Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
APA333
,'" -">. ,::. -_____ ,_._...,..,_;,~ '.· ·, ., ·~ ' ,, 1 ~ 'I ~ I ~ I ·I . ·J., ~~ ~~' . ~; i' ~- ~~ . IJ '[ t~ ,; [}{J&OO(g£ o §00&®©@ Susitrta Joint Venture Document Number 333 Please Return To DOCUMENT CONTROL --· -- SUSIT. NA HYDROELEC. TFf.IC PROJECT . ·-. Prepared by: T.ASK 6 iASK 6 1981 UPPER LJMIT CAPITAL COST ESTJMATE __ L ____ -ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY _____ [ I 1 1 tl ~~ I I 'I I I I I I I I; I 11 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT TASK 6 1981 UPPER LIMIT CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE ACRES AMERICAN INCORPORATED 1000 Liberty Bank Building Main at Court Buffalo, New York i4202 Telephone: (716) 853-7525 I ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT 1981 UPPER LIMIT CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES••••tt•••••••"••••••••••••••O•••••••••••o•••••••••••• ii LIST OF FIGURES .................................... o • o • • • • • • • • • • • • • iii LIST OF PLATES ......•... iit ••• e I.................................... iv 1 -INTRODUCTION 1.1 -Study Obje.ctive......................................... 1-1 1.2-Report Contents......................................... 1-1 2 -SUMMARY 2~ 1 -Watana/Devi1 Canyon Cost Estimates...................... 2-1 2.2-Trans~ission Line Cost Estimates........................ 2-1 2.3 -Conclusions .......... '0...,................................. 2-2 3 -WATANA/DEVIL CANYON PROJECT COST ESTIMATES 3.1 -Wutana Project.......................................... 3~1 3.2-Devil Canyon Project .••....•.•... ~······· .. ·········~···* 3-3 4 -TRANSMISSION LINE COST ESTIMATES 4.1-Description of System~··· .. ··········~···.,~··''"~~~~Z';f·~~ 4-1 4.,.2-Cost Estimate Summary .... ~·············•"f"•·····~~!••:., 4 ... j ' 5-1 s· -CONCLUS I Oi~S ••• "' ••••••••••• ~ ! ~ , ~ t t!l ..e ~ ~ = ; -i .: ...... .o ••• ~ ..... ~ ...... ~ " • APPENDIX A i ~ ~ I ~ N I I ~ I 'I ~ I I LIST OF TABLES 2.1 2.2 3.1 3.2 4.1 4.2 Watana Project -Summary Cost Estimate Devil Canyon Project -Summary Cost Estimate Upper Limit Cost Estimate, May 1981 -Watana Rockfi11 Dam (Crest E1. 2225) Upper Limit Cost Estimate, May 1981 -D~vil Canyon Thin Arch Dam (Crest El. 1460) Transmission Line Distances Transmission Line Cost Estimates ii ~ I I ~; g I I - ! ~ I !I I I I I I LIST OF FIGURES 4.1 Transmission Line Schematic -Susitna Basin Development Option iii I I , __ ~ I ~ I ·~ I g I ~ ie ~ !I I m!~ l};,l ~ LIST OF PLATES 1 2 3 ~~atana Scheme 1 Devil Canyon Scheme 1 -Plan and Sections Devil Canyon Scheme 1 -Sections iv I 1 -INTRODUCTION 1.1 -Study Objective As part of Task 6 (Design Development) and T~sk 9 (Construction Cost Estimates and Schedules) studies for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project, Acres American Incorporated is to provide capital cost estimates for the chosen project developments. These tasks are defined in the Acres American Incorporated Plan of Study (POS) dated February 1980 and in the subsequent POS revision dated September 1980. In line with these requirements, Acres prepared initial cost estimates based upon preliminary layouts for the chosen Devil Canyon and Watana sites. In addition, Acres with the reference to R.W. Retherford Associates (IECo) experience prepared initial transmission line cost estimates as part of Task 8 Transmission Studies. Subsequentiy, in February 1981, Acres was requested by the Alaska Power Author- ity (APA) to provide an update of the estimates to 1981 costs. In addition, Acres was requested by APA to provide a conservative 11 not to be exceeded 11 esti- mate. Such an estimate was intended to provide a reasonable upper limit capital cost estimate that could be used for compa~ative and planning purposes. The results of these studies are contained in this report. 1.2 -Report Contents The report is structured into four sections. Section 2 is a summary of the work undertaken and the results obtained. Section 3 describes the assumptions made in obtaining a conservative upper limit on the Devil Canyon and Watana cost estimates and pro vi des .a 1 i sting of i tern costs based upon structure type. Section 4 provides the details for the transmission line updates and outlines the assumed line routing and sizes. Finally, Section 5 contains the study conclusions. Appendix A cont~ins a detailed summary of the upper limit estimate and a listing of special assumptions for each site. 1-1 - I . " I .. --~ m . . · Jl 2 -SUMMARY This section summarizes the work undertaken in the preparation of the ul981 Upper Limit Capital Cost Estimate" and the results obtained. 2.1 -~atana/Devil Canyon Cost Estimates Similar procedures were followed in developing the upper limit estimates for both the Watana and Devi 1 Canyon sites. In each case, an estimate was made for a "base case" general arrangement drawing that reflected current (February 1981) design considerations. These estimates were produced through an i tem-by-i tE~m review of each major element of the project. Item quantities were derived from the drawings under the direction of an experienced construction cost estimator . A conservative approach was used in determining quantities so as to account for the numerous uncertainties that still exist regarding site conditions and design criteria. Detailed consideration was given to determining actual production rates and, therefore, unit costs for the major elements. As an example, repre- sentative crew sizes and equipment needs were determined for the major tunneling works. Present Alaskan wage and equipment rates were then applied, and a unit rate was produced. Items of lesser importance were taken as lump sum items. Camp requirements and costs were determined by applying the manpower needs for the various work items to an approximate construction schedule. This resulted in an estimate of total mar.power requirements, as well as of peak camp size. An upper limit estimate was then determined for each site by expanding the "base case" estimate to include items about which there was some degree of uncertainty as to ultimate feasibility. A reasonable "upper case 11 general arrangement and esttmate was obtained. As an example, the dam slopes at Watana were flattened to ref 1 ect an extreme 1 y conservative seismic design. The major design adjust- ments made are listed in Section 4. In line with the above methodology, a capital cost estimate of $3,069,889,000 (Table 2.1) was developed for the Watana rockfill dam scheme and a capital cost estimate of $1,519,054,000 (Table 2.2) was developed for the Devil Canyon thin arch scheme. These costs were reviewed during May 1981 and reflect a revised upper limit estimate of the original March 1981 figures. These adjustments were made to include more current information and to appropriately consider camp and accommodation costs. The original upper limit costs for March 1981 were $2,963,517,000 (Watana) and $1,419,829,000 (Devil Canyon). 