HomeMy WebLinkAboutCaribou Project Alaska 1958A 1''l:r "1 {;:I .f'\.,'~'" .:::I
Alaska Resourc,:s Li!lr:t"\ & information Services
Ubrnry !3uiltfing. Suite 111
32111 Proviuellcc Drive
Anchnnu!c. AK 995084614
CARIBOU PROJ3CT
ALASKA,
INFOR.\1.WION REPORT
Fe0ruarJ-21, 19)'':)
BUJENJ OF RECLM1ATICN
ALASK.,\. DIS'I'l.1ICT HEP.DQUARTERS
JUNEAU, ALASKA
JUL 1 5 1974
/1:
//// y
,J "," ~
REPORT OF 1'P~
DISTRICT r,].:i.NAGER
" 1l
o
<0
<0 o
'" o
'"
CARIBOU
CARIBOU PROJECT
GENERAL LOCATION MAP
842-906-14
Stn'.llI1ARY SHEETS
CARIBOU PROJIDT -./-lLASY.A
Location: South Central Alaska, in the Matanuska River Basin,
approximately 107 miles northeast of Anc;lOrage, Alaska.
Authorized: Interior Depa:'tment Al)propriation Act for Fiscal Year 1956
and appropriat.ion acts for p .. ~evious and following fiscal
years a.uthorizing expendit.ures by the Bureau of Reclamation
for engi.aeerlng and ecollomic investigations, and for
related t'epo:-:ts, for the development and utilization of
the water resources of Alaska.
Plan: Construct a high dam across Caribou Creek about four miles
upstream from 0arfbou Creek Bridge. D!.'ill a river diversion
tunnel combined ~~th the spillway tunnel. Drill acunnel 14,480
feet long in a southwesterly direction and place a surface pen-
stock 1,120 feet long to the powerplant vIi th an installed
capacity of 24,000 kilowatts. Water is to be carried from the
reservoir to the powerplant located at Caribou Creek Bridge on
Glenn Highway. Tunnel intake, gate shaft surge tank, and outlet
gate structures are included in the tunnel construction.
Costs: (Construction costs as of July 1957)
Dam and Reservoir
Powerplant (HYdro)
Transmission plant
General Property
Total Project Cost
Interest During Construction
Total Project Cost plus Interest During Construction
Annual Costs: (Remote operation from Eklutna Project)
Operation and }-1aintenance
Provision for Replacements
Total Annual Costs
Average Firm power Rate
$52,520,000
19,136,000
3,055,000
163,000
$74,874,000
_3,743,000
$7 8 ,617,000
$ 70,000
1°°/°00
$ 170,000
27.5 mills
Summary Shee-cs
Dam (Earth and BaCkfill):
MaxiJlum helght • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• 465 ft.
Crest length •••••••••••••••••••••• 1,455 ft.
Crest width. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 30 ft.
Crest elevation ••••••••••••••••••••• 2,524 ft.
Spillway (Glory hole):
Crest elevation. • • • • • . . • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2 ,510 ft.
Dia.meter-crest • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Diameter-tunnel. • • • • • •
Capacity ••••••••••
• • • • • • • • • • • • • •
'(5 ft.
16 ft.
• • • . . • • • • • • • 16,300 c. f • s .
Outlet works:
Invert elevation •••••••••••••••••••• 2 ,140 ft.
Tunnel diameter. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 6 ft.
Powerplant:
Installed capacity (2 units) ••••••••••••• 24 ,000 kw.
Operating head •••••••••••••••••••• 539-736 ft.
Annual firm output •••••••••••••• 114 ,000 ,000 kw.-hr.
Avers.ge annual nonfirrn l)otentlal • • • • • •• 1 ,411-4 ,000 kw. -hr.
Tailwater elevation. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• 1,774 ft.
Tunnel -9 ft. Diameter:
• • • • • • • • • • • · . . • • 2,294 ft. Invert elevation • • • •
Length • • • • • • • • •
Slope •••••••••
, . . . . . • • • • • • • • • .131470 ft.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .00290
'lUnnel -7.5 ft.. Diameter (for pens tock) :
Length. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 610 ft.
.17155 Slope ....................... . • •
Penstock (Surface):
Diameter • • • • • •
Length • • • • • • •
Reservoir:
• • • • • • • • • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Maximum normal water surface elevation • •
lo1inimtl!!l cperatilg level • • • • • • • • • • · .
• •
2
· . . • • · . • •
7.5 ft.
• 1,120 ft.
• •• 2 ,510 ft.
• •••• 2,313 ft.
Reservoir (Continued):
Power tunnel invert elevation
Storage: · . . . . · . .
Hydrology:
Power. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Inactive (ice cover and minimum head
on tunnel) • • • • • • • • • • • •
Dead storage • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
(Surcharge f'Jr flood). • • • • • • •
· . . . . . . · . . . . . .
Summary Sheets
· . . . .
.203,000 acre-feet
• • 7,000 acre-feet
• • 30,000 acre-teet
• ((15,600 :ecre'''!eet)
• ••• 259.5 sq.mi.
• • • • • • • •• 2
Drainage area above Caribou Dam
years of record • • • • • • • •
Estimated average annual rm10ff
l>1aximum annual runoff •
1940-57 • . . . 203,170 acre-feet
269,030 acre-feet
155,350 acre-feet
. . .
Minimum annual runoff • • • • • · . . . . . . .
Swi tchyard :
Transformer capacity
6.9 -115 kv.
6.9 -12.47 !w.
Transmission Lines:
Caribou-Palmer
. . . . . . . .
Length • • • • • • •
Voltage. • • • • • • • •
Caribou-Government Camp~ACS
Length • • • • • • • • •
Voltage. . . . . . . .
Substations:
Palmer
· . . · . . . . . . . . .
· . . . . . .
26,667 kv.-a.
750 kv.-a.
· . . . . . . . . . . •• 60 miles
115 kv.
. . • • • • • • • • •• 1 mile · . · . . . . . . . 12.47 kv.
Additional tr~~sformer capacity . . . . . . . . . . None
Anchorage
Additio~al transformer capacity 115-34.5 kv. 30,000 kv.-a.
Remarks: Due to the excessive mill rate necessary to amortize the
project in 50 :;rears, the Caribou Pro,ject is ec()no:nically
infeasible under prese!:t conditions.
3
C 0 NTE N T S
Page
CHAPTER I TRANSMITTf.L • • • • 1
Investlgations ••• • • • 1
Power Narl~et. • • • 1
\'iater l\esources • • • • • • • • 2
Plan of Development • • • • • • • • 2
Project Costs • • • • • • • • • • 3
Project Benefits. • • • • • • • 3
Conclusions • • • • • • • • • 3
Recommendations • • • • • • !~
CHAPTER II PROJECT POldER r·jARKET A..rtEA • • • 5
Physical Geography. t: • • • • • • • • )
Clima~e 5
Population. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 6
Communities • • • • • • '7
Anchorage. • • • • • • • • 7
Pa..lller • • • • • • 8
Other Towns and Villages r' • • ;)
CHAPTER III RESOURCES Al"'ID ECOlJOl/lIC ACTIVITIES • 10
Agriculture • • 10
Forestry. • • • • • • • • lr(
Mining • • • • • • • • • • • 19
Construction. • • • • • • • 20
Wildlife. • • • • • 21
Fishing • • • • • • • • • • • • 21
Transportation. • • • • • 22
Highways • • • • • • • • 22
Railroads. • • • • • • • 22
Hater. • • • • • • • • • 23
Air. • • • • • • • • • • • • 24
Tourism • • • • • • 25
CHAPTE...~ IV POIV'ER Sur'PLY AND lvIjillyI-BTS. • • • • 26
P&..st and Present Power Supply and Use (Civilian). • 26
IVlili tary Power Supply • • • • • • • 29
Future Power Requirements • • • • 29
i
CuNTEl'~'l'3
CHAPTER V CARIBOU CHEEK I \'iATER RESOURCES fUID UTILIZATION.
iJater Resources
free lpi tati.on.
Runoff Hecords
His tc)rj.cal.
CompuGed.
\oiater Right3
Water Utilization
Caribou reservoir.
Sedimentation.
Evaporation.
Seepage.
Period of Study.
Montbl,:/ Distribution of Annual PO'Ner G<::neration.
Reservoir Operation study.
Flood Hydruloc;y.
CHAPTER VI PLAN OF DEVELOFMENT •
Acces3ibility
Righ ts -of·· wc:..y •
Housing
Construction Period •
Project Design.
Dam and reservoir.
1:!aterways.
Powerplant •
Transmission F'acili ties.
Geologic Conditions
Cost Estimates.
Alternate Plans of Development.
CHAPTE..'R VII FINANCL~ Al{l~LYSIS.
CHAPTER VIII REPORTS OF OTHER ,\GENCIES
ii
Page
40
Ij.Q
ito
itl
41
L~l
41
42
43
43
44
44
1+4
45
46
Table
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
TABLES
.~ricultural Land Classification • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Source of Farm Income. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
number of Farms and Farm Laborers -November 1955. • • • •
l'xisting I)otential Farm M,'1rket • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
P.nnual Fmver Re1uirements -Anchorage-Palmer .Area. • • • •
• • • COIDliar:1son of T;rpical Residential Electric Bills • •
Correlat.;;d and Computed YCarioou Creek Runoff •• • • • •
Summar'.! of Cn..l'i'buu Power Operation • • • • • • • • • • • •
Comparison of Runoff, YCaribou Creek and YMatanuska
Rt vel". • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Official Estimate -PF-l • • • • • • • • • • • (fol1mdng)
iii
Page
11
14
15
27
28
33
38
39
44
Plate
No.
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
CHl'..!."'\TS, MfIPS, AND D&'\.'iHNGS
Caribou Power Market -Annual Energy Requirements
and Supply • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Caribou Power lv1arket .. Annual Generating Capacity
Req\lirements and Supply ••••••••••••••••
Caribou Creek Drainage Basin • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Correlation Curve -Caribou Cree}: w.t th Eldutna Creek • •
Area aC1d Capa-:!:i.ty Curv'es • • . . . . • • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Ge'Q,;,;:c r:1J. PJ.2,n of Development and Profiles of 1:Ta"cer1,-Tays. •
Ca.;doon Dam -Feasibility Design • • • • • • • • • • • •
Primary Generation and T:cansmission Network. • • • • • •
iv
Following
Page
29
29
31
32
37
40
41
43
CHAPTER I
TRANSMITTAL
To: Commissioner
From: District Manager
Subject: Information Report on Caribou Project, Alaska
The Caribou Project Report serves as a permanent record of
the work carried out by the Bureau in its investigations of the
feasibility of Caribou Creek as a potential hydroelectric source. The
field work, planning and designs, cost estimates, power market survey,
etc. were accomplished in sufficient detail that the natural conclusions
and recommendations of this report on project feasibility have no alter-
native under present economic conditioIls.
Investigations
Extensive field work was done in the summer and fall of 1955
and included subsurface core drilling, surface geology and topographic
surveying. Subsequently a final plan of development was selected, a
feasibility design determined and construction costs estimated.
Concurrently a power market survey was conducted to determine
the need for such a project.
Power Market Area
The power market area was arbitrarily selected to include
those load centers which appeared to be within economical transmission
distance. The desirability and possibili~ of extending service from
the Copper River on the east to Cook Inlet on the west were investigated.
These east and west boundaries are approximately equidistant from the
project. '!be Chugach Mountains on the south and the Talkeetna Mountains
on the north form natural boundaries in those two directions.
This market area encompasses such well ~lOwn features as the
famed Matanuska Valley farming areal the Matanuska Coal Fields,
Elmendorf Air Force Base, Fort Richardson ~ Base and the City of
Anchorage. Other Alaska communi ties also included are Palmer I Wasilla,
Glenallen, Gulkana and many smaller villages.
Since World War II the power market area has undergone eon-
siderable growth. This is especially true of the locale in and around
Anchorage. Population estimates for Anchorage, Palmer and vicinity
placed the 1955 population at 98,000 people, including approximately
Transmi ttal
34,000 military personnel. This compares with 34,210, including
military, listed in the 1950 U. S. Census. Population of the Copper
River area was estimated at about 1,200 for 1955.
Federal spending for military construction, operation and
maintenance of military facilities, and the varied activities of Federal
civilian agencies constitutes the primary source of revenue in the area.
The most important industry is construction, followed by mining, trans-
portation, agriculture, tourism, ferestry and fisning, in that order.
There is presently no central station power available in the
Copper River area. HOllever, an REA Cooperative has "been formed and
gran~ed a loan to install a diesel electric plant and construct distri-
bution facilities.
The Anchorage-Palmer area has been experiencing periodic
pO'fer sho:t·tages for the past decade. Complet,ion of the 30,000 kilowatt
Eklutna P:co,ject in 1955 ha.s relieved this situation to date but it is fully
leaded at the present time. It is expected that all existing hydro and
civilian steam generation will be fully utilized by 1961. This leaves
only some 7,600 kilowatts of diesel capacity to take up the slack.
There is no power available for any industrial development.
Water Resources
Carib'Ju Dam would provide storage for a drainage basin of
259.5 square miles. This basin extends in elevation from about 2,100
feet to 6,000 feet.
A water stage recorder was installed on Caribou Creek in May
1955 and is operated and maintained by the U. S. Geological Survey. No.
runoff measurements wer.e made prior to. 1955.
To extend the period of runoff data, Caribou Creek was corre-
lated with E..uutna Creek. By this method it was determined that the
mean annual runoff over a period of 18 years was approximately 203,000
acre-feet.
Plan of Development
The Single purpose project incorporates a Simple plan of
water diversion for electric power generation.
A 465.foot hi~h dam, placed across Caribou Creek at about
river mile 5 would impotUld 240,000 acre-feet of storage. ApproxiG'lately
three Gliles of tunnel and penstock would carry the water to a powerplant
2
Transmittal
at river mile 1. Two 20,000 hp. turbine-generator sets would utilize
the variable 539-736 foot he9.d to generate sO::1e 114,000,000 kilowatt-
hours per year. Sixty miles of 115,000-vol-c line would connect the
project vlith tl:1e existing Palmer-Anchorage 115,OOO-volt line for trans-
mission of project .fjovler to Anchorage.
The project switchyard would provide space for addition of
terminal facilities for a transmission line (~o Glenallen at a later
date. Such a line CQuld be built by the Government or the Rural
Electrificiation Ad:ninistration Cooperative "Then it prl.)ved economically
feasible, but was not considered as an initi~tl feature of the project.
The project would be a single stage, single purpose develop-
ment and all costs vlould be incurred ini tb,lly. Estimated cost of
construction of the Caribou Project is $74,374,000. Intel'est during
construction would add anot:ler ~3,'7hj,000, creating a total investment
for amortization of ~T3,617 ,000. Assu:ning annu2~ ~)peration and main-
tenance expense to be $70,000 and provisions for replacements $100,000,
the average rate necessary to repay all annual costs and amortize the
investment at 2'~ per cent over 50 ,fears v[Quld be 27.5 idlls.
Project Benefits
It is estimated that a similar sized steam plant constructed
near Anchorage c(;uld produce power at a unit kilowatt-hour cost of 17
mills.
Since the Caribou Project is to serve a single purpose,
power development, power sales would h[iVe to repay all costs.
At the energy rate necessary to meet required repayment
condi tiona, project paver would not be saleable and therefore no
monetar,f benefits would be reclized.
