found as the limits of tree growth in altitude, latitude, and longitude are approached. Pure spruce stands of limited extent may occur on the lower benchlands. At the lower elevations, the spruce type will contain excellent merchantable Bureau of Land Management timber, but as the limits of growth are approached the trees become shorter, occur in more open stands, are branchy and of generally poor commercial quality. In the absence of fire the white spruce type becomes the climax type. Alaska white birch, both reproduction and immature timber, is often found as pure type. It may appear as the first cover crop after a forest fire but frequently succeeds the quaking aspen. The white birch type soon supports a heavy understory of spruce and, as the stand reaches maturity, eventually becomes a white spruce-white birch type. Mature stands of the white birch type are limited in their occurence to certain areas in the Cook Inlet-Susitna River region and Tanana Valley. In these regions, the white birch bas reached maturity and over-maturity in pure or near pure stands; how- ever, white spruce is rapidly encroaching on the stands due to their over-maturi ty. Inventory has been accomplished on a gross area of approx- imately 90,000 acres of birch timber known as the Talkeetna Birch Stand. This stand parallels the railroad at the east side of the Susitna River from the Kashwitna River to the Talkeetna River. The average volume per acre is slightly less than 2000 board feet of commercial birch having a diameter breast high of 8 inches or more. No more than 10 percent of the volume is suitable for manufacture of veneer. When Alaska birch is exploited it is felt that the major production will be in specialty products such as furniture stock, flooring, paneling and various items of woodenware. One abortive sale of birch for export from Alaska was issued in the Talkeetna Stand in 1958. With the growing scarcity of birch in northeastern u. s., it appears to be but a matter ~time before it will become economically feasible to develop the Talkeetna and other birch stands in Alaska. Other birch stands presently unknown as to volume and quality exist on the northwest side of Knik Arm, the Shell Hills, Peters Hills, and in the Tanana Valley east of Fairbanks. It is felt that seme of these stands may be of higher volume and quality than the presently accessible Talkeetna stand, The cottonwood type (with associated types spruce- cottonwood and birch-cottonwood) is found along the stream courses. It is typically found on the rich bottom lands and river bars which are subject to more or less frequent flooding. The type, collectively, 2 Bureau of Land Management is important and covers a large acreage; however, on any individuel stream the cotton-wood is typically found as a narrow belt along the river banks. Commercially 1 therefore, the cottonwood has no present market importance. The aspen type is fre~uently found as the first cover crop on burned-over areas. The type may occur over extensive areas but the trees are short lived, subject to heavy decay, are small in diameter and have no present commercial importance. The black spruce type is of no commercial importance and is the scrub species of the interior forests. It is found on wet lands and muskegs. In the Tanana Valley tamarack may be found in admixture-- rarely is tamarack found in pure stands of even limited extent. Appro~dmately 16 million board feet of forest products have been sold from the public domain lands of Interior Alaska annually. The greater part of this volume is harvested within the power market area. This harvest is but a small percentage of the potential annual eut. The present utilization of the Interior forests is entirely dependent upon local consumption demanda, no timber is exported. The commercial logging industry, therefore, is typified by small, portable mills which are large enough to satisfy the purely local demand and yet easy to move from one timber stand to another. The heaviest concentration of sawmills is in the Anchorage and Fairbanks areas, where the population and demand are the greatest. In these areas, the extensive logging of the past 50 years combined with the deep inroads of forest fires during the same period has seriously depleted the more easily accessible stands of merchantable timber. Loggers are now having to go farther afield1 away from the roads, and at greater costs to them in order to obtain satisfactory timber. Presently the majority of lumber used in Alaska is imported from the other States. T.be preference for outside forest products stems mainly from the failure of local industry to