2.2-Transmission Line.Cost Estimates Transmission line cost estimates were updated to 1981 dollars and to reflect the developm~nt of the Susitna Basin with generating facilities at Watana and Devil Canyon. 2-1 I • I ~ ,~ I t~<~ ·m m1 • . .-...... I ' I I UR ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ These estimates were based upon the presently proposed levels of generating capacity at the various sites. They were reconciled with the R.W. Retherford Associates (IECo) estimate of 1979 and provide for a contingency of 20 percent and an engineering, construction management, and owner's fees allowance of 12.5 percent. These factors are in line with other similarly sized projects and are consistent with the line estimates as developed by Commonwealth Associates in January 1981. The total costs developed for the Susitna development are about $522 million . 2.3 -Conclusions The total upper limit capital cost for the Susitna Basin development in June 1981 dollars is therefore estimated as follows: Watana •.•.•...•...•..•..•..•.• $3,070 million Devil Canyon ..•.••.•.••..••.•. $1,519 million Transmission •.•....•...•....•• L_S22 million TOTAL ...•....•...•..•.•.•....• $5,111 million Summary cost estimates are presented in Tables 2.1 and 2.2. 2-2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II l II I I I I I ·.~ TABLE 2.1 WATANA PROJECT -SUMMARY COST ESTIMATE Land Acquisition Reservoir Cleaning Main Dam Diversion & Cofferdams Penstocks Power Intakes Powerhouse and Associated Items Service Spillway Tailrace Saddle Dam Switchyard Miscellaneous Structures & Equipment Access Road/Airstrip Support and Camp SUBTOTAL Contingency Engineering Owner Costs Administration TOTAL $000 $ 35,000 15,000 1,199,824 101.967 13;614 57' 154 179,539 195,440 12,198 45.538 7;018 8,ooo 97,700 306,000 $2,273,992 $ 454,793 34"1,0!19 $3,069,889 ·,1 I t ! ,. ·. lj Bl I .... , :! TABLE 2.2 DEVIL CANYON PROJECT -SUMMARY COST ESTIMATE land Acquisition Reservoir Cleaning Main Dam Diversion & Cofferdams Penstocks Power Intakes Powerhouse and Associated Items Secondary Powerhouse Service Spillway ~mergency Spill~ay Tailrace Saddle Dam Switch yard Miscellaneous Structures & Equipment Access Roads/Rail Spur Support and Camp SUBTOTAL Contingency Engineering, Owner Costs Administration TOTAL - $000 $ 21,000 10,000 458,178 30,299 11,939 28,386 153,911 30,000 81,810 33,455 51,053 15,976 6,718 9,000 27 ,ooo 156,500 $1 '125,225 $ 225,045 168,784 $r,519' 054" I J j I I I I I I I I I I I II . '1 3 -WATANA/DEVIL CANYON PROJECT COST ESTIMATES As noted in Section 2, an extremely conservative approach was taken in determin- ing 11 uppet"' limit 11 costs. In effect, an estimate was developed for the 11 worst 11 case based upon presently available data. It is expected that as additional data becomes available and site and structure arrangements are optimized under the various Task 6 Subtasks the project costs will be reduced from the upper limit estimates. In 1 i ne with this methode logy, conservative assumptions have been made for each site in regard to the following aspects: a) site conditions, b) project design assumptions, c) project layouts and support facilities, and d) unit and lump sum costs. These are discussed in the following paragraphs. 3.1 -Watana Project Plate 1 shows the project general arrangement and profi 1 es upon w1'1i ch this cost estimate has been based. The basis of this estimate is as follows: a) Site Conditions In view of the level of established data regarding the geology of the site, assumptions have been made as to the condition and depth of bedrock. In line with information derived from boreholes and seismic lines, upwards of 20 feet of overburden on the embankments and 70 feet of alluvium in the riverbed have been conservatively estimated. The rock has been assumed to be highly weathered to a depth of 20 feet but at greater depths to be cap- able of supporting underground excavations for the powerhouse and water pas- sages with the provision of heavy support systems. The project has been kept downstream of the severe shear zone, the 11 Fins,11 at the expense of in- cluding the less severe shear zone, the 11 Fingerbuster 11 • The existence of a r~lict-channel on the right bank upstream of the dam, with the possibility of its overlying pervious materials, has also been recognized. Finally, it has been assumed that the alluvial material within the riverbed will be un- suitable for supporting any portion of the main dam and, its complete exca- vation will be required. b) Project Design Assumptions The main dam is intended to withstand dynamic loading based on the maximum credible earthquake, currently estimated as giving a peak ground accelera- tion of O.Sg. The cofferdams are constructed outside the main dam to elimi- nate any uncertainty in the foundation materials and the main dam slopes are flattened to approxirnite those of the Oroville dam which has been checked to 3-1 '· l l I l ·J ' ~ ~ lJ lj I i.! B ~1 e ;• " Li [B rJy .. il tl ;J m{ ~> ~ _i; rnn i"''' ~~ .. i . ·J ~l, ~~ ' ' ':lf1 1!!' PI i!l.j L~ r':jr I Ill'! L:l ~\ ! r 'I ':....:J fu ~ 1 ~d tt1' ' ' ~· t• , r ·t::;:;~ withstand severe ground acceleration. The construction diversion is designed to pass the route~ 1:50 year flood. The double stilling basin spillway is designed to pass the probable maximum flood ir~ order to avoid surcharge of the stilling basins beyond their desig.1 discharge which could wash out the structures. c) Project Layout and Support Facilities The large rock-fill dam is located on the same alignment as proposed t·y the Corps of Engineers. A crest width of 80 feet has been adopted, and U?Stream and downstream slopes of the rock shell are 1:2.75 and 1:2 respectively. The area under the dam has been shown to be completely excavated to sound bedrock, with the area under the impervious core being extended a furthet 20 feet into the sound rock. The rockfill shell of the dam consists of 50 per- cent blasted rock and 50 percent gravel from the upstream riverbed and is placed and compacted in two foot layers. An extensive network