Conclusions
1. The project is feasible from an engineering standpoint.
The plan of development is a relatively siml,le one al1d no paramount
physical obst':1Cles to its construction are foreseen.
2. Under present economic conditions, construction of the
project cannot be justified. Unit kilo,,,2. ~t-houl'" cost of power from
a comparable size, cOdl-fired steam plant would be considerably less
than the cost of Caribou Pl'oject power.
3
Transmittal
3. A longer period of' record of Caribou Creek runoff will
be helpful in determining the adequacy of tlle correlation (Jf Caribou
Creek with Eklutna CreeL
Recommendations
1. ~lis project report should be adopted for information
pU'rposes only.
2. No further action be ex.pended by the Bureau in additional
studies of the project develop!nent.
3. The stream gaging st':1tion un CariiJou Creek should be
maintained and operated fur a period of Lit least three additional
years (five years tot'3.1). A five-year record would prove quite
valuable for correlations \Oli tll other streams in ·t11e c.:.rea.
4. TI1is reJ:)ort should be made av£dlable to the general
l)ublic for informal-ion iJurposes.
5. If the project is reconsidered for development at some
future date, t.:le recommendations of tile U. S. Fish '"'-lld 'wildlife
Service, set forth in Chapter VIII, should be rec':Jgnized.
/,
,'.I"
4
C HAP T E R II .
~T POWER MARKET AREA
Tbe project is so located that it could supply power to
Alaska's fastest growing area. Hemmed in by natural barriers, this
portion of the Territory encompasses less than one-tenth of one per
cent of Alaska's 586,000 square miles of land but contains nearly 50
per cent of the total population. It i6 an aJ;'ea of contrasts in
climate, physiography" and development. Modern and frontier, cities
and tows are intermingled and wilderness areas are plentitul.
Pgysical GeograpSr
The area investigated for feasibility of project service
extends east and west along the Glenn Highway. It measures lengthwise
from mile 0 at Anchorage to mile 203, the junction of the Glenn and
Richardson Highways. The Caribou Project, situated at mile ~07, is
nearly centrally located.
1his considered area might be likened to a,n elongated hour-
glass, Two bulbs of civilization apd enterprise,one on either end,
are joined by a lone; narrow isthmus of pa.ved highw~ Wi. th onlY an
occasional lodge and refueling station. The western end of this market
area is split l~Wi.se by Knik Arm, a narrow extension ot Cook Inlet.
It contains Metropolitan Anchorage and smal1er towns such as Palmer.
Such villages a& Gl.enallen and Gulkana·are found on the ealtern end.
The Ohugac.h Mountain Ra.Dge 011 the south and the Talkeetna
Mountains on the north form natural barriers to north-south expansion.
Four rivers are ot major significance in the service area, The Copper
River" flowing south, presently forms the eastern boundary. The Susitna
River, also flowing south, joins Coo~ Inlet to form the western boundary.
The east-west Matanuska River emptying into Knik Arm and the west-east
Tazlina River terminating in the Copper River, traverse the length.
The ~oject is located near the divide of these east and west flows.
Climate
The proxiIll1 ty of the ocean to the Anchorage -Pal.In~r area has a
definite influence on the cl.imate. Summers are relatively cool wlth
eonsiderable cloudiness. The temperature at Anchorage has not exceeded
86° during the past 38 years. Winters are tempered and ~e severe cold
of the interior regions is shut out by the encircling mountai~s. Over
the past 38 years the miniIll\Ull recorded temperature at Anchorage 'WaS a.
m1nus 38°.
Since the eastern end or the area is not adjacept to the sea
it does not receive the climatic benefits characteristic of the western
end. Tempera.tures are more extreme running warmer in the summer and
5
Project Power Market Area
colder in the winter. Records for the past 10 years disclose a high of
910 and a low of minus 65 0 at Gtukana with the average annual low for
this period equal to a minus 50°.
Precipitation is relatively light throughout this section of
Alaska. The mean annual precipitation at Anchorage is about 14.7
inches. This is comparable to the annua.l ::neRO in the Natanuska Valley
but is about four inches greater than the mean experienced at Gulkana.
Over 60 per cent of the precipitation falls in the four months of July,
August, September, and October.
Annual snowfall is generally not heavy, averaging around 70
inches at Anchorage and about 50 inches at Gulkana.
Population
World War II focused considerahle attention on Ala.ska in
general a..."ld the Anchorage area in particular. This helped to familiar-
ize many people with the true nature of A'.,;'.Gka which is one requisite
for settlement. Termination of hostillti.::<:> in 1945 provoked a lack of
interest in the Territory but 1950 and tQP Korean War saw a permanent
reversal of this attitude. The defense buildup has continued since
1950 and the greatest population increases l1ave developed since that
time. The following table illustrates the growth since tl1e census of
1939.
WeBt..::rn lrea Eastern Area
Year Inc luding Ar.c hc';::,p,ge ,Palmer, etc. Inc luding Glenallen, Gulkana, etc.
______ ::.P..;"op;!;.u.:.:l:::.::;a..:.:.ti~~:! ... -_·~_I_n_c_r_e_a_s_e _____ ---' '_.p __ op;:;.....ul_a_t_i_on ___ I_n_c_r_e_a_s_e __ _
Y1939
Y1950
?l1955
5,710
34,210
98 ,000
28,500
63,790
350
560
1,200
210
640
Y Approximate census statistics. Armed Services personnel residing on
military bases are included.
gj Estimated. Includes an estimated 34,000 military and civilian per-
sonrel living on base.
Considerable seasonal fluctuation is experienced wherein
migrant workers and often their families ar:.?;.ve for SUD:!ner employment
and. depart at the termination of the construction season. This popula-
tion fluctuation in the .mchoro.J2;p-Pa.l.lnPr a].'~a b.RS bo~n Qst.imn+.e.r.. at
between 5,000 and 6,000 people.
6
Project Power Market Area
The population of the Territory can be fairly accurately
determined each year. Tnere are available Territorial wide statistics
of annual births ~~d deaths and the annual net migrant results. However,
for a particular locale the problem is much more complex and the best
that can be accomplished without taking an actual census, is an
educated guess. Estimates are therefore based on employment, school
enrollment, utility services, births over deaths, etc.
Communities
Anchorage
In referring to the City of Jl~chorage the usual connotation
is to the Anchorage Metropolitan Area. This includes the suburbs of
Spenard and Fairview as well as the city itself. It has been estimated
that this metropolitan area was home for over 50,000 people in 1955.
k~chorage is the primary trading center of the entire project
service area. Here can be seen and obtained most of the essentials,
non-essentials and services associated with stateside cities of 100,000
population. In addition it is becoming a wholesale supply center for
much of the remainder of Interior Alaska.
Due to its rapid growth, the city still has a backlog of
work on streets, sewers, water systems, etc. This is rapidly being
taken care of in the cit,y itself but progress is slow or lacking in
the suburbs. The electric utilities however, are relatively current
on domestic connections throughout the area.
The City Planning Commission in a recent economic report
lists the following services available:
Churches 40
Newspape=s -daily 2
-weekly 1
Radio stations 3
Television stations 2
Hotels and Motels 31
Hospitals - 1 co~unity hospital with 74 beds
- 1 hospital for natives 406 beds
Schools (1955-56 year)
Grade Classrooms
Junior high classrooms
y 129
38
Y Forty classrooms used on shift basis to double
actual capacity.
7
Project Power Market Area
Schools (1955-56 year) (Continued)
Senior high classrooms 38
Anchorage Community College -extension
of University of Alaska
Planned - A Methodist University
Movie Theaters 4
The city has a new modern library, a muniCipal auditorium and
many and varied recreation facilities. Anchorage maintains an efficient
police force and fire department and all utilities are municipally owned
and operated. In addition, the many private businesses and services
characteristic of a city this size are to be found here.
Each of the suburbs has a volunteer fire department but must
depend on the Territorial police department for police protection.
Central water and sewer systems are also lacking in large parts of the
suburbs.
Palmer
Palmer, situated in the Matanuska Valley farming area, is
qui te typical of the small farming communi ties found throughout the
agricultural areas of the United States. Since Palmer is 45 road
miles from Anchorage it supplies ffiOSt of the basic necessities of the
surrounding area including some professional services and banking
facili ties.
Prices are in general somewhat lower than in Anchorage, par-
ticularly on fresh vegetables and other local produce.
Most marketing of farm produce from the Matanuska Valley is
done through the Mate.nv.ska Valley Farmers Cooperating Association at
Palmer. Electric and telephone services in the town of Palmer, as well
as the rural areas, are supplied by Rural Electrification Association
Cooperatives, The Matanuska Electric Association and the Matanuska
Telephone Association.. The sole power source for the lilatanuska Electric
ASSOCiation is the Eklutna Project.
Palmer is an incorporated city, guided by a mayor and five
councilmen. Fire protection is provided by a volunteer fire department
and police protection by a city err.ployee. A hospital at Palmer serves
the Matanuska Valley and the Palmer Independent School District provides
for education through the t'Wel.fth grade.
8
Project Power Market Area
other Towns and Villag~
There are a number of other small towns and villages scattered
around the power market area but most of them offer only very limited
facilities. Most notable among these is Glenallen, 181 miles from
Anchorage via the Glenn Highway • Although quite small (1950 population -
152), Glenallen acts as a focal point for activities in the eastern
sector of the power mark~t area. The major supply center for this area
however is Valdez, approximately 111 miles south and west of Glenallen
on the Richardson Highway.
Among the facilities to be found at Glenallen are a post
office, a smAJl vaJ:iety of cOlrJU€Y.'cial establishments, a hospital and a
school offering a curricuJ..llin ranging through the ninth grade.
The lack of a central power station in the area is soon to be
remedied. The Copper Valley Ele'?tric Association received an R.E.A.
loan in July 1951 to construct 48 miles of line and install 500 kilo-
watts of diesel power.
Other utilities are furnished on an individual basis.
9
C HAP T E R III
RESOURCES AND ECONO~UC ACTIVITIES
The rapid growth of the power market area during the past
several years has been due primarily to Federal spending. World War II
pointed up the strategic l.ocation of Alaska with respect to national
defense and the Korean War reaffirmed and accentuated this situation.
As a result several hundred-million dollars have been spent in the power
~arket area for construction of military facilities and an annual multi-
million dollar appropriation is made for necessary operation and mainten-
ance.
The military buildup has led impetus to development of local
basic industries; and a gra0.ual transition to a more diversified econoII~y
should provide a stable economic base within the next few years.
Agriculture
Com~ercial farming in the power market area is limited almost
entirely to the western section. Referred to hereafter as the upper
Cook Inlet agricultural region, this section contains some of the most
important farming lands in Alaska and currently boasts over 65 per cent
of the Territory's crop production.
The usual reference when speaking of farming in the upper
Cook Inlet agricultural region is to the Matanuska Valley. However ,
this region actually consists of three separate areas of which the
tI.atanuska Valley is the most important but not the largest. ~e other
two areas as herein discussed are the Anchorage-Chugiak and the Lower
Susitna Valley.
The 14atanuska Valley agricultural area as surveyed in 1939 and
1940 encompasses some 317 ,500 acres. It includes , in addition to the
lower Matanuska Valley, part of the lower Knik Valley, a portion of the
upper and middle valley of the Little Susitna River, and other smaller
streams that empty into Knik Arm between Goose Bay and the Matanuska
basin.
The Anchorage-Chugirut area extends from Rabbit Creek and
Turnagain Arm, sout..'1 of Anchorage to the Knik River. Land surveys con-
ducted in 1950 included a total of approximately 70,500 acres in this
area.
The Lower Susitna Valley is the largest of the three areas.
For this report it is defined as most of the land below elevation 500
feet encompassed by the Susitna River basin, that portion of the Little
Susitna River drainage basin adjoining the western extremity of the
10
Resoul~es and Economic Activities
Matanuska Valley survey, and the miscellaneous drainages bet,.een the two
river basins. Total area inv01ved is over 1,920,000 acres.
Table 1 compares these three areas, listing total, ar9.ble, o.nd
cropland acreages, as coraJ}iled 'oy tile Alaska Agricultural Experiment
Sta,tion and the U. S. Soil Conservation Ser.,rice.
TABLE 1
AGRICUL rl"UHAJ .. LAND CLASSIFICNrION
or
l'otu1 Ar,ible Crollland C1E;ared'""'
Land Land 1954 in 1955
Al:ea (AC1"es) (Acre s1-(~~s) (Acr~.L --"--
Anchorage-Chugiru~ 70,500 2a,oL~5 y 750 90
Matanusl>.a Valley 317,500 59,435 M 8,815 445.
L01-1e1' Susi tna Valley ~.9201.00CJ 60u,oOO ~ y-if
'total 2,308,000 687,4c)o 9,565 t: ~r· .15:;
!I proven by sUl~ey -Includes class II, III, @ld IV lands only.
?J Estimated -Includes 139,81}5 acres of class II, III, and IV lands
proven by survey.
':J Unknovm -very little if any.
Farming in the iVIatanuska Valley dates back to about the turn
of the century. At that time it was confined to gardening, prinCipally
on a subsistance basis. From "this modest beginning agricultural develop-
ment grew steadily u...'1til approXii,lately 400 settlers were farming in the
valley in 191'7. Entry of the United. 8tat,es into Uorld Har I drained the
young rJen ;t·:i.~om tIle Iviatai1uslm VaJ.ley; drokJped tIle bottom out of the
agricultural market, creatine.; f'ttrm surpluses .. ihich financially broke
most of these early settlers.
At the time of the colonization plan in 1935, there were
slightly over 100 settlers in the valley. This pIcl1 superimposed an
B.ddi. tional 202 families to eng!:l.ge in agriculture. Much has been "11'i t ten
both pro and con as to the i:Ieri ts of the colonization eX'.tJeriment and the
benefi ts which may have accrued to the are;j, and the people concerned.
It is self evident th8.t agriclJ.lture has continued to grow in
importance. Undoubtedly SOille or: t:le impetus for this can be credited
to the colonization.
11
Resources and Economic Activities
The Anchorage-Chugiak area enjoys a slight advantage over the
Matanuska Valley due to its closer proximity to the major market of
Anchorage. Land values are generally higher than in the other areas.
This is primarily due to residential demands rather than farm use.
Considering the relative s:1.ze of the area and its tendency toward
urbanizationl tt is not expected to gain SUbst~ltially in agricultural
importance.
~he Lower Susitna Valley contains the largest volume of till-
able land in the power market area. However, at the same time it 1s
the least developed. Lack of access and remoteness from present markets
are two contributing factors. It will probably await development until
land requirements cannot be fully n:et by the Ha.tanuska Valley and the
Anchorage-Chugiak areas.
The land classifications give~ in footnotes 1 and 2, table I,
are those used by the Soil Conservation Servicev Their general connota-
tion is as follows:
Class II
Class III
Class IV
-Arable ~~th minor limitations in use
-Arable with major limitations in use
-Severe limitations in use, suitable tor
occasional cultivation.
Climatic conditions, 60il fertility and a susceptability to
wind eros ton, impose some limita.tions on the productlon of crops
throughout the region. This precludes classifying any of these lands
as class I -"without limitation in use." Class V, VI, VII and VIII
lands) sultable only for range" "loodland, wildlife, etc. are not fihown
here" but can be found catalogued in the various Soil Conservation
Service surveys. It will suffice to say here, however, that lane.s suit-
able for cultivation constitute 31 per cent of the surveyed areas and
approxima.tely 30 per cent of the total lands considered. Of this
potential 30 per cent arable la"''lds, apPl"oxima.tely 20 to 25 per cent
would probably reqUire some recla~tion" such as drainage.