provide the amount and ~uality of timber at the time and place needed. Aside from certain structural grades the forests of the power market area could supply a good deal of the lumber re~uired by beth civilian and military consumera. In tact, the common grades of local spruce are e~ual to or better than those of fir or hemlock shipped in because the spruce knots are both small and tight. However, most of the small mills in the power use area only operate sporadically1 3 Bureau of Land Management usually as a sideline, producing rough, green lumber which lacks uniformity in manufacture. Local retail dealers are reluctant to stock local material, supply and quality both of which are uncertain. Before local mills can capture a share of the market now going to outside sources, a more constant supply of lumber must be turnished; it must be well manufactured, graded and at least air dried. Also provisions must be made for planing and kiln drying of a fair per- centage of output. Although birch offers promise of entering into the export market, it is not expected that any of the other species will play a substantiel role in lumber export. Spruce in lumber form bas no intrinsic qualities wbich would favor it over softwood timbers grown in the other states. However, spruce, as well as birch, aspen and cottonwood make excellent pulp. Those species form a vast potential pulp-wood reserve. With the advent of a favorable economie climate for industrial development the forests of the interior of Alaska are destined to play an important role in the rapidly expanding pulp industry. 4 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service PROJ.E:CT REPORT on the RECREATION ASPECTS OF THE DEVIL CANYON PROJECT Susitna River, Alaska April, 1960 Field investigation of this project by the National Park Service has not been feasible, due to limited funds and personnel. This report is, therefore, based on materials of record, and on per- sonal knowledge on the part of individuels, gained during the Alaska Recreation Survey, conducted by this Service since 1949. PURPOSE The purpose of the Devil Canyon Project is, primarily, the production of hydroelectric power to serve the Kenai Peninsula, Anchorage, the Railbelt, Fairbanks, and Big Delta. Flood control and water conservation would be secondary purposes. LOCATION OF MAJOR FEATURES The proposed project is located in southcentral Alaska. The major features are the Devil Canyon and Denali Dams, on the Susitna River, a powerplant at Devil Canyon Dam and transmission lines to Anchorage and Fairbanks, with distribution to contiguous areas. Devil Canyon Dam would be located 14.5 miles above Gold Creek, a station on the Alaska Railroad, while Denali Dam would be approximately 115 miles upstream and about 15 miles south of the Denali Highway crossing of the Susitna. GENERAL DESCRll?TION AND OPERATING PLAN The proposed Devil Canyon Dam would be a concrete arch structure rising 560 feet above the river. The reservoir impounded would approximate 1,100,000 acre-feet, with a surface area of 7,550 acres. Of this total capacity, 8o7,000 acre-feet would be active storage. Normal full pool elevation would be 1,450 feet, while elevation at the top of the dead and inactive storage would be 1,275. Thus a drawdown of 175 feet may be anticipated. The Denali Dam would be of earth and rock fill construction, rising 219 feet above the river bed. The Denali Reservoir would National Park Service approximate 5,4oo,ooo acre-feet, with a surface area of 61,000 acres. Of this total active, or conservation, storage would amount to 5,300,000 acre-feet, with an initial allocation for dead storage of 1001 000 acre-feet. Normal full pool elevation would be 2,552 feet 1 while elevation at the top of the inactive storage would be ~ 2.,3Bfe, feet, representing a fluctuation of 184 feet. At this lowest level, the initial water surface would be 3,000 acres. This would decrease rather rapidly, and would disappear after lOO years of sedimentation. Controlled releases from bath reservoirs would be for power generation only. Denali would be used as a storage reservoir, for replenishment of Devil Canyon, from which continuous releases would be made. Ordinarily, releases from Denali would be during the months from October to March. All inflow to that reservoir would be held in storage during the rest of the year. Wi th the combination of releases from Denali and flow from tributaries below the Denali Dam, Devil Canyon would fill in September and remain full through February, with its lowest stage in April or May. CLIMATE Moderate temperatures prevail throughout the Susitna Basin during