of galleries and shafts for grouting and drainage has been included. Rockfill cofferdams are placed outside the main dam, founded on the alluvium, with cutoff tren- ches to bedrock. Allowances have been made for the location of a saddle dam in a low area beyond the right abutment. Curtain grouting and a cutoff trench have also been provided for on the right bank in the area of the bur- ; ed channe 1. Twin concrete lined diversion tunnels, which are designed to pass the 50- year flood during construction, extend well downstream of the main dam on the right bank. A low level inlet for emergency releases is located above the diversion tunnel downstream of the location of the final concrete plug. The single spillway, which is designed to pass the PMF, is located on the right bank and consists of the control structure, a concrete lined chute, and intermediate and terminal stilling basins. The chute crosses the area of the 11 Fingerbuster 11 , and provision has been made for excavating poor qual- ity material ·in the shear zone area and replacing it with dental concrete. Heavy rock bolting and rock anchors have been assumed to be required along the complete length of the spillway. The power facilities are located on the left bank. The deep intake struc- ture serves four lined tunnel penstocks which lead to an underground four- unit 800MW powerhouse. Twin concrete lined tailrace tunnels lead from the powerhouse and cross the 11 Fingerbuster,11 where additional support has been provided. I I I I I I I I I Access to the site is via a road from the Denali Highway to the northeast and by a road from the Anchorage-Fairbanks Highway to the west. An airstrip I is also provided for at the site, together with a 50.--unit permanent opera ... · _ tion community. d) Costs J Unit costs have been developed for the major items based on a simplified 1 contractor's type estimate. Labor rates in Alaska have been determined from · publications and other projects, and a tentative construction plant has been determined. Construction access roads have been considered together with haul distances for dam fill. For the purposes of the upper limit estimate I 3-2 I ~I ~ .~- ~ 1 'I ~ &\ ~ e 'li HI ~ n~ 'L;;.i/ :J rfti '·' .:.~[: J u~ ,, . ' r ~! < J ~n '· ' ~:1 i ~:1 ' ~p ~['l lL...:i &1: ~ }Vl 1 In : . I -:J jf ~~ ' ~~ l J 61i ~i'' ! I 0:J l l I !:.' '. 'l ~ it has been assumed that all excavated rock will ~e wasted and, therefore, all necessary fill required wiil have to be excavated. Electrical and me~ chanical equipment costs have been estimated from costs for equipment and its installation on similar projects. Table 3.1 is an itemized list of the upper list cost developed under this section. It shows a total capital cost of $3,069,889,000 which includes a 20 percent contingency and a 12.5 percent factor for engineering, construc- tion management, and owner's cost. The estimate is based upon a ten-year construction schedule from the time of first road access to the site. · It is estimated that staging the instaliation of the generator units adds about $30 milli01i to the total capital costs as follows: 400MW with initial construction .••.••••• $2j940 million 400MW approximately 3 years later ....... 160 800MW tot a 1 ............................. $"3;IOO million 3.2-Devil Canyon Project Plates 2 and 3 show the project general arrangement and profiles on which this cost estimate has been based. The basis of the estimate is as follows: a) Site Conditions Overburden on the right bank has generally been accepted as 20 feet deep. On the left bank overburden has been assumed as up to 70 feet in depth, and approximately 35 feet of alluvium has been assumed in the riverbed. The rock is intensely weathered to a depth of 20 feet, but is presumed to be able to support underground structures at depth with heavy support. b) .Efoject Design Assumptions The main dam is assumea -~o be capable of supporting dynamic loading based upon a maximum credible earthquake giving a peak seismic ground acceleration of 0.5g. The diversion scheme is designed to pass the routed 1:50 year flood during construction. The right bank and central orifice spillways are designed to pass the design flood corresponding to the routed 1:10,000 year flood with additional flows corresponding to the probable maximum flood dis- charged through a fuse plug on the left bank. c) Project Layout and Support Facilities The concrete thin arch dam is located within the upper and narrowest portion of De vi 1 Canyon. ihe hel· ght or·-t'·h" d ---,. s 650 feet abo"e a 50' th1' c· · k --·---... I;; am .. . . . .Y.. .··. . con crete plug. The developed crest l~ngth is 1,230 feet, and' the base width at the crown is 90 feet. The dam rests on a concrete plug at the center of the valley and terminates in concrete thrust blocks high in the abutments. All foundations beneath the plug, dam and thrust blocks are excavated deep into sound bedrock and i·~~"m a smooth profile. Shafts and galleries for grouting and drainage have b. ?o provided beneath the dam. A rockfill saddle dam with 3-3 impervious fill core ties into the left bank thrust block, and a slurry trench cutoff trench is provided to bedrock. Twin concrete lined diversion tunnels are located within the rock of the left abutment, and upstream and downstream rockfill cofferdams are provided with slurry trench cutoffs to bedrock. The main service spillway is located on the right bank and consists of a control structure, concrete lined chute, and a stilling basin located at river level. Heavy rock bolting and rock anchors have been provided along the length of the spillway. Complementing the main spillway are f0ur sub- merged orifice auxiliary spillways within the upper section of the dam. These discharge into a downstr~eam concrete lined plunge pool. On the left bank a fuse plug is located within a discharge channel excavated in the rock and will pass high flows in excess of the design flood. The power facilities are located on the right bank and are similar in con- cept to Watana except that the powerhouse houses four-150MW units and the transformer gallery is on the upstream side of the powerhouse.. The single tailrace tunnel extends 1-1/2 miles downstream to Portage Creek in order to take advantage of the fall in the level of the river over the length of Devil Canyon. A secondary power plant (50MW) is included to take advantage of the required flow in the river section between the dam site and the tail- race outlet near Portage Creek. Access to the site is via a road connecting with the Gold Creek-Watana High- way proposed under the Watana scheme. In addition, a rail spur is provided from the existing rail line at Gold Creek to the Devil Canyon site. d) Costs Unit costs !'lave been developed for major items in the same manner as for Watana. Aggregates for the dam concrete have been considered to come from the upstream Cheechako terraces. Table 3.2 shows a total capital cost of $1,519:~054,000. The estimate is based upon a seven-year construction sche- dule from the time of first road access to t~e site. ') I I "I I I I I 1- _l I I •• I I I -- .1 ,, I . I ['~--= t~:,~: r"~ r;rr-~ ~·-~ .l~---~ ~:~ ·~ ;·~ ~~ -~ ·-~ :---,,,. <~ ~ -~~ .. ..