In general" new farm lands require extensive clearing, and
heavy fert1:l.1zer applicat:1.ons. The soil mantle is usua.lly shallow" for
the most part contains little organic matter" and is slightly acidic.
Newly cleared tracts are relatively unproductive for the first year.
The costs of placing new ground into production are quite high. Clear-
ing a.lon~ runs between $100 and $200 an acre. Many areas, particularly
in the l<1atanuska Valley" are subject to severe wind erosion and con-
siderable care must be exercised in its management. Water erosion is
less of a current problem, however its presence can be expected to
increase as more slope acreages are ~laced under cultivation.
12
Resources and Economic Activities
During the past few years, a great deal has been done by the
U. S. Department of Agriculture in con,junction with tile U. S. Soil
Conservation Service and the Alaska Experiment Stati.:m at Palmer, to
evaluate tile agricultural economy of the region. Te.ble 2 lists values
of pl~duce raised and relative importance of the various cash crops.
Table 3 illustrates agricultural employment.
Most cummercial farms in the area have eA~anded considerably
beyond the 40-acre tracts of the original colony. A study made of 76
such farms by the Alaska Agricultural Experiment Station revealed that
in 195'~ the average holding of t.hose participating in the study were
24cr acres. The average cropland including field rentals was 82 acres.
These larger farms are essential to economically support full-dme
commercial farming.
Until the past few years, lack of markets was the largest
deterring factor to agricultural development. A revel"sal of this
situation is due in part to improvement in quality wld grading, modern
marl~eting methods, extension of the marlteting period with installation
of refrigerated storage facilities, and acceptance and use of local
produce by the military. Much yet remains to be done along these lines
however, before the full market potenti2..lities can be realized. \Uth-
out further increases in populat.ion the 1955 market could probably be
expanded over 100 per cent on most varieties of produce. Annual
increases in farm develol)ment are es~imated tv be lceeping u:p with the
annual increase in use due to population grovrth. However progress is
slow in taking up the lag between actual production and existing
potential market. This is illustrated in table 4, "Existing Potential
Farm Market."
Residents in the eastern section of the power market area
were not inCluded in estimates of farm produce market. At the present
time ve17 little of the farming region produce finds its w~ to this
area. Its mark.et potential will probably increase to some extent but
was neglected in this report as having a negligible effect on agricul-
tural production in general in tile upper Cook Inlet region.
Considering high cost of developing virgin l~~ds &~d the
lower initial agricultural value of newly cleared acreages, a continuing
effort at greater, more efficient use of presently cultivated l~nds is
to be expected. In this l'espect the U. S. Department of Agriculture,
Alaska Department of Agriculture, and t."le University of Plaska have con-
tributed a great deal to development of more suitable strains of crops,
livestock, etc:. Their aid has also been invaluable to the farmer in
farm management and use. Recent experiments by the Alask.a Agricultural
Experiment Station at Palmer, in cooperation with the U. S. Soil
Conservation Service and the Bureau of Reclamation, have indicated that
irrigation in the Matanuska Valley will materially increase forage
13
TABLE 2
SOURCE OF FAFU~ INCOME
'---_._---Dairy Liv8Stock Vegetables Total Farm Total
Products and Poultry and Other Commercial Use Production
1953
lwlatanuska Valley ~ 650,106 qp173,441 ;fp651,237 ~1,474,78J. *' 99,687 .;pl,574,471
Anchorage-Chugiak 14 2968 60.450 119,950 215 2 368 _~97 _122,465
Area Total ;r,; 665,074 $253,891 $771,187 ~1,690,152 ~106,784 41,796 ,93 6
1954
Matanuska Valley $ 837,644 ~172,823 ~446,518 ~1,456,985 $11 6 ,554 $1,573,539
Anchorago,-Chugiak 26,985 101.1 600 _83--¥991 212.57 6 16,553 229.129 ::0 -(I)
to
Area Total <" 664,629 $274,423 $530,509 .jjil,669,5 61 ~133,107 $1,802,668 0
~~ s::
'1
()
(I)
1955 to
Matanuska Valley ;;p 96 5,464 $128,825 :jp339,955 ;;>1,434:245 ~ 67,797 ~1,502,042 ~ p.
Anchorage-Chugiak 40~29 257!269 .-11>:825 375,223 11 2 788 ~87l011 ~ g
0
Area Total $1~005,593 $386,094 $417,780 $1,809,468 {;. 79,585 $1,889,053 ~.
()
:s>
()
c+
~. < .... c+ ....
(I)
at
.......
VI
l'ABLE 3
NmJ3EI~ OF FAIDlliRS AND FARM LABORERS -NOVEMBER 1955
Matanuska Valley Anchorage-Chugiak Total
-------------------------_ .. -._ .•. _.
Full time
Part time
Total
Farmers Hired Farmers Hired Farmers Hired
140
114
254
Regular Seasonal ~egular-Seasonar--Regular Seasonal
25
25
15
11
48
:2
2
27
16
43
155
147
302
27
27
190
~
231 ::c
CD
(II
0 ~
Ii
Q
CD
til
~
Po
~
0 ::s
0 ~
0
6" c+ ....
~.
c+ ,.....
CD
f1"
I-'
0"-
TABLE 4
11 EXISTING POTENTIAL FARM MARKET
.Y Potential
Percent
Potential 1955 Difference Increased
Per Capita Total Potential Utilization
Product Use Use Production and Actual Possible .p
Fresh Vlilk 280 lb. 26,320,000 lb. 9,102,040 lb. 17,218,060 lb. 190
Eggs 230 ca. 1,801,000 doz. 267,110 doz. 1,533,890 doz. 570
Potatoes (Civilian) 100 lbc 3,200 ton)
) 3,200 ton 3,100 ton 90
(l.fili tary ) 185 lb. 3,100 ton)
Fresh Vegetables 65 lb. 3,000 ton 600 ton 2,400 ton 400
r·leats 7 lb. 660,000 lb. 278¥5l0 lb. 38lA90 lb. 130
y Based on pre::iH~.n~l':'Y studies by U. S. Department of Agriculture?s Agricultural Stabilization and
Conservation Committee. Alaska state Office.
2V 1955 population in Anchorage-Palmer area estimated at 34,000 people living on military bases, and
64,000 people residing off bases.
Resources and Economic Activities
production of timothy grass from mid May t.'l-J.rough July. Generally, more
rain is eA":perienced in August than in the preceed:Lng three months,
apparently greatly reducing the need for irrigation during that month.
Studies carried out in 1957 showed a yield increase of 184 per cent for
high fertility level first cutting timotllY and 60 per cent for low
fertility level second cutting due to irrigation. In the same year a
36 per cent increase in potatoe yields was obtained by irrigation in the
Alaska Agricultural Ex11eriment Station test plots. These experiments
with irrigation are continuing and other crops will be included in their
scope in ensuing years.
Forestry
The forests of the power market area are described as Interior
forests, as differentiated from u1e Southern Coast forests. As such,
they are composed principally of white spruce and Alaska white birch
wi th some aspen and balsam poplar. In addition, the ",et lowlands often
include a small diameter black spruce and stu.'1ted tamarack.
The more important commercial species are the white spruce
and the Alaska white birch. Of less importance is -tile poplar or cotton-
wood, as it is locally called. Very little inventory of the Interior
forests has been taken.
The white spruce is probably the mos t widely dis tributed of
the Interior species. It has also been the most widely used to date.
Mature trees rise from 50 to 75 feet in height but seldom exceed a
diameter of 24 inches. The usual average is between 12 and 20 inches.
W'.aite spruce lumber is highly satisfactory for local use as is attested
by the production of about 6 M b.m. in 1953 by the 22 mills in the area.
It is not expected that the white spruce lumber could be economically
exported from Alaska. Nevertheless, it should continue to serve, in
part, a growing local market.
The Alaska white birch is a major species in four extensive
timber stands in and adjacent to the pm.,er market area. These poten-
tially commercial stands are usually located on the lower elevation
slopes and benchlands with 800 feet about tile maximum ground elevation
to which they extend. The mature trees reach a height of from 60 to 70
feet and diameters average between 8 to 13 inches. Larger trees, when
they occur, quite often contain heart rot.
Two of the forests are especially worthy of note. The Knik
and the Talkeetna stands are both quite extensive ~'1d relatively easy
of access.
The Knik stand extends from the Matanuska Valley to the mouth
of the Susitna River and covers an estimated 51,000 acres. However,
nearly one-third of this land area has been taken up by homesteads.
17
Resources and Economic Activities
This diverse ownership condition constitutes an additional paramount
discouragement to eventual development of the timber resources.
The Talkeetna stand covers an estimated 100,000 acres and paral-
lels the Alaska Railroad on the east side of the Susitna River. To pre-
clude the same diveJ:'se olTnership and sIJeculation problem from developing
here as it did in the Knik stand, the Uo S. Bureau of Land Management has
requested witlldrawal of this forest for timber management purposes.
Interest in possible development of these birch forests, has
been expressed off and on since 1916. However, except for some very
minor usage on a local scale, there has been no harvesting. This has
been due to several reasons, nearly all of which boil dmill to economics.
Since the Alaska requirements for birch products are not of sufficient
magnitude to support such an industry, it is imperative that these pro-
ducts, finished or otherwlse, find their way to stateside markets. To
do this they must ccmgete price wise and value wise with the hardwood
industry in the states.
Developments of 1957 indicate that both the price and the pro-
duct value hurdles may be nearly surmounted. The Alaska Railroad and
shipping lines have established special freight rates for lumber shipments
to the states. This, coupled with probable low stumpage rates for the
timber, is believed to afford sufficient economies of operation to permit
birch lumber to be placed on the market in California at a competitive
price.
The problem of value or grade and use of the wood has been one
of education rather than quality. Largely through the efforts of the
Anchorage Chamber of Commerce a large sample of logs was shipped to a
Longview, Washington hardwood firm for processing and testing. The
results of this operation have led to the decision by the firm to estab-
lish a small mill in the Talkeetna stand to determine the economics of
operation and marketing. If this pilot plant enterprise proves such an
industry to be economically sound, the firm plans a full scale logging
and lumbering operation in the area.
The Alaska white birch has been proven of excellent quality
for furniture, flooring, veneer, paneling, etc. It seems feasible that
following establishment of a lumbering operation, the next step would
be to supply finished products manufactured entirely in Alaska to a
local market. ~lis is especially attractive in the case of furniture
where the cost of shipment to Alaska is a substantial percentage of the
overall cost of the end product.
Cottonwood has also been processed in ~~e area to a very
limited extent. Its value as a hardwood however does not compare with
that of birch and in reviewing the large acreages of birch forest avail-
able it is not easy to see a demand for this inferior species for many
years to come. There has been some agitation to permit export of
18
Resources and Exonomic Activities
cottonwood logs to Japan, however the benefits to be derived by the area
from such a use are rather vague.
A large percentage of the timber in the Interior forests is not
suitable for lumbering but could support a pulping industry. However,
the far superior pulping timberlands of the Southern Coast forests appear
to still be many years away from full utilization for this purpose; hence
it appears quite premature to place any particular emphasis on this
potentiality.
Mining
The Matanuska Valley of the power market area. is the site of
the Matanuska bituminous coal fields. It was to gain access to these
fields that Congress originally authorized construction of the Alaska
Railroad in 1914. The Government planned to use Matanuska coal for its
naval shipS plying the north Pacific waters. Since coal is no longer
used for such purposes, development of the coal fields has depended on
local use.
Both strip and underground mining is carried on with the major
production from strip areas. Due to the dip of the beds and the type of
overburden, however, production costs are relatively high.
Matanuska coal is primarily used for steam generation at the
military and civilian steam powerplants in and near Anchorage. To help
meet these requirements, the Matanuska fields produced 257,548 short
tons in 1955 and 269,067 tons in 1956. Value of this production was
$3,054,502 and $3,273,111 respectively.
In addition to the local coal, it is estimated that about one-
third of the coal requirements of the Anchorage area are supplied from
the fields at Healy, 224 rail miles to the north. In spite of con-
siderably higher freight costs for shipping in Healy coal, it is able
to compete cost wise with Matanuska coal due to much lower mining costs.
Sand and gravel are the only other presently mined resources
of consequence in the power market area. A reduced construction program
however will be reflected in lesser use of this commodity.
There are numerous known deposits of minerals scattered
throughout the power market area. However, most of these are either
economically sub-marginal, marginal or as in the case of many gold
locations, further development must await product price increases or
production cost reductions.
The \-lillow Creek mining district north of Knik Arm was at one
time one of Alaskars major gold producers, however its production today
is negligible. It is estimated that probably not over half a dozen men
are presently employed in metals mining in the power market area.
19
Resources and Economic Activities
Most of the power ma't'ket area is geologically favorable to the
occurrence of oil. Considerable inter~·'::t in oil possibilities has been
shown and at l?ast one test well near ~lreka was drilled to a depth of
over 4,000 feet before abandonment. Most of the favorable areas are
presently under lease and increasad drilling activity is expected in the
future.
Due to j.ts proximity to the Koenai oil areas) Anchorage 1¥"ould
benefi t consideJ.'ably from doevelopment of a maj or oil producdng fteld
there.. Recent tj.iscoY·~ries by Ricbi'ield Oil Company on the Kenai
Peninaula are ~lite promisinge
Constru.ctlon
Throu~h the years 1950-1956 IIp.arly ha~.f a billion dollars was
spent on construetion in the Anchorage,-Pa.lmer area. 'E."'1e largest volume
occurred in 195~ with expenditares esti~ated at about $90,000,000.
Of the total construction investment in the power market area
during this period, approximately 60 per cent was for military wor.ks,
15 per cent for other FedGral agency works, 10 per c~nt for local govern-
ment and utili~J works and 15 per cent for hOUSing ~~d commercial require-
~ents. Directly and indirect~y, all but a very small segment of this
construction program was related to the military buildup.
Although construction spending in 1955 was l~ss than half that
of the peak year of 1952, the effect on local contractors has been only
a small decline~ In its economic report of September 1956; the City of
Anchorage points out that local contractors received slightly over
$53,000,000 in 1952.. In 1956 they were expected to accomplish nearly
$49,000,000 of the totala Although this includes in part, some construc-
tion carried on outside the power market area it is an indication that
the local economy is not suffering as yet, due to the continued decrease
in consturction spending.
Construction activity can probably be expected to decrease
still further, barring reLewed accelerated milita~ spending in the area,
until it reaches a more stable condition. Housing has caught up with
demand and many of the Federal civilian agencies have finished their
construction program~ However, municipal, utility and school construc-
tion should continue to iuc~ease for several years, to close the lag in
needed facilities. This, co'_'pled with normal commercial and housing
growth, the continued expansion of Territorial facilities, and various
highway programs, should maintain a relatively stable construction
industry.
Such major public works as the Methodist University (over
$3,000,000), Mental Healtl1 Hos~ital and ~omplimentary facilities
($6,000,000), Anchorage Port ($8 /800,000) are some o~ the pending
construction jobs.
20
Resources and Economic Activities
Since this survey was not extended to include possible major
industrial expansion in the area, it goes without saying that a shift
in the existing balance of the basic economy from predominantly Federal
expenditures to industrial enterprise, would reaccelerate the construc-
tion industry.