the summer months, with the July maximum averaging about 70°1 with July minimum averaging about 47°. The Devil Canyon Project, being in the middle and upper part of the Basin, might expect to experience a somewhat lower average. The freeze-up would start early in October, in the Denali region, and would reach Devil Canyon perhaps about a month later. Break-up would probably come in late April. TOPOGRAPHY The Devil Canyon section of the Susitna is V-shaped, char- acterized by high, steep canyon walls which rise more than 500 feet above the river. At the upper reaches of the Basin, the portion re- lating to Denali Dam and Reservoir, topography is more gentle, which would result in a broad area .of water at upper reservoir levels. VEGETATION The Devil Canyon section appears to be sparsely covered with tree growth, mainly spruce. The upper reaches of the reservoir, and the plateau country to the north and south, support the muskeg-tundra botanical association characteristic of that latitude. 2 National Park Service Very little timber grows in the Denali section, being replaced by muskeg-tundra. At Monahan Flat, to the north and west of the proposed Denali Dam, there is a fair stand of scrub spruce. ARCHEOLOGICAL VALUES An archeological investigation of the Devil Canyon section indicates that it is obvious that no settlement would be found in the bottom of the canyon except for a few temporary camps. The canyon is steep and the flow of the river is too fast, ta encourage human use and settlement. The upper valley, which would be inundated by Denali Reser- voir, has not been investigated adequately, An old winter trail, or sled raad, c~osses the valley in the vicinity of the abandoned mining camp of Denali, and this travel route may have been in use long ago. More complete investigation is warranted in this area. ACCESSIBILITY The Devil Canyon section is now relatively inaccessible. The Alaska Railroad serves Gold Creek, some fifteen miles below the dam site. A public access raad is proposed ta the dam site, but no ether access is contemplated. Since Gold Creek is served only by railroad, public automotive access to the Devil Canyon Dam would be practically precluded. As regards Denali Dam and reservoir, it is p10posed to reroute the Denali Highway to cross the dam. This highway extends from Paxson, on the Richardson Highway ta the east, to and through Mt. McKinley National Park ta the west. Opened ta the public in 1958, this raad is already receiving considerable use, with the pros- pect of rapid and continuous increase in traffic. PRESENT RECREATION FACILITIES AND USE The entire area embraced in the Devil Canyon Project is a vast wilderness, except for the narrow strip across the upper valley which is affected by the Denali Highway. 3 National Park Service The zone served and influenced by the Alaska Railroad, known as "The Railbelt", lies some 15 river miles to the west of Devil Canyon Dam. There are no installed recreation facilities in this region and, except for the Denali Highway, travel is so difficult as to practically eliminate recreation use. Hunting and, to a lesser degree fishing, is available from the highway zone. And the numerous lakes of the region are acces- sible by float planes. These natural lakes furnish better fishing than may be anticipated in Denali reservoir because of extreme fluctuation. This fact tends to obviate justification of that res- ervoir on the ground that in itself it would contribute to recreation. POTENTIAL RECREATION USE The upper Susitna Basin is a vast wilderness without roads or trails but with many scores of natural lakes suitable for landing float planes. The proposed reservoir would not change this situation to any degree. As Alaska's population grows and her economy develops, demand for and use of such wilderness will certainly increase. How- ever, it is difficult to foresee any marked contribution to recrea- tion by the Devil Canyon Project. The steep sided, inaccessible Devil Canyon Reservoir will contribute chiefly through regulation of stream flow, thus tending to improve fish habitat by reducing seasonal fluctuation in the river below. This would probably benefit the Railbelt but would have no effect on the reservoir and its sur- rounding lands. The Denali Reservoir cannot be expected to contribute to recreation. On the contrary, the magnificent scenery available along the Denali Highway would be spoiled to a degree were this large, widely fluctuating reservoir interposed between the highway and the inspiring grandeur of the Alaska range. CONCLUSION This report is, perforee, of a general nature. Without extensive field investigation, it is not possible to present specifie or detailed discussion. Should the project proceed to a more detailed stage ofplanning, the National Park Service should exert every effort to obtain more precise information. 