-. j' -l .. "·' \.:.. -.~ I '"' ~' ... _~:,~~ .-'""' Table 3.1. UPPER LIMIT COST ESTIMATE, MAY 1981 WATANA ROCKFILL DAM (Crest £1. 2225) -UNIT .sooo $000 $000 HEM -DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE $ TOTAL 1TEH TOTAl FINAL TOTAL LAND Land Acquisition LS 35,000,000 35 1 ooo 35,000 RESERVOIR Reservoir Clearing LS 1.5,000,000 15.000 15,000 MAIN DAM Excavate Rock 5,263,000 cy 20 105,260 Excavate Overburden a, 121 ,ooo cy 8 64,968 Excavate Grout Gallery -Horizontal 12,000 cy as 1,020 Excavate Grout Gallery -Vertical 2,200 cy 100 220 Surface Preparation 680,500 sy 15 10,207 Rockfill/Gravelfill 57,448,000 cy 13.50 775,548 Coarse filter 1,214,000 cy 14 16,996 fine filter 5,530,000 cy 8 44,240 Semi-Pervious Core 3,363,000 cy 7 23,541 Impervious Core 8,961,000 cy 9 80,649 Concrete Grout Gallery -Horizontal 15,340 cy 240 3,681 Concrete Grout Gallery -Vertical 265 cy 450 119 Consolidation Grouting 474,000 LF 60 28,440 Grouting from Surface 93,000 lf 50 4,650 Grouting from Adits 176,000 lf 60 10,560 Relief Drains LS 3,000,000 3,ooo RockbGlts Grout Gallery 200 ton 2,500 500 Support Steel-Grout Gallery 350 ton 3,500 1,225 low Level Release LS 25,000,000 25,000 1,199,824 DIVERSION/ Excavate Rock Portal 278,000 cy 14 3,892 COFFERDAMS Excavate Overburden Portal 92,000 cy 5 460 Excavate Tunnels 556,000 cy 45 25,020 Concrete Liner 100,000 cy 240 24,000 Concrete Portals 4,000 cy 250 1,000 Concrete Plugs zo,ooo .cy 480 9,600 Upstream Cofferdam 3,140,000 cy 4 12,560 Dm1nst:.r.~am Cofferdan 125 ,ooo cy 7 875 Dewatering lS 3,500,000 3,500 Cutoff LS 6,500,000 6,500 Reinforcing Steel Por.tal 80 ton z,ooo 160 Rockbolts Tunn~ls 1,550 ton 2,500 3,87-5 Rockbolts Portals 60 ton 2,500 150 Support Steel 2,050 ton 3,500 7 '175 Gates, Etc. LS 3,200,000 >.zoo 101,967 ~-...... , .;;\;:_ "~"·~.~(': ·•"1'))'.;.·~-?f._~,.>-~·,. ·' '· .<.,:,:. .• ~·;_ · .k.;:--cn..,-,;. '1(-..:;,,7._c"!"'; .. ':<";..._-_..r~~~·:...:·:<iu~. ·-----·- \.~c'! t~ ~ \ .. ~~ ,~::::~ :-~~~ ,~_.;,: ~~ r~ •'~ r~ .1i.4ii ~I::I:I. ....... ~ .JIIIIIi ..-...( .. -...l ·~~~ -..::: e l.~~-"~:;~ "-{! ·"'-'-'" ·~ .. " f"-':::: f~l;! r:~~ :~~ fl~~ L~":;~ ~-~ i . t&-o.i-1 ·~ .... ~ c........,. ·~~ ~~ .J:III . .-.Jal!l( J4llllllf ~.....r ---' !1-" ~---. \'•t;;;..c:::~ ,_J,-:.,~ ; """::::i ~ Table 3.1 (Continued) UNIT $000 -woo $000') I TOt DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE $ TOTAL ITEM TOTAL fiNAL TOTAL:..- SERVICE. SP1l'.WAY Excava.l:c-Rock 3,222,000 cy 16 51,552 Excavate Overburden 1,037,000 cy 6 6,222 Concrete Sloping Slab 46,300 cy 180 8,334 Concrete Rollways/Weirs 206,000 cy 200 41,200 Concrete Keys 74,000 cy 260 19,240 Concrete Walls 70,000 cy 245 17,150 Conctete Piers 14,000 cy 280 3,920 Concrete Bridge Deck 925 cy 500 462 Reinforcing Steel 10,900 ton 2,000 21,800 Rockbolts 1,120 ton 2,500 2~800 Gates, Etc. LS 7,260~000 7,260 Dental Concrete LS 4,500,000 4,500 Gt·outing LS 2,000,000 2,000 Wintedzation l.S 9,000,000 9 ,oog_ 195,1.J40 TAilRACE Excavate Rock Outlet 37,000 cy 14 518 Excavate Overburden Outlet 46,000 cy 5 230 Excavate Tunnels 89,000 c~~ • 45 4,005 Concrete Base Slab Outlet 2,200 cy 220 484 Concrete Walls Outlet 700 cy 300 210 Concrete line Tunnels 13,600 cy 260 3,536 Reinforcing Steel 100 ton 2,000 200 Rockbolts 450 ton 2,500 1 '125 Support Steel 540 ton 3,500 12890 12,198 SADDLE DAM Surface P·reparation 16 ~00 sy 10 166 Rock fill 12o:ooo cy 12 1,440 FilteL"S 18,000 cy 15 270 Impervious Material 81,000 cy 10 810 Excavate Overburden 140,000 cy 6 840 Sluny Trench 77,800 sy 540 421012 45,538 SWITCHVARD Excavate Switchyard Overburden 146,000 cy 4 584 Fill 146,000 cy 4 584 Surface Preparation 35,000 sy 10 350 Eleetrical LS 4,000,000 4,000 Civil Works lS 1,500,000 11500 7,018 >~rt::.: ''F'~ ·~-"~1 ~~t::-, ' t,t:= '-~i ~~~~~ r=-· la .. I~~ .J~ .. em -~ . JJ!III .J!!!!R ,,.. ...... _..._. •'ll .• ·~-•• "''"~"' i.~:"'~~ Table 3.1 (Continued) ON If $000 $000 f< $000 ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE $ TOTAL ITEM TOTAL FINAL TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS Recreation Facilities LS 1,000,000 1,000 StRUCTURES & Buildings and Grounds LS 4,000,000 4,000 EQUIPMENT Permanent Operating Equipment LS 3,000,000 3r000 8,000 ACCESS ROAD/ Permanent Access Road 114 miles 600,000 68,400 AIR STRIP Permanent Bridges LS 20,000$000 20,000 Construction Access Site 15 miles 220,000 3,300 Airstrip LS 6,000,000 6!000 97,700 SUBTOTAL 1,967,992 SUPPORT AND CAMP Construction Power LS 53,000,000 53,000 Trailer Camp 50 units 70,000 3,500 Permanent Housing 50 units 150,000 7,500 Clinic/School 1 units 1,000,000 1,000 Camp Cost 3,300 units 20,000 66,000 Catering/Support 5.0 million 35 175,000 mandays 306,000 SUBTOTAL 2,273,992 20% CONTINGENCY 454,798 12.5% ENGINEERING, OWNER COSTS, ADMINISTRATION -~91,099 TOTAL PROJECT COST 3,069,882_ ---------------~ -I .... --.ii ...---1 ,_.J LF=:::: [~~ 'IL --~ . .., ~~ ITEM LANO RESERVOIR MAIN DAM DIVERSION ·1 COffERDAMS .. ~~ ;, tr~ : lt7"!..