Wildlife
The power market area is one of Alaska's richest in game
resources. Dominant species to be found are moose, caribou, mountain
goats and sheep, black, brown and grizzly bear, While smaller game
includes rabbits, ptarmigan and grouse. Migratorf waterfowl of all
sorts are found here although not in sufficient numbers to be of
primary hunting interest.
The taking of big game and the coincident businesses
engendered is rapidly developing into a major income source throughout
the Terri tory. This is especially true of the power market area where
hunting lodges, guide services, etc. are plentiful. The value of big
game as a supplemental food source to the local huuter is difficult to
estimate but is believed to be considerable.
Trapping is still successfully carried on in many locales of
the power market area. At one time this was the principal industry of
Alaska and still ranks high in utilization of natural resources. In
the power market area it continues to d~~ndle in relative importance as
an economic resource. Principle beneficiaries and those most actively
engaged in trapping are the Indians.
Several species of fur bearers are found in the power market
areao Among the more important are mink" marten, weasel, muskrat,
beaver and fox.
Fishing
The commercial fisheries in the power market area itself are
not overly important al~ough the Copper River on the east boundary and
the Susi tna on the west are both important salmon streams. AIl estimated
50,000 cases of salmon are packed annually in Anchorage. This coupled
with a fresh frozen plant and two or three hand-pack plants constitutes
most of the fish processing industry.
M~ part-time and a few fQll-time fishermen reside in the
Anchorage area and fish in the southern reaches of Cook Inlet. Although
very little of their catch is actually processed in the power market
area, the individual incomes ~epresent an economic asset to the area.
21
Resources and Economic Activities
Fresh water sport fishing is engaged in by large numbers of
residents and tourists alike and lends itself to a successful outing.
Salmon can be taken by rod and reel from many of the rivers and their
tributaries which empty into Cook Inleto This salmon take includes
kings, silvers and chums.
The fresh water fisheries are composed primarily of rainbow,
steelhead, cutthroat, lake and Dolly Varden trout as well as grayling.
Transportation
The power market area is accessible by highway, rail, water,
and air. From the main highway junction on the east to the transporta-
tion hub of Anchorage on the west, passenger and freight movements are
both modern and convenient. In addition, nearly all freight to Interior
Alaska passes through the power market area as does a large measure of
the passenger traffic.
Highways
Three main highways play an important part in vehicular
accommodations in the area.
The paved Glenn Highway is the main east-west artery and, in
effect, bisects the full length of the power market area. It extends
from mile 0 at Anchorage to mile 328 at Tok Junction where it joins the
Alaska Highway. At mile 189 near Glenallen, the Glenn Highway inter-
sects the paved Richardson Highway. This junction is of considerable
importance to the eastern extremities of the power market area since
the Richardson is the primary north-south highway from the seaport of
Valdez to the Interior. Truck traffic from Valdez to Fairbanks and
other interior points follows this route.
The third major highway joins the Kenai Peninsula port of
Seward with Anchorage. This highway also provides access to the agri-
cultural and oil lands of the western side of the Kenai through its
junction with the Sterling Highway 38 miles north of Seward. The entire
128-mile length of the Seward-Anchorage Highway is paved.
Many secondary roads criss-cross the power market area pro-
viding access to many local areas. Chief among these is the Palmer-
Wasilla network which serves much of the farming lands in the Matanuska
and Little Susitna River Valleys.
Railroads
Anchorage, Palmer, the Matanuska Valley, and. intervening
areas are located in -what is known as the "Railbelt." This nomenclature
22
Resources and Economic Activities
is derived from the north-south traverse of the Alaska Railroad. This
railroad, comp~ted by the Federal Government in 1923, joins the southern
port of Seward with the Interior City of Fairbanks some 470 miles away.
Enroute, it passes through Anchorage, Wasilla and other villages in the
western end of the power market area. A spur line connects with Palmer
and the Matanuska coal fields and further south another spur connects
wi th the military port of Wni ttier. This railroad forms a steel link
between all of the major population and industrial centers of South
Central and Interior Alaska as well as the large militarJ bases at
Pnchorage and Fairbanks. Anchorage is the site of the main supply,
warehouse and shop facilities of the railroad.
The bulk of freight to Anchorage and the Interior is presently
hauled by rail from Seward and wbittier~ In its economic survey of
September 1956, the City of Anchorage estimated that about 80 per cent
of supplies to Anchorage a~d vicinity are hauled in this manner. Based
on the 1954 figures co~piled by the Corps of Engineers, this would
represent about 380,000 tons of civilian goods shipped by rail in that
year.
Military tonnages have not been disclosed but probably exceed
civilian requirements by quite a margin.
Passenger accommodations are also provided by the railroad.
Use of modern diesel equipment, co~ortable terminal facilities and
regular schedules make this scenic train trip a well utilized mode of
transportation~
Water
Ocean shipping accounts for most of the freight movement to
and from Alaska. This is true of both military and civilian freight.
Four seaports serve the power market area, although three of
them are not actually located in it. The port of Valdez, located on
the Gulf of Alaska, was not considered to be within economical trans-
mission distance of the project, however a considerable volume of the
requirements of the eastern portion of the power market area are sup-
plied through this port. It is a much shorter trucking distance from
Valdez to Copper Center or Glenallen than it is fro~ Anchorage.
The two most important seaports are those of Seward and
Whittier, both on the Kenai Peninsula. Seward handles most of the
civilian freight for the Anchorage-Palmer area, while Whittier is the
main port of entry for military consignments.
The port facilities at Anchorage, are the only ones servicing
the power market area directly.
23
Resources and Economic Activities
Although a considerable volume of ocean freight is handled at
the Anchorage dock, its value as a port is presently curtailed due to
the extreme tides , silting .• winter ice and inadequate docking facilities.
These condi tlons are not without possible remedy hO\{ever and an
$8,800,000 municipa! bon~ 5,ssue has been approved by the voters fo~ this
improvement. In its economic studies, the City of Anchorage estimates
that, were proper port facllities available) Anchorage port would handle
in excess of 240,000 tons of general cargo in 1958, resulting in a
savings of over $3,000,000 to shippers.
For many years steamships provided the primary method of travel
to and from Alaska~ The subsequent completion and utilization of the
Alaska Highway, coupled with the increasing passenger accommodations
supplied by the several airlines provided alter.nate and more diversified
methods of travel. Due to continued declines in passenger requirements
for steamship travel to Alaska, this service was discontinu .. ~ by Alaska
Steamship Company in 1954, and no such service has been available to the
power market area since.
Air
Air travel has long been of utmost importance to Alaska's
everyda:y functions. It is only natural that any growth of Alaska is
reflected in the growth and betterment of its air facilities and service.
Anchorage occupies the position of being the central hub for
every means of transportation in the area including air traffic. Three
civil airports, the Anchorage International Airport, Merrill Field, and
Hood Lake are located here o Hood Lake, seaplane base, is often con-
sidered a part of the International Airport; however it has its own
tower and is reported separately by the Civil Aeronautics Administration
in their fiscal year report, "Federal Airways Air Traffic Activities.1I
Major airlines scheduled service is offered between the states
and Anchorage (primarily through Seattle) and to the Orient. Local air-
lines supply scheduled service to many of the outlying Alaskan cities
and communities. From these airports, charter service is available to
anywhere in Alaska.
In its fiscal year report for 1955 the Civil Aeronautics
Administration recorded 285,195 operations from Anchorage airports. In
1956 Anchorage operations had increased to 312,944 and in 1951 to 421,358.
For the past three years only three other cities in the nation (Chicago,
Detroit, and New York City), handJ.ed more air traffic.
Gulkana airport, with a 5,200-foot paved runway, is the only
one in the eastern extremities of the power market area 'Which is able
to handle large planes. However, there are many smaller strips scattered
throughout the power market area which handle local and charter small
plane service.
24
Resources and Economic Activities
Air service is important, not only from the standpoint of
passenger travel but for the movement of freight. To many isolated
Alaska villages, this is the primary method of freight haulage. In its
economic survey the City of Anchorage pointed out that in 1955, 5,757
tons of inbound and 7,809 tons of outbound freight were transported by
air to and from the two major Anchorage fields.
Tourism
Probably the fastest growing industry in Alaska is the tourist
industry. Although accurate statistics are lacking, estimates on tour-
ist expend1.ture,;3 in the Anchorage area alone place the figure at well
over $1,500,000 for 1956. Tourism is of considerable importance to the
eastern part of the power market area and along the highway joining
east and westo The majority of the lodges, motels, etc. found along
the road (and there are a considerable number) derive most of their
income from the tourist.
It is believed that the number of stateside tourists to Alaska
decreased in 1955 due to termination of steamship accommodations but
travel was back on the increase in 1956. Airplanes have probably sup-
planted a large share of the discontinued steamer facilities as a mode
of travel. klthough ~~e Alaska Highw~ is considered a good gravel road,
many people are reluctant to utilize it due to adverse publicity, the
time involved or a disincline.tion to such a long drive on an unpaved
road. Canada is presently engaged in paving the approach roads to the
Alaska Highway which, when completed, will remove the worst stretches of
the entire trip. Accommodations along the highway, are, for the most
part plentiful but of mediocre quality, acting as an additional dis-
couragement. At such time as accommodations are improved upon and the
highway is paved in its entirety, the tourist traffic to Alaska should
literally boom.
25
CHAPTER IV
POWER SUPPLY AND MARKETS
Periodic power shortages have been occurring in the power
market area for many yearsa In the Anchorage-Palmer area, new power
developments, when built,are generally only sufficient to alleviate
an existing shortage. In rare times when a surplus of generating capac-
ity does exist it is of short duration and usually consists of the assort-
ment of diesel units retained in the systems for standby and emergency.
In the Glenallen area, central station power for general use
has never. been available. Electricity, where used, is supplied princi-
pe,lly by individual light plants, an expensive operation.
Past and Present Powe~Supply and Use (Ci~.1-].ia.."1)
Three electric dtstribution utilities serve the power market
area at the present time. The Matanuska Electric Association, a Rural
Electrification Association Cooperative, serves Palmer and other loads
of the Natanuska and Knik Valleys. Chugach Electric Association,
Incorporated, also a Rural Electrification Association Cooperative,
serves most .. of the area around the City of Anchorage and a small portion
of the municipality. The municipally-owned systelll of Anchorage provides
service to most of the city residents and a small part of the suburbs.
Three sources of generatlon are available to tJ,lese utili ties.
The Eklutna Project completed in 1955 and operated by the Bureau of
Reclamation provides 30~OOO kilowatts of hydro power to the network.
The Chugach Electric Association, Incorporated, in conjunction
with the Alaska Railroad built the 9,500-kilowatt Knik Arm steam plant
in 1952. The capacity of this plant has been increased to 14,500 kilo-
watts by the addition of a 5,OOO-kilowatt unit in 1951. The Knik Arm
plant also includes 950 kilowatts of diesel eqUipment which is main-
tained for emergency use~
The City of Anchorage has two diesel plants maintained for
standby use. Aggregate capacity of these two plants is 6!136 kilowatts.
One plant is used frequently by the city for peeking system loads which
exceed 12,000 kilowatts.
The Matanuska Electric Association has no generating capacity
of their own and depends entirely upon the Eklutna Project as its source.
Power requirements of the area have increased over 360 per
cent in the past eight years. Table 5 lists the annual civilian energy
and capacity use since 1948.
26
Year
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
Power Supply and Markets
TABLE 5
ANNUAL POWER REQUIREMENTS -ANCHORAGE-PALMER AREA
E..'1ergy Estimated
Kilowatt-CoincidentaJ. Kilowatt-hour
hours Peak KWQ Increase in 10
30,388:000 6,700 16.6 35,426,000 7,650 23.6 43,805,000 9,050 26.6 55,444,000 12,750
74,937,000 16,800 35.2
100,964,000 21,200 34.7
110,016,000 24,700 9.0
122,902,000 27,500 11.7
140,624,000 32,000 14.4
Despite the periodic power shortages experienced in the
Anchorage-Palmer area customer average power use has continually
increased. Aggregate utility use averaged approximately 5,580 kilowatt-
hours per customer in 19510 This increased steadily to an average of
6,740 kilowatt-hours in 1955, the last year for which such figures were
compiled for the entire area. The availability of Eklutna power and the
resultant consumer rate cuts accomplished by the utility systems should
be reflected in greater average usage after 1955. It is estimated that
this figure may reach 8,000 kilowatt-hours in 1957.
Unlike the average power bill in the states and most commod-
ities in Alaska, the cost of power to the ultimate consumer in the
Anchorage area has continually decreased during the past few years.
The residential customer in Anchorage pays about $10.00 for
a month's use of 250 kilowatt-hours. This is one of the lowest bills
in Alaska and only 39 per cent higher than the average typical residential
electric bill in the states. Table 6 compares the approximate typical
electric bill for residential customers in some of .~aska's major cities
and the National Average Residential Bill of 1955.
27
Power Supply and Markets
TABLE 6
COMPARISON OF TIPICAL RESIDEnTIAL ELECTRIC BILLS
Locale
Ketchikan Y
Juneau ~ Anchorage ~ Sitka
Palmer §j
Seward ~ Fairbanks
U.S. Avg. Residential 21
i Y Approximate Kw~-hJ:'. Use Cost per Month
~---.. -'--~, ~--~------
l 25 ! 50 ! 100 150 : 250 . 375 ' 500 1 750
; I, I , I . I : :1.50,2.50 4~00 5~50: 6.75, 8.31 9~88i13.00
:2800 2~50'5.00 6.50 1 9.10:11.6011.60;16.35
2.00:3.00.)4.75: 6.5010.00;12.25,14.50 119.00
2.004~00;6~50: 9.00'14.00!20.25,26.50!
2.50.4cooi6095, 9.45:14~4517.10:19095:27.45
3~OO,5.50'9000 11~50 16.50'22050124~OOi -
12e25'4.50~8.25·12"OO;17.50~22.50:27.50:
i : t !!!,
; 1.36; '3.86 I 7.18: 110.30'
I ' ;
1 J
Y vfuere separate water heater rates are involved, it was assumed that
the first 250 kw.-hr. monthly use was for lights and power.
~ Rates in effect in 1957.
~/ Rates in effect in 1957. Three meter rate structure (lights) power,
water heating). Values shown reflect winter rates; summer rates are
somewhat lower.
~ Rates effective July 1956.
~/ Rates in effect in 1955.
§I Rates in effect in 1956.
II Rates in effect in 1954.
~ Rates effective January I, 1954. Monthly use of 250 kw.-hr. or more
presumed to take advantage of an all electric rate schedule which has
a minimum bill of $17.50.
2/ Federal Power Commission, T,ypical Electric Bills, 1955, Cities of
2,500 or more.
28
Power Supply and Markets
Military Po~er Supply
The two large military bases near Anchorage, supply all of
their own pow.;r requirements., Aggregate installed capacity of these
plants is in excess of 60,000 kilowatts of which approximatelY 50,000
kilowatts al'e steam generation.
Tbese military plants are not available for supplying off-base
civilian loads, however they have a very definite influence on firm
dependabili ty in the civilian pOyTer network. All systems, including the
militar,y, have a tie-in YTith the Bureau of Reclamation's Anchorage Sub-
station. An ag::;ocement between the Bureau and the Military provides for
emergency interchange of energy to the tie-line capacity of about 20,000
kiloyTatts 0 The physical tie between the two systems and this interchange
agreement establish a reciprocal emergency rcs8r.Yoir of generating
capacity to both systems without th~ necessi~J of maintaining additional
U11used facilities.