4 National Park Service On the basis of available source material, it appears that the Devil Canyon Project will not add to the recreation potential- ities of the Upper Susitna. ~e scenic values of the Upper Valley, which includes sorne of the finest vistas in Alaska, might actually be affected adversely by the Denali Reservoir. In sÙch a vast country, however, such effect would probably be of minor importance. 5 U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA Corps of Engineers P.o. Box 7002 Anchorage, Alaska 1-15-60 Mr. Daryl L. Roberts, District Manager U. s. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation P. o. Box 2567 Juneau, Alaska Dear Mr. Roberts: Your letter dated October 21, 1959, requesting an evalua- tion of Flood Control Benefits that could be attributed to the Devil Canyon Project has been under study. The area downstream from your proposed project is sparsely populated and with the exception of the Alaska Railroad contains little valuable development that would be subjected to flood damage, Because the Alaska Railroad sustains the major damages occurring in the plain, that agency has been contacted to ascertain the extent of annual average damage. The answer received is enclosed and indicates an average annual damage of $8,000. Since the inflow below the project is small and the damages are brought about by ice jams in the spring, when the reservoirs are low, it should be possible to control the runoff until the danger of ice jams has passed. Highvater unaccompanied by ice causes negligible damage, making large volumes spilling at a later date possible without harm. Complete control of the stream would provide a maximum of $8,000 prevention of damages which could be used as flood control benefits. However, since prevention of damage to the railroad as a project purpose requires dependable storage of spring runoff, assigne ment of benefits from flood control to the project or projects would require that an appropriate amount of the usable storage of the proposed reservoirs be specifically allocated to flood control, or to a joint purpose which included flood control. The flood control benefits would be computed on the basis of the storage so assigned. The reserved space must then be operated in accordance with rules and regulations to be prescribed by the Chief of Engineers. Attributing benefits to possible future development are considered impractical because of the high degree of uncertainty inherent in such an estimate, In addition, if such future damages Corps of Engineers could be evaluated, the amount would have to be adjusted to an aver- age annual value by Present Worth methods. After the adjustment, the benefits would probably be insignificant. The amounts of maximum releases, and the storage that would have to be available specifically for flood control, would have to be determined. Project costs would have to be allocated to the specifie purpose to insure that the benefits were sufficient to carry the separable or incremental costs of including it in the project. If less than the total storage necessary were set aside, the $8,000 benefits would have to be reduced to reflect the lesser control. But even partial elimination of annual damages would require planned flood storage reservations and annual operation for this purpose. In view of the minor amounts of prospective flood control benefits and the expense and problems connected with their attain- ment, it is believed that there is insufficient reason to justify inclusion of flood control as a project purpose. It is therefore suggested that the limited flood control obtained from the normal operation of the project be cited and included as an incidental project benefit. If you wish to prepare a full scale study in order to establish the reservoir storage and operation limita and cost alloca- tion necessary to establish flood control as a project purpose, this ·· office will be pleased to provide any assistance you may need. 1 Incl Cy ltr ARR cc: North Pacifie Division 2 Very truly yours, /s/ W. C. Gribble, Jr. W. C. GRIBBLE 1 JR. Colonel, CI District Engineer UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR The Alaska Ra11road Post Office Box 7-2111 Anchorage, Alaska November 17, 1959 The District Engineer Refer to: File No. NPAGP U. s. Army Engineer District, Alaska Corps of Engineers Post Office Box 7002 Anchorage, Alaska Attn: Captain