-'l ~ .. ~~~s ~ ~.;~·;-:~~ ~ .f~·~-;~ j~,J.4 Table 3.2 -UPPER LIMIT COST ESTIMATE, MAY 1981 DEVIL CANYON THIN ARCH (Crestr El.. 1460) UNIT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE $ land Acquisition LS 21,000,000 Reservoir Clearing LS 10,000,000 Excavate Rock Dam & Thrust Blocks 271,000 cy 20 Excavate Overburden Dam & Thrust Block 281,000 cy 10 Excavate Rock -Plunge Pool 80,000 cy 24 Excavate Overburden -Plunge Pool 122,000 cy 6 Excavate Grout Gallery-Horizontal 8,400 cy 85 Excavate Grout Gallery -Vertical 1,500 cy 100 Surface Preparation 19,000 sy 15 Concrete Arch Plug 39,200 cy 200 Concrete Dam 1,409,400 cy 200 Concrete Thrust Blocks 115,000 cy 200 Concrete Grout Gallery -Horizontal 10,740 cy 240 Concrete Grout Gallery -Vertical 200 cy 450 Reinforcing Steel 5,320 ton 2,000 Reinforcing Steel P~ug 330 ton 2,000 Consolidation Grouting 650,000 lf 60 Grouting from Surface 150,000 Lf 50 Grouting from Adits 270,000 lf 60 Rr~lief Drains LS 4,000,000 Rockbolts Grout Gallery 140 ton 2,500 Support Steel Grout Gallery 500 ton 3,500 Concrete lining -Plunge Pool 57,000 cy 180 Reregulation Capability LS 20,000,000 Low level Release LS 10,000,000 Winterization lS 11}, 40 't' 000 Excavate Rock Portal 280,000 cy 14 Excavate Overburden Portal 92,000 cy 5 Excavate Tunnels 106,000 cy 45 Concrete Liner 19,600 cy 240 Concrete Port.als 4,000 cy 250 Concrete Plugs 10,854 cy 480 Cofferdams 92,000 cy 7 Oe\'/ater ing LS 3,500,000 Reinforcing Steel Portal 40 ton 2,000 Rockbolts Tunnels 365 ton 2,500 Rockbolts Portals 60 ton 2,500 Support Steel 500 ton 3,500 Gates, Etc. LS 3,200,000 . .of .fffJI J::li .. JII!I Jl!llll $000 $000 $000 TOTAL ITEM TOTAL fiNAL TOTAL 219000 21,000 10,000 10,000 5,420 2, 8'10 1,920 732 714 150 285 7,840 281,880 23,000 2,577 90 10,640 660 39,000 7,500 16,200 4,000 350 1,750 10,260 20,000 10,000 10~400 458,178 3,920 460 4,770 4,704 1,000 5,209 644 3,500 80 912 150 1,750 3,200 30,299 ~-··. c<iV~1:~!'"*'~1'-·~~p-,."0'\?•"·~•·': o·."'-~1'~,:'-,.• 'l•:,".l~;<~;.'!;;;,;~~·~~~~·.•~~fi:llf4J94ftt&!U!Ki -5 WT ---·-...... J.llll •r:· ':· l ~' ' :" t »' ' .. I '· ! - ~-';:'~ A:_' ... ~.' ::;:~ ~f,.,. Table 3.Z (Continued) : r;_: :~-.: ~ ·~·~ ,!;·~· .:::..; ["""""""' :f~".*.-J ..... ~~ r-J:,..co:~j ~ ~ L~:J .. ~··= ~ . . , ... a,.;,iliftilllL •• ~~ .... ,.~ •••••... ~ . -~ U~IT-~~---~ $000~-----~$00U ----~~--liOOO ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE $ TOTAL ITEM TOTAL fiNAL T~ PENSTOCKS POWER INTAKES POWERHOUSE ASSOCIATED 1 TH1S - - Excavate Tunnels Concrete Line Rockbolts Steel line Excavate Rock Excavate Overburden Concrete Base Slab Concrete Structures Reinfrorcing Steel Rockbolts Gates, Etc. £xcavate Powerhouse Vault Excavate Draft Tube Excavate Transfot·mer Gallery Excavate Rock Tunnel Portal Excavate Overburden Tunnel Portal Excavate Access Shaft Excavate Cable & Transformer Shafts Excavate Access Tunnel Concrete Substructure ~owerhouse Concrete Superstructure Powerhouse Concrete D~aft Tube Concrete Transformer Gallery Concrete line Access Shaft C'oncrete line Cable Shaft Concrete line Access Tunnel Conc1·ete Access Tunnel Portal Concrete Transformer Shaft Support Steel Access Tunnel Rockbolts Powerhouse/Draft lube Rockbolts Access Shaft Rockbolts Cable Shaft Rockbolts Access Tunnel Rockbolts Access Tunnel Portal Reinforcing Steel Powerhouse Reinforcing Steel Transformer Gallery Reinforcing Steel Draft Tube Turbines and Valves Cranes Gene1·ators 201,000 21 ,ooo 38,000 7,000 22,000 7,300 6,100 20,000 41 ,ooo 21,000 12,400 10,000 600 800 3,700 2,000 4,000 400 275 65 20 130 8 3,660 600 740 Mechanical/Electrical Equipment Auxilia1·y t~echanical/Electrical Equipment Draft Tube Gates Architectural Powerhouse Auxiliary Generators ------- cy 40 8,040 cy 45 945 cy 45 1, 710 cy 14 98 cy 5 110 cy 65 474 cy 65 397 cy 40 800 cy 300 12,300 cy )60 7,560 cy 285 3,534 cy 300 3,000 cy 450 270 cy 450 360 cy 240 888 cy 300 600 cy 450 1,800 ton 3,500 1,400 ton 2,500 687 ton 2,500 163 ton 2,500 50 ton 2,500 325 ton 2,500 20 ton 2,000 7,320 ton 2,000 1,200 ton 2,000 1,480 LS 26,950,000 26,950 LS 2,600,000 2,600 LS 31 ,ooo,ooo 31 ,ooo LS 20,780,000 20,780 LS 12,000,000 12,000 LS 550,000 550 LS 1,500,000 1,500 LS J,ooo,ooo 3 1000 ---~ .,_ .... l~-.;;: nr~~~ fl0, _;:;., ~~------~If:~ -r;~-"!;;~ t-~ ~~~ -~ ~ ~ -~ U!'!fl -~ 11!!11 Jlllf Jliilll t_. ~ ·~-~~~,;J • _2:-'!"J ,a .. ~ ' ~"!'llit l -'•-"',. ·:: ! .-""'"''~ ------~ - fir:=~·::; tit~ ho::.:M i~ c:::::;; ,~ ~ ~ ·~ ... ~ ~ ~.-.. .~ J.i,!'!l .f.!!'.~! ~ ~ .~ ~ -..i ............ Table 3.2 (Continued) UNIT $000 $000 $000 IT~M DES~RIP_T!OJ~ . -~-QUANTITY UNIT PRICE $ TOTAL ITEM TOTAL FINAL TOTAL SADDLE DAM SWITCHYARD MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES & EQUIPMENT ACCESS ROADS/ RAIL SPUR SUBTOTAL SUPPORT & CAMP SUBTOTAL 20~ CONTINGENCY Surface Preparation Excavate Overburden Rockfill filters Impervious Slurry Trench Excavate Overburden fill Surface Preparation Electrical Equipment Civil Works Recreation facilities Buildings and Grounds Permanent Operating Equipment Permanent Bridges Permanent Roads Construction Access Roads Rail Spur Construction Power Camp Cost Catering/Support .. 12.5% ENGINEERING, OWNER COSTS, ADMINISTRATION TOTAL 50,000 170,000 561,000 81,000 294,000 6,100 146,000 146,000 35,000 2 15 10 2,300 2.3 sy cy cy cy cy sy cy cy sy LS LS LS LS LS each miles miles LS LS units million mandays 10 6 12 15 10 585 4 4 10 3,700,000 1,500,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 600,000 300,000 10,000,000 30,000,000 20,000 35 500 1,020 6,732 1,215 2,940 3,569 584 584 350 3,700 1,500 3,000 4,000 2,00£! 5,000 9,000 3,000 10,000 30,000 46,000 80,500 15,976 6,718 9,000 27,000 156,500 968,725 1,125,225 225,045 '168 '784 1 ,519,05{~ __________________ ._. ___ ....__. 1 l 1 ~1.1 I j I ~ \ , 4 -TRANSMISSION LINE COST ESTIMATES 4.1 -Description of System In line with the development of an upper limit capital cost estimate, the trans- mission line system was developed and casted as a separate item. Characteristics of the system are outlined as follows: Figure 4.1 illustrates the 345 kV transmission system with Watana and Devil Can- yon developments and Beluga thermal plant delivering power to Anchorage and Fairbanks. For purposes of this estimate it has been assumed that the electrical power from Watana and Devil Canyon is transmitted via three 345 kV lines to a switching station at Gold Creek. Two lines continue in each of the north and south dir- ections, with the ultimate load centers at Fairbanks and Anchorage, respective- ly. The Fairbanks' termination shows a transformer substation stepping down the voltage to 138 kV for subtransmission to the utilities. The two lines to Anchorage from Gold Creek have been sectionalized at Willow. This wi 11 improve the contingency performance of the system and facilitate the supply of a future load. Series compensation has been shown for the two line sections to Anchorage, which will allow the line to handle heavier loading at 345 kV. The station at Willow will allow subtransmission at 138 kV. Two termination points have been shown at Anchorage and designated as Anchorage I and II. The two substations have been arbitrarily shown as iocated 15 miles apart .. The switching stations are interconnected by a 345 kV line. The elec- trical power is stepped down at each substation to 138 kV for distribution to the utilities. The Beluga thermal station is connected to Anchorage II bus via two 345 kV lines. The connection at Anchorage II allows the Beluga power to be easily ab- sorbed into the system. Table 4.1 indicates the lengths of the various transmission lines necessary for the Susitna Basin option. 