The mllitary system also provides an additional market for sale
of Eklutna Project dump energy when such is available.
Plates 1 and 2 illustrate graphically the trend in power reqUire-
ments in the Anchorage-Palmer area since 19480 Loads of the past have
been composed almost e~tirely of residential, commercial, and municipal
needs, each type of use R~resultant of population growth. The small
industrial loads are about the same ~agnitude as commercial and are
included in that classificat.ion. Since the area economy has been based
to a large extent on the military activities in the area, major indus-
trial power requirements have been negligible.
It is pro~able that the rate of load growth immediately follow-
ing 1957 will be curtailed to some extent. This situation is reflected
in the load curves of plates 1 and 2. These curves anticipate that in
1958 and 1959 the greater average use per customer, the growth of farm
loads, munic:i.pal, and industrial rcquirements i etc. will be considerably
offset by fewer residential and commercial customers. This decrease in
customers is expected to develop as a result of sharp cutbacks presently
being effected in military spending and personnel in the area.
The Anchorage-Palmer area is undergoing an economic change.
It must change from a base composed of mj.litary and government spending
to a base of more industrial make-up. In view of the proximity of
exploi table natural resources) the posH.ion of fUlchorage as a trans-
portatior.. <rnd 3UPPl..V ('enter: ".ne.. ~e h.cre'3.sing propensit.y to industrial
29
GFO 990508
CARIBOU POWER MARKET
ANNUAL ENERGY REQUIREMENTS
AND SUPPLY
(EXCLUDING INDUSTRIAL AND MILITARY)
PLATE I
400----~--------~--------~r_--------r_--------r_--------+_--~
350-----r--------~--------;_--------~--------+_--------r_--~
/ /
300
// ~ ~/
~ //
~ ~/
I //
/ /
//
/ /
/
///
/ /
/
~/
250 ~----~--------+_--------+_--------+_----~~/L/4_--------~----~ / ~ // ° ~/
J //
~ ~/
// ~ ~ ° / 200 ~--~----------r_--r_----+_------~~--------+_--------+_--~
Z //
0/ ,II'
J // Anchorage -Palmer Area
J Historical Esti mated /:/ -// ...:: ..--1' :;.~
::::------
150 I'
100
50
1948 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70
842 -906 -I!!
GPO 99U506
PLATE 2
I
CARIBOU POWER MARKET I
ANNUAL GENERATING CAPACITY
REQUIREMENTS AND SUPPLY
(EXCLUDING INDUSTRIAL AND MILITARY)
rBO ------+----------r---------+----------r---------~--------_r----~
/
//
/ //
/ //
~70 ------+---------~---------4----------~--------4_--------_+~/--~
/1//
/ /
'"'./ / ,,!. /
eO / 't /
'Iir,///
I ,rz.~// r60 ------+---------~--~-----4----------~------~~ /
~~/ //
~~//
/ / /,f (/) 0,/ // ~ ~/ ~ 0'" / / r--..... al
l
/
r50 ~ ----r---------4_---r-----+----------r-~~----+_--------_r--~-o // ~ g Historical Estimated // ~
(futu,. co;nc;dentOI J:" ~ lL.. o I
( approxim ate
coincidental peak) peak) // ///
(/) I / // Anchorage-Palmer Area
~40 0 ----~--------~--_r----_+----~~/----r---------,-----------r---
Z //
~ --::: _-:!/ /
6 /~-
-30
-20
I
I-
V
~IO I (~
I I I I I
194B 50 52
CALENDAR YEARS
I I I I I I I I I
54 56 58 60 62
>-~ -u
<t
0-c:r
U
Z c:r
-.J
> -u
(!)
z -l-
(/) -X
W
I I I I I I
64 66 68
E c
~ -(/')
--
c
>-
"0
>-
I
70
Power Supply and Markets
development, there is ever,y reason to believe that this transition will
be accomplished.
The load trend was therefore continued after 1959 and reveals
that under this type of growth, over 76,000 kilowatts of installed capac-
ity will be necessary to meet the residential, commercial and municipal
loads of 1970. This is more than double the expected peak requirements
of 1957 for nonindustrial loads. The following factors should lead to
attainment of this estimate.
1. Central station service to the Glenallen area. The Copper
Valley Electric Association was granted a Rural Electification
Administration loan in July 1957 to purchase and install two
250-kilowatt diesel units and 48 miles of distribution line.
Their initial service will supply over 200 customers.
This will open the way to further development and service
in the eastern region of the power market area.
2. If power availability can keep pace with demand and the present
reasonable rates are maintained, average customer usage should
double by 1970.
3. With the rapidly growing interest of farmers in irrigation
pumping, average farm use may well quadruple by that date.
4. Numbers of customers should again increase following a short
slack period.
It should be stressed that these estimates do not include large
industrial loads. In view of the ready need for such a block of power
due to normal load growth the trend load curves were not expanded to
encompass industrial uses.
From all appearances, nonindustrial loads will exceed presently
installed hydro and steam capacities by 1962. Furthermore, assuming suf-
ficient power were continually available and at reasonable rates, the
capacity of a project the size of Caribou could be fully utilized by non.
industrial loads alone within a few short years.
Even then, however, there would be no excess firm capability
with which to encourage indust~ial development.
It is unfortunate that the Caribou Project has proved to be
infeasible. It would have provided on optimum size development to
bridge the pending power gap between existing capacities and a maJor
development such as the Devil Canyon Project on the Susitna River.
30
CHAPTER V
CARIBOU CREEK, WATER RESOURCES AND UTILIZATION
The water resources of Caribou Creek are little used today.
Periodic working of a few gold placer claims on an upper tributary and
a mode!'ate sport fishery represents the extent of present beneficial
utilization.
Construction of the Caribou project would not interrupt the
gold placer operations and would, in all probability, improve and expand
the sport fishery. The value of Caribou Creek basin as a recreational
area would be somewhat enhanced due principally to better fishing and
easier access.
The ~ost important aspect of develop~ent of the water resources
of Caribou Creek is its potential as a sourcz of hydroelectric energy.
Normal operation of the project for power purposes would afford some
minor benefit in control of Mayor June floods of the l'liatanuslta River
but would have little effect on floods later in the year.
Water Resources
Caribou Creek drainage basin and Caribou Creek profile are
shown on plate 3. The terrain is mountainous with basin elevations
ranging from approximately 2,100 feet at the dam site to 6,000 feet in
the headwaters which originate in the Talkeetna Mountains. The basin
has a general southern exposure and only a few very small glaciers are
shown on topographical maps.
Vegetation on the upper slopes is made up primarily of low
bushes, grasses, etc. Small spruce, birch and cottonwood trees are
found in scattered stands along the lower slopes. Most of the area is
underlain by permafrost. A thick, mossy overburden insulates the perma-
frost areas against Sumffier thawing.
Precipj.tati,on
There are no precipitation stations within the basin. Non-
recording precipitation stations are located at Sheep Mountain just
south of the basin and Eureka, east of the basin. Records at Sheep
Mountain for the period 1944-1954 indicate a mean annual precipitation
of 10.12 inches. Generally more precipitation occurs at higher eleva-
tions and as most of the watershed area is at a higher elevation ~~an
Sheep Mountain, the average precipitation for the basin would be con-
siderably greater than 10 inches per year. The average runoff at the
waterstage recorder located on the bridge where the Glenn Highway
crosses Caribou Creek, was conputed to be 14.65 inches for the period
31
GPO 990508
o
-.JL
Jl
CARIBOU
~
NOV. 4, 1957
DA~::"I
--r
I
5
SCALE OF MILES
MAX. W.S. EI. 2510. --
PLATE 3
CARIBOU
DRAINAGE
CREEK
BASIN
AREA
EI. 251Q
5
I
~
/"
~
;rOo""
5000
2800
21100
2400
2200
2000
1100
In
Z o ...
<l >
14.1
...J
14.1
10 15 20 25
RIVER MILES
CARIBOU CREEK PROFILE
MILE 0 TO MILE 25
842-906-10
Caribou Creek, Water Resources and Utilization
1940-1957 based on an Eklutna Creek-Caribou Creek correla.tion study. An
accurate estimate at the total aillount ot precipitation falling on the
wa.tershed would be difficu~t to maJ~e until studies are conducted to deter-
mine the consumptive use of natural vegetation in the area.
Runoff records
Historic~l.--A water stage recorder established and maintained
by the U. S. Geological Survey at tile Glenn High1.,ray Bridge has provided
a continuous rec0l1d of the runoff of Caribou Ci'eek from May 1955 to the
present time.
Computed.--Due to the short period of time for which a histori-
cal record is available, it was necessary to extend the lunoff record by
some means. Attempts were made to correla.te t.'1e l"'Unoff of Caribou Creek
with Eklutna Creek at Eklutna Lake Outlet, Matanuska River at Palmer,
Li t tle Sus i tna Ri ver ne 8.r Palmel1 and the Sou tll Fork of C atnpbell Creek
near Anchorac;e. All of these attempts resulted in POOl1 correlations
with a wide dispersion of plotted points.
A good correlation resulted when the monthly runoff of Caribou
Creek "l-TaS compared with the rtu'1.off of the follo,\>ling month at Eklutna
Creek. A straight line r81ationship derived by the metilod of least
squares resulted in a coefficient of correlation IIr" of .9250. This
correlo~tion is sho'\>m graphicallJr on l)late lj..
Most of the Caribou Creek drainage area faces southward and
consequently is sooner affected by the spring and summer sunshine than
the Eldutna drainage basin ·~lhich is a closed basin over half of which
faces northward. Apparentl~yUlis difference in exposure is the cause
of the one month's time differential in runoff (most of which is snow
melt) between the t,\>lO basins.
During the su~ner of 1957 temperatures were conSiderably above
normal whiJ.e preCipitation was below normal in tQ.ese areas. The warm
temperatures resulted in a high sustained runoff due to glacier melt in
the Ei,lutna basin with no comparable effect in the Caribou basin. The
correlation would be improved if this difference in glacier melt did
not exist.
The runoff of Caribou Creek at tile gage was extended b?~k
through stream year 1939-1940, the period for which a record was avail-
able for Eklutna Creek. TIle runoff at the gage was tilen converted to
runoff at Caribou Darn 6i te by using a drainage area relationship and is
shown in table T.
32
PLATE 4
100
z
0 ..... 0
.....
~
(/)
80
0:::
<:(
W
Z
.....J
~ <:(
W U
W -60 0::: 0::: 0 U .....
~ (/)
0 I
CD I 0::: u.: <:(
u <{ 40
0
LL 0 LL 0 0
Z
~
0:::
~ 20
I .....
Z
0
~
II
>-0
/
( / / 0
(~;. 4~~~~ II •
Ott..:
4..,,0' °
~ /
/ 0
(.)
1-'0_ ~
0 ;;( <:l
0. °
:,. 0
o 20 40 60 80 100
X:: NEXT MONTHS RUNOFF EKLUTNA CREEK
AT LAKE OUTLET 1000 A.F.-NATURAL
CORRELATION CURVE
CARIBOU CREEK WITH EKLUTNA CREEK
OCT, 31,1957 842-906-8
GPO 990508
TABLE 7
COHRELATED AND COl-PUTED 11 CARIBOU CREEK RUNOFF
Run-off at Caribou Creek at Dam site Unit 11000 Acre-feet Drainage Area 259.5 Sguare Hiles
Year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. Nay June July Aug. Sept. Total
1938-39 21.11
1939-40 12.16 3.46 2.10 1.38 2.89 3.29 6.01 27.41 61.69 69.12 54.90 18.87 263.28
1940-41 5e85 3.77 2,02 1.62 2.02 2.18 3.13 41.24 56 .42 54.49 23.10 6.33 202.17
1941-42 5.05 5.21 2.97 1.77 2.26 2.02 18.79 30.62 39.24 24.54 33.88 14.80 181.15
1942-43 3.77 2.33 1.62 0.98 1.05 1.54 3.85 27.66 48.19 42.91 14.48 6.97 155.35
1943-44 10.96 4~57 2.26 0.·74 1.05 1.54 9.13 44.19 70.07 83.58 25.43 11.76 265.28
1944-45 4.26 2.33 1.13 0.74 0.74 1.38 7.45 32.61 63.37 57.13 17.83 9.76 198.73
1945-46 3.21 1.22 1~05 0,,90 1.05 1.54 8.01 35.73 67.29 40.91 23.02 4.89 188.82
1946-47 4~41 2~33 1.94 1.54 2.18 2.10 5.44 24.14 61.45 45.63 27.02 12.48 190.66 0
1947-48 6.89 4,,65 3.62 1.69 1.69 1.77 6.89 27.66 48.19 46 .35 14.80 7.45 171.65 II' Ii
\JJ 1948-49 4.10 6.01 2.66 1.69 1.46 1.61 8.01 25.90 49.38 50.02 34.37 8.33 193.54 ~.
\JJ 0'
1949-50 5.85 3 .. 93 2.90 1.77 1.94 1.62 3.61 30.13 50.99 56.98 16.07 5.77 181.56 g
1950-51 2.26 2.73 2.02 1.38 1.38 2.02 5.37 26.22 69.60 56 .33 49.38 8.32 227.01 (')
1951-52 4~97 3.13 2 .. 98 1.38 1.62 1.30 3.05 19.74 50.90 40.52 17.04 18.15 164.78 Ii
CD
1952-53 8.96 5.29 2.74 2.10 1.85 2.18 10.72 51.46 83.58 63.52 24.79 11.84 269.03 CD
;t;'
1953-54 4089 3.54 1.94 1.21 1.54 1.54 8.65 2/29.97 51.70 59.69 27.74 10.40 202.81 ..
1954-55 6.80 4.73 1.77 1.61 2.26 2.10 P3.91 29.38 14.86 12.96 161.11 ~ 4.18 16.55 ~ 1955-5 6 4.77 1.68 0.68 0.50 0.41 0.31 4.38 35.09 80.39 58.90 25.79 18.85 231.75 CD
195 6-57 6.20 2.96 2.48 1.84 1.30 1.51 1.78 50.96 67.93 38.45 17.40 15.61 208.42 Ii
~
CD
18-year (II g TOTAL 105.36 63.87 38.88 24.84 28.69 31.55 118.45 577.28 1084.29 918.45 461.90 203.54 3657.10 Ii
(')
NEAN 5.85 3.55 2.16 1 .. 38 1.59 1.75 6.58 32.07 60.2.4 51.03 25.66 11.31 203·17 CD
(II
PERCElIJT 2.68 1.75 1.06 0.68 0.78 0.86 3.24 15.78 29.65 25.12 12.63 5.57 100.00 g
p.
!I Taken as 90 per cen~ of the correlated runoff at Caribou Creek at the gage (based upon drainage c:
ci" ~. area relationShip). I--'
21 First month of operation of stage recorder established on Caribou Creek at the
~.
Glenn Highway bridge. N
~
~.
0 ~
Caribou Creek, Water Resources and Utilization
Water rights
Appropriation of water in Alaska is not governed by Federal
or Territorial laws. Co~non law, expressed in court decisions, recognizes
principles of priority, beneficial use, highest use, and negotiability.
There are no established rights to the waters of Caribou Creek
which would hinder the development of Caribou Project. A few gold placer
mining claims do exist on Caribou Creek but the project will not affect
them.