F. A. Wolak Dear Sir: We have received your letter of inquiry as to the annual flood damage occurring to the iiailroad as a re sul t of the flooding of the Susitna River. The Susitna causes the Railroad very little damage except in the Spring run-off, between the first and last of May. Ice jams accumulate between Mile 261 on the Railroad and Mile 235 which causes a damming effect. This, in turn, causes the flooding of the Railroad and embankment washing. Generally, we are out of service approxi~ mately twelve hours each year, and our corrective cost amounts to about $8,000 per annum. If there is anything further we can furnish on this matter, please let me know. 3 Very truly yours, /s/ R. H. Anderson R. H. Anderson General Manager UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service December 11, 1959 REPORT FOR BUREAU OF RECLAMA.TION ON RAILBELT AREA OF THE CHUGACH NATIONAL FOREST: The railbelt area includes that part of the Chugach National Forest that lies on the Kenai Peninsula from Seward to Anchorage. It is approximately 1,300,000 acres in size and supports a stand of white spruce, black spruce1 cottonwood, birch, Sitka spruce, and western hemlock. At the present time only Sitka spruce, hemlock, and white spruce are being used in commercial quantities. The commercial timber lies along the river bottoms, tidal flats, and up the rugged slopes to an elevation of approximately 1000 feet. The quality is good enough for sawmill use 1 pulp, piling, house logs, and some veneer cutting. Inventory of timber stands are incomplete but it is thought the Kenai working circle can support a eut of approximately 15 million board feet annually in perpetuity under the present multiple use pro- gram of management. An additional substantial amount can economically be brought in by water from the Prince William Sound working circle to possibly more than double this amount. The deep water ports and railheads facilities at Whittier, Anchorage, and Seward make them well situated for wood using industries. The following table shows the sawmill locations, their potential capacity, annual eut, and the value of their products in 1958: Approxima te Approxima te annual B. F. annual eut Approxima te Location capacity 1958 B. F. value 1958 Se ward 6 million 1 million $ 95,000 Seward 6 million 1~ million 142,500 Whittier 10 million 6 million 570,000 2 portable mills ~ million j million 47,500 Totals 22~ million 9 million $ 855,000 If the installed mills had operated at their full capacity, the value of their total product would have been slightly over 2 million dollars. Forest Service A new treating plant, now under construction at Whittier, will have a capacity f'or handling approximately 5 million B. F. of' poles, piling, ties and timbers, annually. Most of' the treated material will be sold locally in Alaska. It is dif'f'icult to estimate the value of' its outp~t at this time or estimate how f'ast the indus- try will grow. However, it is felt that as the State grows, this industry is bound to expand. Very little hemlock is being processed at the present time. As the merchantable stands of' Sitka spruce become harder tc procure, it will, in all probability, force more hemlock onto the market as it has done in other parts of' the Pacifie Coast states. The present market priee f'or hemlock lumber in Alaska precludes its manufacture in any great quantities at this time. However, the treating plant at Whittier plans, at present, to treat hemlock peles, piling, and ties. The ties and timbers will be sawn in an existing local mill, and it will increase the use of' hemlock by possibly several million feet annually in the near future. There are various economie reasons why more timber is not eut and processed in Alaska at present. Trees are a renewable resource and when managed under a sustained yield program, aff'ord a perpetual supply of raw material. Therefore, it is f'elt that the timber industry is bound to expand in the f'oreseeable future to be one of Alaska's f'oremost, permanent, and stàble industries. The recreational resource of' the Kenai area has just begun to be developed. The glaciers, lakes, streams, and scenic views make it a tourist paradise. The abundant fish, moose, and rare Dall sheep make it an unique area that attracts sportsmen f'rom all over the world to hunt and f'ish. As more and more touriste, campera, and sportsmen use these recreational resources it means that more campgrounds, stores, service stations, restaurants, picnic areas, and public services will be required to take care of' this lucrative trade brought in by these people. In 1958 the recreational use increased 18 percent on the Kenai over the 1957 use, according to the annual visitors' report compiled each year. Preliminary estimates indicate the 1959 total may exceed a 20 percent increase over last year's use. It is a use of' a resourcethat is growing phenomenally all over Alaska and already ranks near the top in annual income for the state, yet from all indications it will continue to increase in astounding proportions. 