4.2 -Cost Estimate Summary The line cost estimates of $522,200,000, as shown in Table 4.2, were developed with reference to R.W. Retherford Associates• experience in Alaska. The line costs are based on a X-type tower. The cost figures de·;e loped are consistent with the Commonwealth Associates• January 1981 estimate for line costs. Table 4.2 indicates a total transmission line cost of about 525 million dollars. 4-1 I ~ I M n !J ~~ ,~ 'l J G j !B ' ~~ :·J ::i rn ·f· l , .. w TABLE 4.1. TRANSMISSION LINE DISTANCES '": ............. _ ....... SUSITNA BASIN DEVELOPMENT OPTION -Watana to Devil Canyon -Devil Canyon to Gold Greek -Gold Creek to Fairbanks -Gold Creek to Willow -Willow to Anchorage -Beluga to Anchorage -Anchorage I to Anchorage II THERMAL PLANT OPTION -Beluga to Anchorage I I -Anchorage I 1 to Anchorage I -Anchorage !I to Willow -Willow to F'airbe.nks Miles 27 13 176 77 65 50 15 50 15 65 253 ,. '1' ·,' (! l ill..J ·.('.· '' n: ,f ' f. . fl,.1i TABLE 4.2: TRANSMISSION LINE COST ESTIMATES SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC TRA~SMISSION COSTS (1981 $'s) Tctal Millions Millions (i) Watana {1993) c~nes $181.0 Substations and Series Compensation 82 .. 8 Var Generation 24.3 268.1 Contingency 57.6 Enginaering etc. (12.5~ -Engineering 5~, co~t 2.5~) 43.2 Land Acquisition 32.9 TOTAL $421.1r $421.8 (ii) Devil Can~on (2000) c~nes $ 3 .. 7 Substations and Series Compensation 25 .. 1 'lar Generation 5.9 )4 .. 1 Contingency 2~ 7o0 Engineering etc., -12.5~ 5.2 Land Acquisition $ 46.~ TOTAL $ 46.9 Susitna Transmission $468 .. 7 (iii) Beluga Coal (2008) c~nes $ 21.1 Substations and Series Compensation 13.9 Var·Generation 1.8 36.8 Contingency 2t= 7.4 Engineering etc. -12.5~ 5.5 Land Acquisition 3.8 TOTAL $ 53 .. 5 $ 53.5 Total Susitna and Beluga $522.2 NOTES: 1) Coats do not include switchyards at generating plants or dispatch center. 2) Engineering and other fees equal 12 • .5% of total line, substation, series compensation, var generation and contingency costs. 1 l 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I t[ II ' . ,-~~ ~·~""':" reo-· ~1'2~ ~ r'>c-·-, ~ (!'!'"":;:'~ --<'= ~-~ ~-:·~ ~"'?lilt ~ ~-~~ ~~ e:'"!'"',.. --W""'-"'~ < ' :500 MW BELUGA I , I -345 KV 50 150 ANCHORAGE li L,. _ __. WILLOW GOLD CREEK FAIRBANKS + f ~···~ I I E 65 I J36KV ~ . 345 i 15 r'h KV 138 KV '<Y i I ( 77 I ( I 176 I I !76 ~ ( 77 11-+-------------r---t ~~~ •. . j -t i I It-~ ANCHORAGE I 345 KV ...... e 0 -rJ G) -t~ c (YYl ::0 JT1 n·tn ~ . .JYYl !77t' (] ·- ~-· ---~-_,........---'"'"'::""" --... LEGEND -· LOAD GENERATION VAR GENERATION SERIES COMPENSATION SHUNT REACTION GENERATOR TRANSFORMER(S) STEPOOWN TRANSFORMER(S) WITH TERTIARY WINDING LINE LENGTH (MILES) 13 13 40 I _::t::::: 345 KV DEVIL CANYON 345 KV WATANA TRANSMISSION LINE SCHEMATIC SUSITNA BASIN DEVELOPMENT OPTION , · .... · "'.. .--~~~,.· <J;;""""~•-':~~,-;;-~ •u -·--·- ~j~tl .Jj ~~ 138 KV 5 -CONCLUSIONS A total cost of $5.11 billion dollars was developed as a reasonable upper limit capital cost estimate for the development of the Susitna Basin with major· dams at Watana and Devil Canyon. This cost is based upon information made available and for layouts as developed up to March 1981. It is expected that sufficient allowance has been made in dam volume quantities to permit optimization of the d&~ heights around the crest elevations as shown on the layouts. Further re- finement of the project estimate will be carried out under Task 9 studies as the project design develops under Task 6. 5-1 • f '' t 1.~ :J ., lr ~; ,,.~.! J', ; ./ ' '·1.· 1: ' . ~I APPENDIX A I l. . f ' . ' ~~ n: I! J; , r: l. ~~ L L L APPENDIX A TABLE 1 SPECIFIC ASSUMPTIONS UPPER LIMIT CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE WATANA ROCKFILL DAM Land Acquisition -taken as lump sum at $35,000,000; COE {1979) estimated 100,000 acres at $20,000,000. Reservoir Clearing -taken as lump sum at $15,000,000; COE (1979) estimated 5,100 acres at $4,300,000. Main Dam -- Dam volume based upon slopes of 1:2.75 (upstream) and 1:2 (downstream). -Shell assumed to be 50 percent quarried rock at $15/cy; 50 percent river gravel at $12/cy; average price $13.50/cy. Quarrying of rock estimated at $7/cy and hauling and placement at $8/cy; 60,000 cy/day production assumed based upon two, 10-hour shifts per day; two to three foot lifts assumed; haul distance averaged at about four miles. -Filters and cores estimated by similar procedure. -Grouting assumed to be through series of vertical and horizontal tunnels on either side. Grout curtain extended to 70 percent head with maximum depth of 300 feet. Horizontal galleries 6 feet by 10 feet, horseshoe shape with concrete invert and shotcrete lining with additional steel support of 6 feet on center ribs for 25 percent of tunnel length; rock bolts included for 25 · percent of tunnel length; vertical shafts 6 feet in diameter with one-half foot concrete and 25 percent rock bolting. -Low level release lump sum i~em (includes intake, gates, and tunnel into lower end of diversion tunnels). Diversion/Cofferdams -- -Two diversion tunnels, total length 13,000 feet, 35 foot inside diameter; fully lined with concrete one and one-half feet thick, steel support included for approximately 25 percent of length; rock bolts included for 25 percent of length. -Gates' lump sum estimated. -Cofferdams estimated with 2:1 slopes -upstream dam taken as 250 feet hign (crest elevation 1,650) and downstream as 50 feet high (crest elevation 1,450). -Dewatering for entire duration of job lump sum estimated. -Diversion tunnel plugs included to plug after use (upstream of any drawdown tunnel). -Cutoff trench assumed to be installed during installation of cofferdam from banks of river. t; 1: IJ J! ,. J 1: f " ' .. .1 - TABLE 1 (Cont 1 d) Penstocks -- ~ Four penstocks for total length of 4,180 feet with 18 foot inside diameter included; ful1 liner of two feet thick concrete assumed with fifty percent rock bolting; steel liners of three-fourths inch thickness and 150 feet in length included at powerhouse. Power Intakes -- -Twenty-five foot overburden excavation assumed. -Reinforcing steel assumed at 90 lb/cy throughout structure. -Rockbo1ting assumed throughout area. Powerhouse & Associ a ted Items -< .. Vault & Associated Structures -Excavation and concrete quantities based upon standard underground