The need for reservoir releases for downstream fishery resources
is evaluated in the following statement by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service:
"Existing stream flow records indicate that increment
flows in the section of Caribou Creek between the dam and the
powerhouse will be inadequate to sustain a fish population under
project operation. However, the fishery resources of this
stream section are considered to be of minor importance due to
the steep grade of the stream bed and the presence of numerous
falls and cascades. It is believed benefits resulting from
development of a reservoir fishery and regulated year-round
flows in the stream section below the powerhouse would more
than offset the loss to the fishery in the upstream section.
In addition, the roads and trails required for project con-
struction would facilitate access to the area for fishermen
and would result in greater utilization of the fishery than
currently exists. Therefore, it is anticipated that no
minimum flow reqUirements need be prescribed for the area
between the dam and the powerhouse."
Water Utilization
The general plan of development is discussed in detail in
Chapter VI and is sho'WIl on plate 7. The project "ould serve a single
purpose, hydroelectric power generation. Its remote location would
preclude its development for other uses. The project would consist of
an earth and rockfill dam located about four miles upstream from the
Caribou Creek Bridge. A tunnel and steel penstock would deliver the
water to a powerhouse near the Glenn Highway.
Caribou reservoir
Caribou reservoir weald have a tot~ storage of 240,000 acre-
feet at maximum water surface elevation of 2,510, of which 203,000
acre-feet could be used for power production. About 7,000 acre-feet
~ o
'" '" o
<l\ o
a>
2600
z
0
CAPACITY---Mox.W.S. EI. 2510.:..:-=.::-::~______ __ _ --..--. I-
2500 <t 240,000 A.~ --~~~~----r---------+-~-----~ __ q---------4~~--·~··~--~--------~
>
LU
-I
w
2400
,·--Min. Operating Surface EL 2313. 37,000 A.~
2300 - - - - - --1-- -... -1-- ---t--~-+-! --~--1-~~--+~---+-----~·--+-~-~--~-~
- ---"-:---=-Powe-;:-Tun~ Invert EI. 2294. 30000 A.F. ,
AREA and CAPACITY CURVES
CARIBOU PROJECT
M' ---Outlet Works EI. 2140. 1000 A.F. _-.r ________ j
AREA IN ACRES
500 1000 1500 2000
2100----~-------------------~-------------~---------------------L--------------------~------~
o 100 200 300 400 500
CAPACITY IN THOUSANDS OF ACRE-FEET
OCT. 10,1955-Rev. DEC. 2,1957 842-906-1
Caribou Creek, Water Resources and Utilization
of inactive storage bet,.,reen the power tunnel invert elevation 2,294 and
elevation 2,313 would p=ovide mini~um head and ice cover for the tunnel.
Of the 30;000 acre-feet of dead storage below elevation 2,294, all but
about 1,000 acre-feet could be drained by rr:.ea!~s of the outlet works at
elevation 2~140> A tai.lv;s,ter elevation of 1,.774 would result in a
hydraulic head for power generation varying from 736 feet to 539 feet.
The area and capacity curves for Caribou Reservoir are shown
on plate 5.
The 203,000 acre-feet of active storage is necessary to regu-
late flows vli th:Ln each year and also to provide holdover storage for
yea=s of below normal runoff. Over 80 per ce'0t of the seasonal runoff
occurs duri.ng the months of May, Jur.e, July and August. The reservoir
mus t s tore the surplus wa t8r during this :per::"xl of hi.gh runoff to meet
the greater tb,an avc;>:,age demand for firm enera during the winter when
rlIDoff is low.
Al tl:ough extended. severe drouth cycles of neany years duration
such as are experienced in the western United States do not occur in
tais area, some long term carry-over storage is re'luiredo The reservoir
operation study shows that t..~e reservoir could have been full during
August 1946 and have been lowered to its minir::u!i1 capacity during April
1953, indicating a carry-over for seven years. It would have taken
until July 1957 to completely refill the reservoir, although it lacked
only 2,000 acre-feet of being full in August 1954.
Sedimentation
Quantitative measurements on the amount of silt carried by
Caribou Creek have not been made. However, due to the absence of lLajor
glaciers in the drainage basin, the quantity of silt carried by the
stream is qUite small and silt depoEition in the reservoir will not be
a major problem. Silt carried by Caribou Creek at the present time
originates from slides along the canyon walls and from placer mining
operations.
Detailed estimates on sedirr:.ent encroachment were not prepared
for this report. It appears reasonable to assull:e, however, that the
30,000 acre-feet of dead storage plus 7,OCO feet of inactive storage
reserved for head ar.d ice cover, and U.e 26,300 acre-feet of unused
active storage (see deecription of operation study) should insure
operation for the life of the project without sedi~ent encroachment
reducing the reserroir firm yield.
35
Caribou Creek, Water Resources and Utilization
Evaporation
There are no records of evaporation rates for the area. During
winter months the reservoir surface would be frozen over limiting water
losses to sublimation of the snow and ice cover and possiblY seepage.
The conversion f~om prereservoir conditions to postreservoir conditions
would probablY result in an actual gain in water supplY as the saving
in consumptive use by the removal of natural vegetation and foliage in
the reservoir area would more than compensate for the evaporation loss
due to a greater water surface area. Therefore the amount of error
that wouJ.d be introduced in this report by making no allowances for
evaporation from the reservoir surface, is considered to be negligible.
Seepage
Character of material at the dam site foundations and in the
reservoir area and the prevalence of permafrost indicate seepage losses
will be small or nonexistent.
Period of Study
The operation study was run from 1939-40 through 1956-57,
the period for which a computed r~~off record was available. This
period includes both wet and dry years and should be representative
of the conditions of runoff that m~ occur.
Monthly Distribution of Annual Power Generation
The follow~ng monthly percentages of the firm annual power
generation were used in this report:
oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Total
8.0 100.0
This monthlY distribution is representative of actual power
use in the market area as the actual records of the Anchorage MuniCipal
Light and Power 1epaxtment and the Chugach Electric Association,
Incorporated were us~a as a basis for deriving the figures.
Reseryoir Oreration Study
A plotting of reservoir storage versus yield resulted in a
smooth curve with no sudden changes in slope. An exarr.ination of this
curve and a maSD curve of runeff at the dam site indicated that a
reservoir provicing near~v complete control of the runoff would be
36
Caribou Creek, Water ResGurces and Utilization
desired. No significant change in dam section would result in construct-
ing a dam of sufficient height to obtain this storage. It was therefore
assumed that a dam of sufficient size to obtain an active capacity of
203,000 acre-feet would result in the optimum plan of development.
A theoretical monthly operation study of the reservoir and
powerplant was made for the period of study 1940 through 1957. This
study is shown graphically on plate 6 and is summarized in table 3.
An examination of the Caribou runoff record and the monthly
operation study indicated that the reservoir would be full at the end
of September 19400 Runoff records available for other Alaskan streams
indicate that the years immediately prior to 1940 were not dry years,
further supporting this assumptiono If by chance the reservoir would
not have filled in 1940 it would definitely fill in 1941 with no effect
on the firm power output.
A firm energy generation of 114,000,000 kilowatt-hours can be
realized from Caribou Project. Minimum storage in the reservoir "las
63,300 acre-feet compared to 37,000 acre-feet of inactive storage
indicating that a slightly larger generation could be realized. However
an output of 115,000,000 kilowatt-hours per year would have encroached
upon inactive storage so 114,000,000 kilowatt-hours can be considered
the firm annual generation to the closest 1,000,000 kilowatt-hours.
A small amount of secondary or nonfirm power could be
generated in five out of the seventeen years. Tuis amounted to a
total of 24,550,000 kilowatt-hours or an average of 1,444,000 kilowatt-
hours per year for the seventeen years.
Flood Hydrology
No provisions for flood control are incorporated in the
project plan. Floods are not likely to become a problem to highway
or other facilities on or near Caribou Creek. The project drainage
basin contributes only a minor runoff to the Matanuska River in July
and August, the months of greatest flows in the Matanuska.
A comparison of Caribou Creek runoff above the dam site and
the recorded f1:->';{8 of the Matanuska River during the months May through
September is presented in table 9.
37
15
10
5
o
250
200
150
100
50
o
20
15
10
5
L--O
GPO ~Y0508 11-29-57
If)
£r
f-::J ~o
ox
f-1f)1-
zl-
o<t -~
"-j3
~5Z
-I-W
W
~
-w a:: u
<t
-~
0
(/)
r-0 z
<t
(/)
CARl BOU PROJECT
RESERVOI R OPERATION
ENERGY GENERATION
",-Nonfirm Energy
" ,.., • I., Ih ,J1n Ih In I, /, ,Jln l, ,In I.., ~, I h • Ih r1 h -~ ./ """t,. / ".. V "' ~ --.",. lJr'" """t,. / -". V ~ V "' V ~ ./ "' / .",. ./ ."". V """'-V "'-V ~
"-q-I-Fi'l TrT-r:51
INFLOW TO RESERVOIR AND RESERVOIR CONTENT
Maximum Storage Capacity EI. 2510. = 240,000 Acre Feet-----, I I I I I
---'\--r\--A-------T\--(\--r\--Ir\~-I~Re~~~~Conten~-~-~-----------(\ ------r\ --r-[(\ -\ \ 1\ (/\ ~ ,
\/ \ \ ~ J 1\ / ~ (\ \ ) \ I 1\ I \ I'l '~ r-\ \ ,
V \J \ I
V V V V \j 1\; 1\ I
\ V \J \ \I
1\ 1\
~_ Mimimum Operating Level EI. 2313.V Inflow to Reservoir--... .. \ """ \J Vr (_ Storage 37,,.200 Acre Feet r r ., r r j/ h h 1 r-::J
8 1---,= r11~-e-1K---!t.-j \ -
n ,
0 -1 t --j ~-+ 1 r\' -j t-1 t -j t--L ~~ k: j lle-I t-~--f 1\ --~-X ~-l-I 1
I I I I I I I I
I-RESERVOIR RELEASES
f-W
W
~ (7~ose /~onjhowJ r-W r r
£r j } J J I ~ j ~ j ~ j ~ J \ j h ! J ~ j u ~ h ~ ~ h h <t ~ L-~
0 l.LrJ L~ .rI l ~ L ~ L J L Lr L ~ ~ f-r' u-V L u-" L ~ ~ L
If)
r-O
Z
<t ....... -_.,-::::---Release for Firm Power ----;;.,---.-If) , )
L-::J / ,
' ..... -, ' ____ I
0
I I I I I I I I I l-I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i L I I I L i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L I I L L I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
1940 1941 I 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 19471 1948 1 1949 1 1950 I 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957
PLATE 6
15
10
5
o
250 --
200
150
(00
50
foo--
o
20
15
~.
10
5
0----1
842-906-13
TABLE 8
SUMMARY OF CARIBOU P01IffiR OPERATION
Reservoir Theoretical
\iater Year Release far Power Content {laOOO AF} Energy Output
Ending Inflow PrQ.9.ll<?ti on ib.Q.QO AF) Spill End of {¥li1licn kw.-hr.}
Se,Et. 30 ~l!OOO AF) Firm Nonfirm {l z000 AF2 Year r.1aximum IV.ii ni mum Firm Nonfirm
1940 263.28 240.00
1941 202,,17 19L61 19.03 0 231.53 240.00 134.55 114.00 11.03
1942 18L15 192.79 0 0 219.89 220.75 145.15 114.00 0
1943 155.35 197.61 0 0 177.63 207.70 110.85 114.00 0
1944 26!).?8 20~~40 5.00 0 235Q51 238.53 78.19 114.00 2.78
1945 198073 192.62 6 0 64 0 234.98 240.00 131.51 114.00 4.05
1946 188.82 192.94 0.76 0 230.10 240.00 129.58 114.00 0.47
1947 190,66 193·,98 0 0 22 6 .78 229.18 127.48 114.00 0 n
1948 171.65 193.96 0 0 204.47 217.80 131.69 114.00 0 III
"1 1949 193~54 199.14 0 0 198.87 205.73 104.26 114.00 0 1-'-
0' U> 1950 181,,5 6 200,68 0 0 179.75 189.40 93.86 114.00 0 0 (Xl. ~ 1951 227.01 206.67 0 0 200.09 20 6 .94 65.74 114.00 0 n
1952 164078 202.58 0 0 162.29 188.83 91.71 114.00 0 "1
(\)
1953 269,,03 20 6 ,,04 0 0 225.28 228.34 63.30 . 114.00 0 (\) :;.;-
1954 202,,81 194~22 0 0 233.87 238.26 125.57 114000 0 ..
1955 161011 193 .. 43 0 0 201.55 224.88 135077 114.00 0 :E:
III
195 6 231.75 199.70 0 0 233.60 233.60 87.08 114.00 0 c+
CD
1957 208 • .42 19L93 10.09 0 240.00 240.00 129.79 114.00 6.22 "1
::0
(I)
1941-1957 to
0
TOTALS 3,393.82 3 ,352,,]0 41.52 0 1,938.00 24.55 ~
"1
Q
199.64
(I)
AVERAGE 197.20 2.44 0 114.00 1.44 til
~
P.
~ ...,-.... 1-'-
N
~
I-'-g
.,'
Cari·DOu Creek, Water Resources and Utilization
May
J'..me
July
August
Sept.
T.ABLE 9
, I C01lfPARI30N OF RUNOFF
!t CARIBOU CREEK AND §/ MATANUSKA RIVER
Y Caribou Creek basin above dam site.
21.7
6.1
3.9
5.3
?:/ Matanuska River basin above gage at tHe Glenn Highway bridge
near Pal!:'ler.
The flood studies in this report have been directed towards
computing a spillway capacity and determining diversion requirements
durLlg cons t.ruction.
Paucity of precipitation and runoff data on Caribou watershed
necessitated the use of adjusted data from other areas to apply to
Caribou. Flood runoff results from snoviUlelt augmented by rainfall.
The critical flood as regards peal;;: discharge will result from rainfall
runoff during the snowmelt season. Maxitnum volume flood will result
from snowmelt supplernefl"ted by rainfall runoff.
Diversion facilities during construction should provide for
high flows during tne SUinmer monti1s. Probable 5-, 10-, and 25-year
peak discnarges of -::;hese flows are 5,500, 6,300, and 7,400 c. f. s • ,
respectively. An inflow d8sign flood having a peak discharge of
23,500 c.f.s. and a four-day volume of 52,000 acre.feet is recommended
for this report. In routing the inflow design flood it was assumed
that the conservation space of the reservoir was full and that releases
were being made at the rate of 1,000 c.t.s. This would require a sur-
charge of 15,600 acre-feet (maximum water surface elevation 2,517.8)
in combination with a spillway capacity of 16,300 c.f.s.
39
C HAP T E R VI
PLAN OF DEVELOPl4ENT
'Ihe project "'ould serve a single purpose, hydroelectric power
generation. Its remote location would preclude its development for
other uses with the possible exceptbn of recreation. }'lood control
would be of negligible imlJOrtance.
Tne plan of development shown on plate 7 would utilize the
natural runoff of Caribo'..l Creek, a tributary of the Matanuska hiver.
A 465-foot, earth and rockfill dam would inrpoWld a total of 240,0()O
acre-feet of water "fllen the reservoir is full. Of this volume al)proxi-
mately 203,000 acre-feet. would be available f'Jr' .;.x;wer generation.