2 UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA in cooperation with the UNITED STA'lES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURE Alaska~railbelt includes a large acreage of potentiel agricultural land (Table 1). Soil studies conducted by the Soil Conservation Service and reconnaissance surveys by the Bureau of Land Management give an estimate of about a million acres. By 1959, accessible good land in satisfactory site locations could be found only in the Susitna Valley and Tanana Valley. The most publicized entries were being made on the west side of the Susitna River opposite Talkeetna and in the Willow Creek region east of the Susitna --both remote from markets, roads, and services. If agriculture expands in step with Alaska's predicted population growth, the acreage put to use in growing foodstuffs will not make much impression on this reservoir of farm land. A four-fold expansion relative to present markets will not bring full utilization of Alaska~ cultivable •acres. A locally supported population is considered highly desir- able from the standpoint of national defense. National emergencies will disrupt shipping and bring food scarcities to Alaska. Alaska's total annual retail food bill is estimated at. $120 million. Of this, $30 to $40 million worth might be grown in the State, chiefly in the railbelt market area. In contrast, the retail value of commercial farm sales and home consumption is esti- mated at about $10 million in 1959. Alaska is therefore 8 percent self-sufficient in fana produced foodstuffs. Excluding resident military forces, and including fish and game in the feed base, the civilian population is 15 to 18 percent self-sustaining. The magnitude of farm sales in the railbelt area is shawn in Table 2. It is emphasized that these values are in terms of what the farmer realizes and do not reflect retail values. Agriculture will slowly expand through the efforts of individual rather than group planning. Market opportunities will not be fully exploited for a variety of reasons, most cogent of which is the lack of profit motive at the producer level. Sorne vertical integration, with decision making assumed at the retail leve11 may lead to more orderly marketing of vegetables and poultry. Producing units will slowly expand in size and volume as homestead holdings are consolidated. A realistic goal may be 25 percent self-sufficient Agriculture by 1975. No climatic or environmental limitations bar atainment of this goal, wbich is justified by all economie considerations. Among these is the need for reducing reliance on long sea or land supply lines, especially in view of Alaska's strategie importance to the continent as a whole. A major factor impeding the development of Alaska's food industry is the continuing agricultural revolution in the otber States. Fewer acres were cropped in 1955 tban in 1920. In that year the expansion of cropland abruptly halted, terminating an activity tbat bad begun with the founding of the Nation, and bad long been recognized as an integral socio-economic cbaracteristic of the United States. Since 1920 population bas climbed steadily upward, from 105 million to 165 million in 1955. In 1955 the per capita acreage of cropland reacll:d abw of 2.4 acres and the country was plagued with surpluses. Agricultural surpluses are still a major problem. Opening new farmlands even in insignificant acreages and at the end of long supply lines, runs counter to national trends, attitudes, policies and action programs. REFERENCES __ ...,_..,...,_. FARM PRODUCTION-ALASKA-1956, Alaska Agri. Expt. Station and Alaska Department of Agriculture, Palmer ---::--:~ FARM PRODUCTION-ALASKA-1957, Alaska Agri. Expt. Station and Alaska Department of Agriculture, Palmer FARM PRODUCTION-ALASKA-1958, Alaska Agri, Expt. Station ---=-_,...,.-and Alaska Department of Agriculture, Palmer --~~--~ AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS, 1958, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. c. Jorgenson, Harold, FARM LANDS, unpublisbed report. Bureau of Land Management, u. s. Department of the Interior, Washington, D. c., September 1954. Marschner, F. J., LAND USE AND ITS PATTERNS IN THE UNITED STATES, Agriculture Handbook No. 153, U. s. Department of Agriculture, Washington 25, D. C. April 1959. 