powerhouse. -Reinforcing steel bas~~ upon 90 lb/cy for secondary; 120 lb/cy for primary and structural concrete. -Rockbolting based upon standard powerhouse arrangement -generally 5 feet by 5 feet pattern on a 11 vert i ca 1 surfaces and ceilings except only 10 percent of powerhouse walls. Mechanical & Electrical Equipment -Total estimate based upon standard underground powerhouse arrangement and with reference to switchyard location. Access Tunnels & Shafts -Vertical shafts 50 percent rock bolted. -· Hori zonta 1 shafts and tunne 1 s 25 percent rock bolted and 25 percent stee 1 supported. Cable shafts 15 feet in diameter; 550 LF total length, one-half foot thick concrete liner. -Access shafts 25 feet in diameter, 600 LF total length, one-half foot thick concrete liner. -Access tunnel assumed 32 feet wide by 22.5 feet high, horseshoe shape, 25 percent rockbolted; 25 percent steel support; one foot thick liner for 50 percent tunnel length. Service Spillway -- -Twenty-five foot overburden assumed, remainder of excavation in rock. -Concrete reinforcing: 40 lb/cy rollways, weirs, walls; 80 lb/cy all other concrete. -Lump sum items for gates; dental concrete; grouting; winterization. -Rockbolts, 10 feet by 10 feet pattern \'lalls and slab. ~ Assumes concrete work can continue through winter with proper winterization. ,-~. ·,·~.~~ --·" i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l r 1 ' j TABLE 1 (Cant•d) Tailrace -- -Fully lined with one foot thick concrete. 4,900 LF total lengthe -Twenty -three f oat inside diameter. . -Twenty-five percent length supported by rockbolts; 25 percent length supported by steel. -Outlet portal tied to wal1s with rockbolts. -Rock and overburden quantities at portal are minimal. Saddle Dam.__ -Small saddle dam required near relicit channel to contain reservoir. -Approximately one and one-half mile· long by 100 feet deep bentonite slurry trench included as cutoff to relicit channel (with associated curtain). Switchyard -... -Yard assumed to be directly above powerhouse location. -Overburden excavation sufficient to level area. No rock excavation. -Electrical and civil work items taken as lump sum items. Miscellaneous Structures & Eg_uipment -- -Items taken as lump sums. Access Roads/Airstrip -Access road from Denali Highway and also from Park Highway assumed. -Two large permanent bridges also assumed; smaller bridges incorporated in per mile roadway _cgst~ -Airstrip of sufficient size to handle Hercules C-130 assumed; minimum navigation and control equipment required; runway of 6,300 feet by 150 feet assumed, with associated loading pad/parking area. Support & Camp -~ -Construction power based upon size of project~ -Fifty temporary higher quality housing units (trailers) assumed for senior staff. -Fifty single family homes and clinic/school assumed for senior staff and for permanent operations. -Single status camp for 3,300 workers assumed. -Five million mandays required for construction; based upon assumed schedule and associated labor requirements for each stl·ucture; 10 percent service personnel and 15 percent turnover, visitors and staff included in anticipated construction work force. - ' ··:J· I I.; I·~ ·' IJ .: ~· : ,, ' : i !1 !:. ~·; ' ~} ~ · . .. ,. .. ~ l ~~ i ~ ;' -1<..,:;,4 APPENDIX A TABLE 2 SPECIFIC ASSUMPTIONS UPPER LIMIT CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE DEVIL CANYON THIN ARCH DAM Land Acquisition -taken as lump sum at $21,000,000; COE (1979) estimated 14,000,000 acres for this item. Reservoir Clearing --taken as lump sum at $10,000,000; COE (1979) estimated 1,920 acres at $1,613,000. Main Dam -- -Concrete thin arch dam assumed with 10 percent additional volume concrete added to expected design quantities to negate any possible seismic problems. -Sound rock taken at elevation 1,350 for thrust blocks; overburden taken as 25 feet deep; an wdditional 40 feet of unsound rock under dam also assumed. -Dam sits on concrete plug of SO foot depth. -Reinforcing steel in dam taken as 7 lb/cy. -Grout·i ng assumed to be through series of verti ca 1 and horizonta 1 tunne 1 s on either side of dam; tunnel sizes and support assumed to be same as at Watana; lengths are somewhat less due to smaller height and breadth of canyon; grouting assumed to be more extensive than Watana in order to ensure complete integrity and cutoff. -Low level release lump sum estimated (includes intake, gates and tunnel into lower end of diversion tunnel); reregulation capability also included to ensure adequate river flow between dam and tailrace. -Plunge pool lined with 10 feet thick concretec Diversion/Cofferdams -- Two diversion tunnels with total length of 3,800 LF assumed; 26 feet inside diameter; fully lined with concrete one and one-half feet thick; appl"oximately 25 percent steel supported and 25 percent rockbolted. -Gates • 1 ump sum estimated. Portals rockbolted for entire contact area; reinforced at 40 lb/cy. -Cofferdams estimated at 60 feet (upstream) and 40 feet (downstream) in height with 2:1 slope. -Dewatering assumed the same as Watana. -No cutoff assumed to be needed. -Diversion tunnel plugs included to plug after use (upstream of any drawdown tunnel). Penstocks -- -Four penstocks of total length of 3,500 LF assumed, with 18 feet inside diameter; full length of tunnel lined with two feet thick concrete. -Fifty percent rockbolting assumed; steel liner of three-fourths inch thickness and 220 feet in 1 ength inc 1 uded at power·house. I I I I •• I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - ~-~-~·.·-, .· ----"'' ~ ,a PEP NM-•IIDIB't ~~ I I .l 11 .I [ ll .1 ll j 1 .. , -~ ' j I; -J ' (1 j «': ~L TABLE 2 {Cont.dj Power Intakes -- -Same assumptions as Watana; greater· volume of excavation -required. Powerhouse & Associated Items Same assumptions as Watana, except no surge chamber needed due to lower operating head; also additional electrical work needed to connect north bank powerhouse to south bank switchyard; access tunnels total length 2,000 LF; access shaft total length 400 LF, cable shafts total length 930 LF. Secondary Powerhouse -Fifty MW unit lump sum estimated at $600,000/MW for power facilities only. Service Spillway -- -Same assumptions as Watana; stilling basin lump sum estimated. Emergency Spillwal -- -Twenty-five feet overburden assumed; localized channel lining lump sum estimated; rock-fill fuse plug. Tailrace -·- -Outlet portal assumed to be appr.oximately as at Watana. -Assumes two, 29 feet diameter tunnels approximately one and one-half miles long to take full advantage