Diversion of the active storage and runoff througll 3, tunnel and penstock
to a pOvlerhouse near the Glenn Higllw3.y "\fOuld L)rescriOe an installation
of' two -12,000 kilowatt generating units to produce 1111-,000,000 kilowatt-
hours of firm energy annually. An esti,llated annua'!. average of 1,444,000
kilowatt-hours of noni'irm energ;'l could also be produced. A 115 ·l~v
transmL,aion line 60 miles in length would be built to SU),ply po ... ·er to
the Anchurage-palmer area, and a 12.4'7 ··:;:v line would carr] power about
one mile to serve the nearby Alasl:a Cornr.mnic;ation Sys~,;,em sta.tion and
the GoverrIDlent Camp. No Hne would be constructed initially to supply
the Glenallen-Gulkana Copper Center area. This could be accomplished
at a later date when the market Gained sufficiently to SUP.iJOrt it.
Accessibi+ity
Access to the dam site would require the construction of
approximately five miles of road from a point on the Glenn Highw~ near
mile 10,{. There are no existing lakes nearby for float plane use and
0. landing field for wheel planes would be d.ifficult to maintain.
Vegetation of the upper slopes is made up primarily of low
bushes, grasses, etc. Sl:!all spruce, birch, and cottom-load tree.:> a:o.1 e
to be found in scattered stands along the lower slopp.s. A WiCK mossy
overourden insulates permafrost areas against summeJ~ thawing. \.Jhcn
th:!.s material is removed the ground Wlderneath becomes a <luaemire
maldng travel very" difficult. This condition is particularly true of
the upper slopes.
Most of the project works would be located on public lands
administered by the U. S. Bureau of Land l'1anagement.. Several gold
plA.Cer claims, located on a tributary to Caribou Creek, and upstream
of the reservoir, would no-c be affected. It "rill be necessary to
obtain right-of-way €?sements for the T,Y'",,"8:n1ssion line ,}0ar :-.... ll!!e:c.
40
n
GPO 990508
2600 -
2500-1~ '" o +"-
-r-
2400 -o~
-~
230
/'1 -----------1
TRASHRACK····
I
2200 _ 10
STATIONS
U)
z. o
~
G;2100
.J w
2000 -
GLORY HOLE
11-6-57
I
II
Originol Ground Surfoce-_. -'. '-,
, = I '1'" , ,
.9' DIAMETER CONCRETE
I I
12 13
)1
TUNNEL-····/
I -
14 15
SCALE OF FEET
100
I
200
I
16
I
17
I
I
I
I
! .---GATE
I ,
I ,
I
I
18
PROFILE OF POWER TUNNEL INLET PORTAL TO STATION 20.
,-2600
-2500
SHAFT
-;-2400
-2300
1
19 20 -2200
-2100
-2000
U)
Z
El
~
2700-
2600-
2500-
2400-
2300 -
~2200 -
w
2100 -
2000-
UPSURGE CHAMBER
30' DIAMETER 40' HIGH
I I I 1 --'I
9' DIAMETER CONCRETE TUNNEL-"" I
DOWNSURGE GALLERY
(18' DIAMETER 100' LONG
i
Ground Surface
7.5' DIAMETER STEEL TUNNEL"--
100 , o
I
SCALE OF FEET
100
I
200
I
300
I
-2700
-2600
/
-2500
-2400
-2300
',1.'\;-' \ I
I
CARIBOU PROJECT
GENERAL PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT
, ,AND
PROFILES OF. WATERWAYS
o on
W
!'1
o
iii
a:
I
7,5' DIAMETER STEEL PENSTOCK'---1
PLATE 7
-2200-
-.2100
-2000
PROFILE OF POWER TUNNEL AND PENSTOCK STATION 140 TO POWERHOUSE
1900 -,
1 1
1800 _ 140 141
STATIONS
I
142
500
I
I
143
0
I
I
144
1
145
SCALE OF FEET
500 1000
I I
GENERAL PLAN
146
1500
I
I
147
2000
I
1
148 149 150
I .
lSI 152
I
153
I
154
I
ISS
\
\
l,,\
"'\
\
MAG,
I
156
I
157
1
158
1
159
-1900
-1800
TAIL WATER SURFAc-E~_~~~~~ __ ~)'
ELEVATION 1774.0
I I
160 [61 -1700
GLENN HIGHWAY
107 Mi. 10 Anc:horloae-·,
E
-PENSTOCK
842-906-9
Plan of Development
Housing
A Government Construction Camp would be built near the power-
house site and would include, among other buildings, a dormitor.~, mess
hall, 13:horatcry and warel1.C'use. Since the pl"oject would be remntely
operated from the Ekiutna ?roject the permanent camp could 1:)e ~.imi ted
to a maximum of four residences. Savings could possibly be effected
by converting the dormitory and mess hall into apartments at the end
of construction.
Constru~tion Period
Severe winter weather would necessitate construction work on
outside features to be accomplished during the summer season. Assuming
funds, material, and labor to be available as needed, construction could
be completed within five years after authorization of funds.
Project Design
Dam and reservoir
Caribou Dam, illustrated on plate 8, would be an earth and
rockfill structure rising to a maximum height of 465 feet above the
stripped streambed. Crest elevation would be 2,524. Cutoff below the
center of the dam would be provided by a grout cap with grout holes on
lO-foot centers. The dam would contain an impervious earthfill core
with upstream and downstream slopes of 1/3:1. A gradation of sand to
gravel to rockfill material would compose the rest of the dam. Upstream
slope would vary from 3t:l at the toe to 2t:l at the crest while the
downstream slope would range from 3:1 to 22 :1. Crest width would be
30 feet and leng~~ 1,455 feet.
Stream diversion would be by means of a 16-foot diameter,
2,800-foot tunnel through the left abutment. The diversion tunnel
would later be incorporated in part into a glory hole type spillway
and an outlet works. Spillway crest elevation would be 2,510. Having
a crest diameter of 75 feet the spillway is designed to pass 16,300
c.f.s. With a reservoir surcharge capacity of 15,600 acre-feet, ample
allowance has been made to handle a maximum flood peal" of 23,500 c.f.s.
and a four-day volume of 52,000 acre-feet.
Outlet works would consist of a separate intake structure
200 feet do~nstream from the diversion tunnel intake, and a six-foot
diameter tunnel to a junction with the diversion tunnel. A second
six-foot diameter tunnel would circumvent the concrete plug which
forms part of the spillway tunnel confluence with the diversion tunnel.
41
INLET EI
o 990508
~~~~-----" I
I
I
200
I
I
-I
_~ I
N'
, I
I
I ' , I ,
"
I
I
GENERAL
0
I
SCA L E OF
, ,
I
" I,
I
I
r -'
PLAN
200
I
FEET
WORKS
INTAKE STRUCTURE
400
I
_ NW~I 25100---
MIN OPERATING _-_~ EI. 23130--, -------=---_ .Jl.
I I'~---'-CREST OF DAM
_--_I I
: I :--·-~30'
, ' __ •• C-EI 25240
, .\' /1
'2.' / 1 I' \" 2f // / ~ '" ./----~
/ " I I
r /,--(;-"...-' I .\ ~ ~
MAX WS. EI. 25178---------=--",
EI 23800--------------'1--
3 1 _ --; R " ,( "/' ' "I" -~-,
, OCKFILL-/'-/,) -SAND :: ~\~~:~' '-.( ... i=:, ,Y
o
/ AND :-:1, .,. ~,,'SAND ~---
, /G _",/0 I"~ " / RAVEL FILL-I( I \ AND Z '-;~,
__ -=--;::-=--:=--:_ r /' ') i / EARTHFILL \ --< R
.... >-' I " GRAVEL FIL _" --Ocr,FILL--
_ _ _ 1.--_ L" \ L-,{, " '::),
// -,,;.
'---STRIP TO ROCK
GROUT CAP -/ 1' ...... ---GROUT
HOLES @ 10' CRS
MAXIMUM SECTION
CREST EI 25100---
DIAMETER CREST
" f. '''''''r -
16' ~ ---'Rl7jF~~~::::::::==o~ ,-DIAMETER _~/ DIVERSION T '~-PLUG I I UNNEL ~)_~ 6' DIAMETER ;~~~~~::::::::::::~~~~#~;=~~ OUTLET WORKS WORKS INTAKE'""" " <". ","cm em '"'''C, DUTLET ' ' , -~ TUNNEL
'-PLUG
BULKHEAD -----
TRASHRACK -----,
EI2140.0-----',
EI 21370 ----, -----t ~t
16' DIAMETER
PROFILE ON ~ OF SPILLWAY
200
I
o
I
200
I
SCALE OF FEE T
400
I
END OF STEEL :-<-------100'-----
LlNER-->-;
SECTIONS ON
2600
U') 2400
z o
....
'" >
'" -' w2200
2000
GROUT CAP----"
GROUT HOLES @
16 I. 12
SCALE OF FEE T
100
I
CREST EI. 2524.0 ----,
ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE ---
ROCK SURFACE ---
PROFILE ON It OF DAM
.>-7' DIAMETER SHAFT
FLOW GATE
AIR
o STATIONS
2600
2400 ..
Z o
....
'" >
'" 2200 ~
2000
/ EI 2070.0
/ __ ~,---EI 20800
Y.,.1, , ~ t.' t-~"
EI 20700'/
-:-____ ,RESERVIOR
ELEVATION
2313 to 2510
2294t02313
DATA
~~~_I~STREAMBE TOTAL STOR D 102294
____ ~~_~'AGE CAPAC~
IN A SURCHARGE 16 3~OMBINATION W?JH 15,600 A. F. (MAX MAxI~U~F1NF'E PROVIDE~ ~6'LLWAY C:p~C~~ 25178)
23,500 U.S. 2~D D~S~ND FL06~OT~K0INAGAIN~T O;HE AY VOLUME O~ A PEAK OF 52,000 A. F
CARIBOU DAM
FEASIBILITY DESIGN
PLATE 8
842-906-12
Plan of Development
A seven-foot diameter gate shaft and ring follower and jet flow gates
installed in the second tunnel would control the outlet works.
The reservoir would be wholly contained behind the dam,
there being no existing la},es in the drainage area. Total maximum
storage (not including surcharge storage) would be 240,000 acre-feet.
Active storage would be 203,000 acre-feet between elevations 2,510 and
minimum operating level, elevation 2,313 feet. An allowance of 7,000
acre-feet of inactive storage between minimum operating level and
elevation 2,294 feet provides for ice cover and minimum head for the
tunnel. Dead storage below the power tunnel invert is 30,000 acre-
feet.
Waterways
The water~lays consist primarily of 13,470 feet of pressure
tunnel and 1,'(30 f'eet of penstock. Approximately '75 per cent of the
pressure tunnel would re~uire steel supports and the full length
would be reinforced concrete lined to a finIShed inside diameter of
nine feet. Tunnel invert would be at elevation 2,294 feet, 19 feet
below the reservoir minimum operating level.
The intake structure, built at station 10+00 would incorporate
a steel bar trash rack to prevent debris from entering the tunnel.
At station 17+35 a nine-foot diameter gate shaft would house
a seven-foot by 9-foot bulkhead gate. The shaft would rise 220 feet"
cut through rock for its entire height, and would be lined with
reinforced concrete.
A surge tank composed of an 18-foot diameter, 100-foot long,
horizontal downsurge galler,y and an 18-foot diameter, 260-foot high
vertical shaft topped by a 40-foot high, 30-foot diameter upsurge
chamber, would be constructed at station 144+70. ~ne entire ~urge tank
would be cut out of rock and lined with reinforced concrete. Overall
height of the tank above the power tunnel would be 300 feet.
From station 144+70 to the outlet portal at station 150+70,
tunnel diameter would be reduced to 7.5 feet. With a slope of .17
and an average maximum pressure head of 336 feet the increased
velocity dictates use of a 5/16 inch thick steel liner. Overall
length of this penstock tunnel would be 610 feet.
The steel penstock would be continued from station 150+70
to the powerhouse, station 160+90, a slope distance of 1,120 feet.
This portion would be installed by cut and cover construction~ Inside
42
Plan of Development
diameter would continue at 7.5 feet and average steel thickness would
be about one inch. At the powerhouse, the penstock would split into a
"y" to serve the two turbines.
Tailwater elevation is 1,774 feet. The tailrace would dump
back into Caribou Creek near the Glenn Highway crossing.
Powerplant
The pO'Herhouse structure would be located near the Caribou
creek bridge at mile 107 on the Glenn Highway. It. would be reinforced
concrete construction, and fully enclosed. Power generating equipment
would consist of two 20,000 horsepower vertical shaft, Francis turbines
directly connected to 12,OOO-kilo-watt generators.
Turbine operating head would vary between 539 to 736 feet.
An annual firm generation of 1ILI.,000,000 kilowatt-hours could be
expected with a possible average nonfirm generation potential of
1,444,000 kilowatthours.
Powerplant controls would be designed for remote operation
from the ELlutna Powerplant at mile 34 on the Glenn Highway.
Transmission Facilities
The generator voltage of 6,900 volts would be stepped up to
115,000 volts for transmission to Palmer and Anchorage load centers.
For this purpose a three-phase, 69/115-kv" 2G,667-kva transformer would
be used. The switchyard would also include a 6.9/12.47-kv, 750 .. kva,
three-phase transformer to supply power to the nearby Government Camp
and to the Sheep Mountain Alaska Comrnunicat,ion System station. Provi-
sion would be made so that a third transformer could be added at a
future date should it prove desirable to carry Caribou power to the
Glenallen area.
The Project.-Palmer transmission line, some 60 miles in length,
would be of wood pole, "H" frame construction. Conductors would be
three -397,500 -circular mil, ACSR with no provision made for over-
head ground wires.
Only miscellaneous switching would be nec~ssary for the line
tie at the Palmer Substation. However, transformer capacity at the
Anchorage SUbstation would be increased to 60,000 kilowatts.
A single line diagram of generation and transmission facilities,
plate 9 , illustrates the project tie-in with existing facilities in the
power market area.
43
cP
($ OJ
+-~
fj
/iiJ
~I(~
}r
!I
n Dl €r'
0
[g)
NOV.'S, 1957
GPO 990508
LEG END
EXISTING PROPOS fD
" t
H
o
l
-"Ir---
OF MIL.ES T
SCAL.E I • • '&*3 o I 2 E"3 E3 ...........,
PROJECT CARIBOU. .
NERATION AND PRIMARY GEON NETWORK TRANSMISSI
PLATE 9
842-906-11
.!
Plan of Develo~ment
Geologie Conditions
Geologie investigations "lere conducted in the summer of 1955
and included diamond core drilling, materials investigation and testing,
and tile preparation of a geology report. Tne geological report is
included separately as Appendix I.
Cost Estimates
TIle total construction cost of Caribou Project is estimated
at $'74,874,000. Summarized on Form PF-l, Official Estimate, the total
cost includes field investiGations, design and construction expense,
operation and maintenance during construction, overhead, and contin-
gencies. Estimated interest during construction would add another
$3,143,000 to be repaid.
Estima.ted anllual operation and maintenance expense is ~>70,OOO
for all project features including dam, 'HateI'i'lays, powerplant, transmis-
stion lines and incidental works necessary to project operations.
Necessary replacements are estimated to re'luire an annual provision
of $100,000.
Alternate Plans of~De,,!elopme~~
Several alternates to certain proposed features were con-
sidered and rejected for one reason or a..."lother.
A different tunnel route providing for a shorter tunnel but
a longer surface penstock proved to be less economical and desirable
than the route selected. Higher and lower darns ,,,ere investigated to
determine optimum dam height. A 372-foot dam would cost considerably
less. However, due to a much lower firm output, it proved to be as
uneconomical for the project as a whole as the 46S-foot higher dam.