2 Table 1. Agricultural land in Alaska's railbelt area, and estimated occupancy Kenai-----Ma tanus ka -Lower Peninsula Anchorage Valley (1) Susitna Tanana RAILBELT lowlands area lowlands Vallel Valley(2)TOTAL Estimated total area (6) 1,000 acres 9,000 319 2,526 1,2o8 14,516 27,569 Surveyed lands (3) 1,000 acres 339 33 480 216 558 1,626 Known Cultivable land (3) 1,000 acres 185 18 131 79 332 '745 Known uncultivable land (3) 1,000 acres 154 15 349 137 226 881 Estimated additional cultivable land (4) 1,000 acres 47 None (7) 27 19 113 206 Land cropped in 1958 acres 1,801 1,126 13,556 '75 4,294 20,852 Present and expected occupancy Full-time farms, 1959 number 10 5 115 2 23 l..ù Part-time farms 1 1959 number 25 35 120 5 68 Agricultural homesteads, 1959 (5) number 235 43 287 45 325 Number of farms by 1975 (6) number 60 None (7) 430 20 300 (1) Including the Chugiak, Little Susitna and wasilla areas. {2) Including Fairbanks vicinity, Chena River area, Big Delta-Salcha area, and Fairbanks-Nenana area (3) Acres covered by soil Conservation Service surveys as of 1956, confined to most readily accessible and the best farming lands. (4) Unpublished estimates of Bureau:of Land Management (1955) and Alaska Agricultural Bxperiment Station. (5) Occupants intend to farm but have not yet reported significant commercial sales. (6) From report of Alaska Soil Conservation Needs Committee, November 18, 1959, calculated on basis of lOO cropland acres per farm. (7) Farmland is expected to be diverted to urban uses. 155 253 935 810 .j::"' Table 2. -Volœne of commodities sold from railbelt farms, and on-farm value, byfarm areas for 1958 (From farm production statistics, Alaska Agricultural Experiment Station and Alaska Division of Agriculture). No commercial sales have yet been reported from the Susitna Valley Item Kenai Peninsula Anchorage Area Matanuska Valley Tanana Valley Railbelt Area 1956 1958 1956 1958 1956 1958 1956 1958 1956 1958 Milk 1,000 pounds 403 200 366 124 11,050 12,198 98tl 1,422 12,803 13,944 1,000 dollars 56.6 20.0 3fJ.2 13.0 1,189.0 1,281.9 93.3 152.8 1,377.1 1,467.7 Eggs l,OCO dozen 46 66 89 104 91 75 16 66 242 311 1,000 dollars 46.5 65.7 89 88.7 86.5 63.6 15.9 62.5 237.9 280 .• 5 P!Drk, beef, pou1try 1,000 pounds 22 48 68 171 89 101 35 39 214 359 1,000 dollars 9.6 20.8 32.3 66.3 36.9) 40.7 14.1 20.0 92.9 147.8 Potatoes tons 142 203 1,445 1,625 2,757 3,117 3,013 2,6Tr 7,357 7, 622 1,000 dollars 17.1 20.2 173.3 156.2 330.8 253.8 370.6 236.2 891.8 6T.J.4 Cabbage, lettuce, 7 49 98 480 506 ce lery tons 20 39 379 339 55 1,000 dollars 1.4 5.0 8.3 12.1 92.9 91.5 11.1 12.8 113.7 121.4 Carrots, radishes tons 3 12 15 20 169 241 8 49 195 322 1,000 dollars 0.5 . ."5;1 2.5 9.2 28.7 60.1 1.8 12.6 33·5 87.0 Other* tons 4 7 27 18 107 31 2 27 140 83 1,000 dollars 2.0 3.7 11.9 12.0 34.8 14.3 1.0 18.2 49.7 48.2 TOTAL** 1 1 000 dollars 133.7 140.5 355-5 357-7 1,799.6 1,816.2 507.9 515.1 2,796.6 2,829.0 * Includes other vegetables, greenhouse vegetables, and nursery production. ** Totals do not reconcile because of rounding. ALASKA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA in cooperation with UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE September 11, 1959 Mr. Daryl L. Roberts, District Manager Alaska District Headquarters Bureau of Reclamation P. o. Box 2567 Juneau, Alaska Dear Mr. Roberts: Here is a brief summary of present farm irrigation: Matanuska 'l'a nana Kenai Valley Vall!:l Peninsula Number of systems in 1959 13 5 l Number of acres covered 270 80 8 Acre-inches applied 4 5 2 Total 19 358 4 Home owners and gardeners in Anchorage, Palmer and Fairbanks are using considerable water on lawns and gardens. Estimated acreages watered are 380, 14 and 195, respectively. Use rates appear to be around 8 inches total during the entire gardening season, judging from Palmer's experience. About 2 percent of Alaska's cleared farm acres were irri- gated in 1959. We estimate that 40 percent of all cleared acres (or 6,800) might be economically irrigated. We also estimate that the current market for local foodstuffs justify 4o,ooo cleared now, and perhaps 80,000 cleared acres in 1975. If Alaska's population grows as many people expect, in 4o years there will be. a minimum of 150,000 cleared acres needed. Of these perhaps, 40,000 might be profitably irrigated. Use rates, judging by present experience, will be between 5 and 6 acre-inches. These are academie figures. Development will actually depend on the interaction of many complex factors. Sincerely yours, /s/ Allan H. Mick ALLAN H. MICK Director 5