of available head to Portage Creek. Saddle Dam -- -Saddle dam required on south bank to contain reservoir. -Slurry trench beneath dam included as cutoff. Switchyard -- -Yard assumed to be on south bank of river. -No rock excavation required. -Electrical and civil work taken as lump sum items. Miscellaneous Structures & Equipment -Items taken as lump sums Access Roads/Rail Spur -- -Two permanent fifteen mile roads assumed to connect site with previously constructed Park Highway-Watana Road. -Lump sum item included for construction rail spur from Gold Creek to the site. 0 - { TABLE 2 (Cont'd) Support & Camp -- -Construction power based upon overall size of project. -2G3 million mandays required for construction; based upon assumed schedule associated labor requirements; 10 percent service personnel and 15 percent turnover, visitors and staff added to anticipated construction work force .. -Single status camp for 2,300 workers assumed, based upon peak manpower loading. .G and I I I I 1- I I I I I I I ' ~ I I lr l If l I j ' If l II l i IL ~. I'~ I r r: r·, ' r· r . I : 1) Rock Bolts A. General B. Tunnels C. Portals APPENDIX A TABLE 3 BASE ASSUMPTIONS WATANA/DEVIL CANYON -Standard pattern five feet from center to center, 15 to 20 feet long, 1-1/4 inch diameter, 100 lbs each -25 sq ft con- tact area per bolt. -Generally bolted for twenty-five percent of tunne1 1 s length.a -Standard pattern. -Add 100% to quantity for upper limit estimate purpose. -Generally bolted with standard pattern. -Face and 50 feet either side. -Concrete contact area only. -Add 100% to quantity. D. Powerhouse and Power Facilities -Generally bolted standard pattern. -Fully bolted dome and ten percent of walls. -Fifty percent of penstock length bolted -Add 100% to quantity. E. Spillways -Generally bolted standard pattern over slab and wall concrete contact area. -Add 100% to quantity. 2) Penstock Liner -30.6 lb/sf for three quarter inch thick plate assumed. 3) Stee 1 · Tunne 1 Supports - Phorseshoe = A + A + 112 (2B)1t = 2A +1t'B Pround = if'c .. In general assumed for 25 percent tunnel length. TABLE 3 (Cont•d) -Six feet on center at 55 lb/lf. -Eight cross members at 6 feet length at 20 lb/lf. -Therefore weight steel/6 lf tunnel = 55(p) + 8 (6) (20) 4) Reinforcing Steel (lbs. % steel/cubic yard of concrete) -Primary concrete 120 lb/cy. APP·A/T-1 APP-A/T-1.1 APP•A/T-1.2 APP-A/T-2 -Secondary concrete 190 lb/cy. -Spillway slab 80 lb/cy. -Spillway wall 40 lb/cy. -Intake 90 lb/cy. -Main dam/thrust block 7 lb/cy (mass concrete). • (] Q I I I I I I I I I I I I· I I I I: I J ,) ml G F E - 0 c B 1-Ill tli ... 2: ,- <A ~ I l ~ ; J ~ 10 . J.JORM"-1.. t.<A>< WL. EoL-2:tOO --- r-'----~-----~ ,.._.., ... , .... "." ~ ~·- ::;;>,.,..... "'·--------... ------FIN~: rt-1-TERJ jsEMI-PERVIousJ/ \ \/ ~ ,,IQIIiil-Jsu, I I F ~ ""'""'""'"' -----....~.'L-'----col:'.--..1..--'---~ ~·-~ GEN~RAL A~RANGEMEN7 :>CL>..I...E.: A ~ '--- -- --uoo ..... "%leO -20:0 .... :::~~ ... ~f800 2 0 f100 ~ ~-lGO:) ~ ihsoo ~ ~I.. MI.)(..., "!;_l-Et.. '2.100' So ~ 500 SE.C'TION /:.·A ~CAU:C 0 - -EL.-2'214 I 11 II II ll ----.. ·-~· . S,_.A,:T--..:l ;: ~-· ---· .... ---H-'j1 ll "-=eu s..u..rns 1 .••. ll ••. ·1 :: J i ,, _.._. ___ _.__ ~~--4~1~c.o~,;;;;.;:--· --/~ 1-lNED,"r!::'"IJ'}'r~ .)1 5CO I= SE.CTION ':1-iRU DAM &CA.l.E: B -""~ . TLJNf.,l£.LS '2·'2!>'0IA..eo .... m ~""''= • -ETE. LINU) -.. ·"iOiC!i'ii'hK I Hcillffil,, l!ic:O = = = e,5c:O C&..~.c..u .. J~E IN FE.E.T EXISTING GI<!OUND tli u.. ~ z (.) ~ ~ w POWEQ F.b.CIL ITI E.S PROI=ILE. SCAI.E. < E> r+A I+ A • =ex -··--. ---~ ... avec. ------_._ --.__ ' ' ' ' ' ' = 14o?-f . -·---· -··-·--1 I 1600 -----~--·-I 1 1 F£Ei • I!>Oo-• I 1 1 I !>= 1 I I 0 -57 E.l.. '2225' 1 SSLLOOPPE.E. .... f-~ ~-""-c' c~ r-~ ~-----.......-; l ,, . .--::o-a:.~oo ~~.:::::--. '\ • ; J 11 =c==--=:.-=1r·'"-""'i;~ :: \ GAl..LERtES~ OI?.IGINll.l-Gl20l.INO SUI<f",O.C.E. ..___ ~'"'-- ~ L SECTIO SCAI..E A 0 500 1000 FEET &CALE. Eo 0 2CO --'CO FEET SCAt..S c o leo 200 I'E.ET ~-"-1 SPILLWAY PROFILE. SCL>..L-E.: e N/-..TANA SCI-IEMEI E + 0 cl B , = . .. . •, --~~'::---..... ~·· -•!57()()- 1 Ol•-.. "" " -JSK ·--t,=.V'£'JPJ'j,4~-0~~~ :;.~-~;. /./;/' ---=-.:~ ·-. L Li ... ~7,.;;;;;.w;Q~--"""-'-:-&o=o. s=, ', // ";r· -t 2 \~\. ·, ------·~;~-===:=L~ t I ' ''----------;:; l'~~u q; or o"" I ' LONGITUDINb. ~5CALE~. ~~' e.~==;7----t---~--- --=--=----.:.o ______ ~---~--···-·-·-----· ----"~ -_-__ -. --~-----_-_t+_-_-___ ------~---;a_-_-__ -__ -------·----~---·------------_ ----7·~-.. "~_.__~~---..-Si~ -----.. -~-------------~-~---~---~ .... ~---------~.--..,o,_.;-,----~--,., '::.:ii!itPWW. \J. .. "-0 .:. a 1.? ::< ~ ~ -I I &l~ r !::'w 0 ..Jf:{ <(U 0 ua !! o· J ~05',1 --~ C0\>1' j l I ~~ l - I ! I" l'of l l II) - 0 c ISCO B 120::1 JlOO <A I loa:> CROW!J SE..CTIO N S::I<VIC.S SPit,.LWA'{ ~ APP::za.o.Cl-l C'"""NNE1..; V..t..Jl. ~~'-~T!NG: .1~0~ ..:.v-..t.. a. J4SD' i a .....:__j_=-----. ~ MlU. ~WL £t. ;!o()O' - -.&-£L,l2c05·-~.Jiidiii ...... U ~ '( "·-........ ISOO "DO l~O 1100 1100 1000 'la> 600 100 ~~""' uoo 1~00 llOO r----·-· , llOO l __ "'-... hATU:::!AL. S\JI<FAC.S. .......... ----> --·~->- r MAX NORMA,1.. OPE~ING LE.vc:L EL.JASO' ~ ·-··-:t(L£1'7 SIDE) -...... ' . "• • \. _.. Nt..iURAL SURo=AC:E'. ·, ":"' (l<IGI-lT SiDa) -·r- ~r :t '·.·~ GROUT CURTAIN 11; I I !' -18'DIA GONCQ£TS: "':' '\"'-. J.IN£0 7UNNE.I.. t .. \ " ,-COIJC<E1E -tiJING·Z 11-!1<. \ '...._ {:!>j'E.e.L. UNING '4'THI<.. ""1. . . \ E1.14G4 1 -AIJXI~IAt"f SI"ILLWAV ~ lil ~ ~ _,It""~ --~ ,--' / •, -....._...,.---SOUt..IO &OROCK .'5Ui<FA,CS-UPST~J>.M /' .• -..., ~',~ rSOUND eEDR.O~ SURFl>.CE,· 00Wt{S7REAM I/ ' '·· -\,, " > // " ' ';) " ', '\:,--' //; J ~ \ //; ' I 'I \. ___ "' t'il ', I ~&-· \. f 'o' ~-;~:.-~ __ , , I .... ·-_,:'; • dOIY'E'<SION 0 -"if •· ---~Nt..IE~ ~ , ...... ___ .... / ·-~ , ____ , CO~I<ETE'. P!..IJG ~· DAM • PROFILE. (LOOkiNG UP~lTR~AM) NAT!llll.-:>UIZFJ,CS {LEFT St~) SUIZFAC:i: ,21GIIT ::.IDE) F'OR. UPPER. e><JDG!:.T EST I MATE. l.ODITIONA.L.. COST ALLOWANCE'. w.5 l &EJ-1 MJ>Oe. F'OR.A_.STlL.UNG ~ , AT RIV~ U::VE.I.. 10 REPlACE. ' FI..IP BUCJ<.E.T. ~Avu.TWL i El-B~' '=' -ALLUVIUM CIIZI!D .. IOD OUT~ SECTION TI-IRU SPILLWAY PLATE 3 l '· -AVG >WL. £l. 890' SCALE. 0 I "tOO ~ "' F I 2 f SECTION Tl-!RU POWER. FAC!I .. ITIES ll --- .... ~.U'Jl .... 10 g t t 8 7 6 ~.-~-~-"'"-~._.-~.,--·· _.,,.. __ ...__~----·~·-'-~--------· --'<"~·---·~ ... ~---~.......-~----...-,--~~-._. ----·..,..·-··----~-··-·-;--·~----~·-"-~-..___..----:--·-........_.___...,_ _____ ·_··-- ......:i. !"' s t 100 2CO FEET 4 3 DE.VJL CANYON SCI-lEME. I SE.CTIONS r~