If further investigation revealed that the conditions of
the materials to be used in the embankment were the most favorable
possible, slopes of the dam could be increased to compare with those
of the Corps of Engineers lvlud Mountain Dam on the Pugallup River in
Washington. This would effect a savings of between $4,000,000 and
$5,000,000. For this report the more conservative design was adopted.
44
Gl
8
'" '" o
'" o
'"
UNITED STATEs
DEPARTMENT 0" THE INTDtIOR
"""EAU orr ItEQ. ... MATtON
~M PP' -I (REV. SEPT. 1S51)
Prepared by: ___ !t2.Y.: _~ "-_Sj.yj._n_e.!l.. ______ Approved by: __ p! );'! }~~~!x::t:.'!. _______
Uniform
Cost OEseRI PTiON
Classification
(I) 2
SIIMMARY
o .01 Caribou Reservoir and Dam
11.01 Caribou Powero1ant -Hydro
13.01 Caribou SwitchYard
.02 Palmer Substation
.QJ Anchorage SUbstation
.01. aribou-Palmer Transmission Line
.05 Caribou -Government Camp -ACS Line
15.01 General Property
Tobl Con8t~ tl on COAt.
-
OFFICIAL
ESTIMATE
Unit Total Quantity Cost Estimate
(3) (4) 5
52.520 000
24000kw 19 136 000
530 000
Misc. Switching 26 000
348 000
o mi. 115-kv 2 123 000
1 mi. 12.47-k1 28000
163 000
. 7I..~874.ooo
Project : _______ ~'!~_~~~ _-:._A_1_a_._~ ________________
-----------------------------------
Dote of Estimate: __ ~~~L~J1 ______ --1----.r-
SheeL __ oL_ --
Construction Materials Construction Other Previous
and Labor Officiol Controcts Supplies FClCilities Costs Estimate
6) (7) (8 9l _(IOJ II
1.9~1.1O 000 530 000 2.580 000
16.615 000 180,000 2,341 000
456 000 5 000 69 000
23 000 0 3,000
324 000 4000 20000
1.754~000 19 000 350 000
22000 0 6 000
139 000 3 000 2l 000
68.743.000 71..1.000 <; .,qo.ooo
" 1]
° '" '" o
'" o
'"
UNITED STATES
OE:PARTMENT Ofll' THE INtt~1OfII
BU!ltEAU 0 ... MQ..AMATION
FOI'fM P,r-lfI=tEV.SEPT.,!laR)
Prepared by: ___ ~~~L!:._~~~~~':~ ______ Approved by; __ .?:_.!--~_~~~!::~ _______
Uniform
Cost DESCRIPTION
Classification
(I) 2
01.01 CARIBOU DAM AND RJ:SERVOIR (EARTH AND ROCKFILL)
.32 Clearinlt Damsite
.l~ DIlRI
--SO. II, ,-
11.01 P()"",IlPT tNT _ HYDRO r 21..000 ICrlWA'I"l'S
.12 C'. ,,... Lands
.13 "t_ru~t_"rA. and.
.36_
'l'"ph 'A' and Generators
... 8 Accessorv TOi A~t TO.mdnM-~t
... 9 Miac" I AnAn" .. PnWArn' ant. EawiDDlent.
n. 'l'IlA~"OfT""T()" LINES mDS AND ~"R~'l" 'l'T()",~
.()l CARIBOU
• 32 en ."ri ng Land •
.11 ~+ Ann
.51 St.at.ion TO,
.02 P.ALHER "lIR~'l'A'I'T()N
.·n c· and I)
• ~1 "t. .. t. inn TO.nul nmAnt . )
.0, SUBSTATION
.·n c_ and 01
. ~1 Sbt.i nn TO.nul nmomt .
_DL. CARIROlI_PAT.MF.R TR, !.TIIF.
.'In LandB on'; ,,' Ri.rnt..s
·'l2_ ", .. '" na T.onn.
... 1 Pol .. " .. n" Fi rl.u,...~
.54 Overhead Co and Devices
0<; CARIROU..('.()VF.RNMF.NT CAMP_ICS 'l'RANSMrS8ION LINE
.32 ... '" na .ands
.53 Poles and Fixtures )
.5..4 Overhead CQndJlctQr5 ami Dnie.os}
1<;.01 GKNKRAL _ CART ROll r.AlW
.32 Clearing: Lands
.1, Struct.ura" .nd
... 9 Mi Be .. 1 LAneau.. F.ani nm.mt
.78 Commurr-,cation 1;',
-
TnTAL ""'~'l'
OFFICIAL Proiect: ______ g~!"~~c:!!!_ -:_~~'!~'!. ________________
ESTIMATE ~----------------------------------
Dote of Estimate:_..J.l\J-.Y_lill _______ - -----.J.--
SheeL?_oL ---
Unit To!al Construction Materials Con struction Other Previous
Quantity and Labor Officiol Cost Estimate Contracts Supplies Facilities Costs Estimate
(3) (4) (5) 6 (7) C8J (9) (lOt II
52 520 000 49.410 000 530 000 2.580 000
20000
4'i.150.ooo
-~
19.116 000 16 6n 000 180 000 2.341 000
000
3 000 000
11 J.29 000
1.55.0 000
-168 000
265 000
1.()~5 000 2.~79.000 28000 il8 000
( 530.000) 456 000 5 000 69 000
2000
45.4 000
~
(26 000) 21 000 0 , 000
21.000 _. ~
(1 .. 8.000) 121..000 000 20000
'\:>1..000
( 2.12'\.000) 1. 7~1..000 [<1.000 150.000
7.000
252_000
il?il.{)()()
667:000
:28.000 :?2 000 0 6,000
1 OOC
19.000
16'1.000 11<1.000 "LOOO 21.000 ~ ;).000
120:000
5.000
12.000..
7J. . fl7J, • 000 611.71.·LOOO 71..1.000 <; .19Q.000
Gl
1l o
\0
\0 o
'" o
<»
UNI TED STATES
DEPARTMENT 011" THE. IN~"IO"
BUfll'E. ... U O~ .. I!Q... .. MATION
Fe"'" PF -I (REV. Sf-PT. 1~51)
Prepared by: __ A~~_'!!_~~e~~!~ _______ Approved by: ____ 0-,,_ !-!_ !t9!?~!:~! ______
Uniform
Cost DESCRIPTION
Classification
(1/ (2)
G.L.l 0 SERVICE FACILITIES -CARIBOU CONSTRUCTION CAMP
.32 Clearim, Lands
.33 Structures and Improvements
.1.9 Miscellaneous EQuipment
.72 Office Furniture and EQuipment
.73 Transportation Equipment
.76 Laboratory Equipment
.81. Operation and Maintenance Expenses
.85 Earnin"s Durin" Construction
G.L.L42 INVESTIGATION COSTS
.1 Ceneral Investigations
.2 Proiect lnvesttgations
G.L.L43.3 GENERAL EXPENSE
Designs and S,ecifications
Construction Engineering and Supervision
Other Cost
OFFICIAL
ESTIMATE
Unit Quantity Cost
(3) (4)
--f--.
Project : ______ f~.!~!?~!!_ ::_~~~~~'! ________________
-----------------------------------
Dat& of Estimate: __ JY1-.L~~?.7 _________ T--r-
SheeL __ oL ___
Total Construction Moteriols Construction Other Pra-iou5
and Lobor Official
Estimate Contracts Supplies Facilities Costs Estimate
5 iSJ (7 (8 9 10 " 71.1_000 ~61 _000 'l80_000 '{,Qonnl
16 :000
31.5.000
S8000
17000
.1:2000
~J.QOO
'l50.ooo
-lOe .000
1.60.000
121 000
'l'l9.00c
1..910.000
2 630.000
~ 100_000
1 _?00_000
---
C HAP T E R VII
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
All project costs are allocable to electric power generation
and any econor,lic benefits derived would stem from sale of power only.
The financial analysis of the project 1,.,ras made assuming
required repayment of all costs within 50 years after completion at
2~ per cent corrr,pound interest. Values used in the analysis were:
Annual operation and maintenance expense $70,000,
Annual provision for replacement expense $100,000
Annual firm energy genera:don 114, 000,000 k'1.hr.
Annual firm energy sales $107,000,000
Annual nO!lfirm energy sales °
Project construction C()st $74,874,000
Interest during construction cost * 3,743,000
Tne average rate necessary to amortize the project over the
50-year period and repay all annual costs is 27.5 mills. 'lbis is nearly
2~ times the 10.f3 mill rate for Eldutna firm energy. T.his rate is also
considerably greater than the estimated 1'(.0 mills per kilowatt.hour
obtainable from a comparable sized coal fired steam plant built at
Anchorage.
Since there are no other monetary benefits which could be
realized by construction of the Caribou Pruject, project power would
not. be saleable. In effect the pl'oject is found to be economically
infeasible under present conditions.
45
C HAP T E h VIII
REPORTS OF 01'llEH AGENCIES
UNITEIJ STNI'}!S
m~PAH'l'I1EHT ul<1 'lo'HE INTERIOR
FISH ~ID WILDLIFE SERVICE
BUHEAU OF ALASKA COH1"lERCI/lL FISHERIES
OFFICE OF 1HE REGIONAL DIREC'l'OR
BOX 2021 -JUNEAU I ALllSKA
Hr. DarJl L. Rober ts
District Man.s,ger
U.S. Bureau of Reclamatiun
P. O. Box 25b1
Juneau, Alaslta.
Dear ~k. Roberts:
Februar/ 25, 1958
Reference is made to your request for ou:: vievls and com-
ments on the Carfbou Cree!\: prDj ec t. '1'11is letter consti tu"tes our
preliminary :. .. eport on this project.
The project ,{ould be located about Go :!1iles northeast of the
Ci ty of Pe.litler, Tttird Judi<.!ial DiviSion, 'l'erritor.l of Alaska. A d.'J..'ll
al)prCJximately 465 feet in height and having a crest elevation of about
2,524 feet msl. vTould "oe const,l'uc ted on Caribc)U Creek about four
miles upstream from the Glenn Higin-ray bridge e~t l/ule 107. 'lhe
impoundment would have a surface area of about, 1,810 acre::; at
m8~im1.Un pool elevation cf 2,510 iIlSl. Appurt,enan;'; fe,s:tures would
include a lJ0't-,erhouse (~laving watel' releases of about 3CJO to ;300 c. f. s. )
and a spHlway with a deSiGn caJ?acity of 16,300 c.f.s. 'Ihis project
vTould be cunstructed to gellere,'::'e llydrueleC!tric l:)O"ie:i.~ for the c:i, ties of
Pallner and i\nchorage.
Al thouGh no al:ladro:Jous sport or comrtercial species of'
fish are knOi'ill t,~) use Car1b,~,u Creek due to cascades and waterfalls
'vhich limit movemerl'..;s, this creek Sl:pp'::rts al")paren':, good stoCl\:3 of
residen"L grayling !.md Dolly Ve.rden trout. A moderate Spol't fishery
exists at the Glenn aiGIn-las' bl'idge crossing of Caribou Creel~ and is
especiallY' gOiJQ ear"!.y in the season 'Hhen the l'i'aver is relatively clear.
iUf:cea Creek and SquavT Creel:, t.'1€ only maj()r tributaries entering the
45
Reports of Other Agencies
impoundment area, also contain Dolly Varden and grayling. The latter
creek is easily accessible from the Glenn Highway at rrdle 118.1 and
sustains moderate fishing pressure.
Existing stream flow records indicate that increment flows
ill the section of Caribou Creek between the dam and the p01-Terhouse
will be inadeQuate to sustain a fish populatiun under project operation.
However, the fishery resources of this stream section are considered
to be of minor importance due to t..'le steep grade of the stream bed and
tile presence of numerous falls ani cascades. It is believed benefits
resulting from de'lelopment of a reserv'lir fishery and regulated year-
round flows in the stream section beLJW -the pm-lerh<.)use would more
than offset the loss to the fisher'J in the upstream section. In
addition, the roads and trails required for projec1:. construction
would facilitate access to the area for fishermen and ".'ould result in
greater utilization of the fishery than CUl'relrt.ly exists. Therefore,
it is anticipated that no minimum flow requirements need be prescribed
for the area between the dam and the p()werhouse.
Big game species known to utilize the project area are
mountain sileep, moose, caribou and grizzly and black bear. Evidence
suggests mounta.in s;leep traverse t):le area. during seasonal mo· ... -ements
from Sheep Mountain, which lies itllOledia:tely southeast of the impound-
ment area to and from high mountains lying to the northwest. Human
activity associated with development of be project plus the impact of
the impoundment as a barrier to such mount.ain sheep movement could
pose a rather serious problem in the overall program of mountain
sheep management and conservation of that area. The Sheep Mountain
Game Reserve (established and maintained for Dall sheep) is an area of
considerable esthetic value. This specie8 may very frequently be seen
from the Glenn Highway--one of the few places in the Territory where
Dall sheep may be observed by the tourist.
The Caribou Creek drainage is relatively accessible to big
game hunters. During 1954, 10 caribous and 2 moose were known to
have been taken from the area to be inundated. However, it is believed
that the loss of a moderat.e amount of x'ange e.s a result of inundation
Vlould not be seriously detrimental tot..."le moose 8l1d caribou pOl)ulations.
As was true in the C3.se of the fishery resources, ti.1e improvement in
access resulting from project development "Tuuld be beneficial in opening
new areas for hunting. In addition, the creation of a moderate sized
lal{e would be desirable from the standpoint of l1lU1ters utilizing both
float-equipped aircraft and small boats.
Other wild_life species Imowu to illi'1a'oi t the area are
ptarmigan, spruce grou,se, and an occas ional fox, "Holf, coyote 1 and
wolverine. Other animals such as weasels, lynx, rabbits, etc.,
47
Reports of Other Agencies
undoubtedly use the IJroject area from time to time. It is anticipated
that, with project development, very slight detrimental affects would
result to these species.
In order that maximum utilization of the fishery and wildlife
resources may accrue from project development, it is recommended:
1. 'Ihat the following language be incorporated in the recommenda~
tions of -[,he report of the Regional Director of the Bureau of
Reclamation: "Tha.t additional detailed studies of fish and wild-
life resources affected by the project "Je I.!onducted as necessary
after the project is autllorized, in accordance with Section 2 of
the Act of August 14, 1946 (60 Stat. 1080); and that such reason-
able modifica.tions i:a the authori zed proj ec t fac ili ties be made
by the SecretarJ as he may find appr ;priate to preserve and
propage.-ce these resources.:1
2. That t.1-J.e foll')'VTing languege be incol--pore.ted in the recolIllllenda-
tions of the report of the Regional Director of tile Bureau of
Reclamation: "That federal lands and project waters in the project
area be open to free use for htUlt1ng and f1sl1i.ng 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 1mblic l)rOperty."
3. That the following language be incorporated in the recommenda-
tions of the rep)rt of the Regional Director of the Bureau of
Reclamation: "That leases of federal lC:.nds in the project area
resel.'ve the right of free B.nd :public access for hunting and fishing."
The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service should be advised of any
change or refinement of the engineering plan in order that adequate
provision may be made for the IJrotection of the fish and wildlife
resources in the affected areas.
48
Very truly yours,
lsi \\lilliam F. Royce
W. F. ROYCE
Ac<".irig Regio:ml Director
Bureau of CO!llil1ercial Fisheries