HomeMy WebLinkAboutPort Lions Hydroelectric Project Environmental Report Supplement 1980KOD-P
006
vol. 2
Alaska Power Authorfty
LIBRARY COpy
~Port Lions Hydroelectric Project-----.
ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT
(Supplement)
Kodiak Electric Association Inc.
Kodiak, Alaska
Beak Consultants Incorporated
Portland, Oregon
June, 1981
LETTER A
~_.-' r, c-:::p 'I ,.' III " I "\' I '-ilL.. II ,-~, tJ l..~J L' ~
I'
L,':' \ ~,'
JAY S. HAMMOND. Gowwnor
-~--.... -'
O .... CB OF TDB GOvBllNoa
DIVISION OF I'OLICY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING
December 5, 1980
f'OUCH AO
JUNEAU. ALAS"" _II
"'f)NE, _-3$7:1
Mr. David Nease, Jr. Manager
Kodiak Electric Association
P.O. Box 787
Kodiak, AK 99615
Subject: Port Lions Hydroelectric Renewable Energy Project Environmental Report
State 10 * TJKOl-80071404ES
Dear Mr. Nease:
The Alaska State Clearinghouse has completed review of the referenced
project.
The following comment was received from the Department of Community and
Regional affairs (C&RA):
A-21
"The Department, through the A-95 review, previously commented on
the "Background Infonnation" publ ication prepared by Beak Consultants
concerning the Port Lions Hydroelectric project. The A-95 review
comments, including ours, were not included in the Environmental
Report (ER). We requested in our comments that the issue of flood
hazard be addressed in the ER in a manner which delineated the
flood zone, assessed its potential impacts and identified flood
prevention measures. This issue as well as many of the issues
raised in the comments of other agencies and the City of Port Lions
were not addressed in the Environmental Report. It was our understand-
ing that the purpose of reviewing the "Background Infonnation"
publication was to identify issues that should be addressed in the
Environmental Report. We can only conclude that either the Environmental
Report was written and printed prior to the receipt of the review
comments or that the consultant did not believe the comments merited
a response. If this is a correct interpretation, we find the
process of developing the report as well as the substance of the
report to be deficient in this regard. We recommend that a response
be provided to the issues raised by the City of Port Lions and the
reviewing agencies."
The Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) commented:
D'~LH
A-1
A-2
RESPONSE TO LETTER A
Dam ~afety analyses are being prepared as part of the "Permit to
Con~truct or Modify a Dam" for the State of Alaska. Separate analy~es
are being prepared for the Crescent Lake and forebay dam site. These
analyses will evaluate effects of earthquakes and seismic loading on dam
structure integrity. A separate flood plain analysis is also being
prepared to evaluate the effects of dam failure on downstream area~. The
dam safety studies and flood plain analyses will be submitted for agency
review when they are complete.
Comment noted,
A-3
A-4
A-5
A-6
A-7
LETTER A (CONT.)
"1. We expect that the Department of Fish & r,ame wi 11 address the
proposed Port Lions River salmon loss and the report's related
statements. One significant item concerns the consultant's
opinion that although the spawning grounds will be lost below
the falls, the lagoon spawning area will be enlarged as the
lower dam will allow this ground to be covered more fully
through stream flow regulation. This may be true; however,
this same increased area will not be covered with water during
the egg hatching period (December to February) as the dam
system will be shutdown, thus any increased spawning will be
I "2.
"3.
"4.
I "5.
los t. .
The reduction or possible elimination of the salmon from Port
Lions River will affect the wildlife which feed upon them,
including eagles and river otter.
The report stated that the Crescent Lake beaver population
would probably move as they cannot live where water levels
fluctuate. The problem is that the beavers will not know in
advance that the lake level will fall in the winter, thus they
may not attempt to move until it is too late.
There may be more increased siltation in the Port Lions River
than expected, as the upper river will always be swollen to
bank level during the months that the system is operated.
This will cause increased bank erosion with its resulting
water siltation.
If construction crew housing is brought into the areas, the
contractor must be sure to obtain the appropriate permits from
this Department."
The Department of Fish & Game (DF&f,) has this comment:
"The Alaska Department of Fish and (,ame has reviewed the above
referenced environmental report on the Port Lions Hydroelectric
Project.
"We feel that the document adequately describes the environmental
setting of the project site and identifies possible impacts associ-
ated with the project.
"With respect to operation of the project, our greatest concern is
detrimental impacts to area fisheries resources, particularlv loss
of spawning habitat in that area of the river that will be dewatered
during three months of the year.
"Cursory analysis of the data presented in Table 3.21, Projected
monthly mean discharge in the Port Lions River flow regu1rements
RESPONSE TO LETTER A (CO NT.)
A-3
A-4
A-5
A-6
A-7
In severe winters. flow during January. February and March could drop
to relatively low levels. Under these conditions it is probable that some
of the incubating eggs in the lagoon area will be lost. It should be noted
that such losses could occur under natural flow conditions as well as regu-
lated conditions. In years such as 1980-81. the regulation of stream flow
would have benefited spawning success. Flow in the Port Lions River dropped to
3.3 cfs in August 1980. thus greatly reducing the suitable spawning habitat
in the layoon. With regulation. flow would have been 40 cfs in the lagoon
dur1ng this period. During the winter of 1980-81. flow did not drop to the
low levels projected; the lowest daily flows in January. February and March
were 59.4. 37.3 and 45.7 cfs, respectively. Therefore. there would have
been essentially no reduction in spawning habitat during the winter months.
The winter of 1980-81 was relatively warm for Kodiak although simi lar winters
have been experienced for the last four years. Without additional flow
records for the Port Lions River. it is difficult to know how representative
the 1980-81 hydrograph is. In any case, it appears that in some years sup-
plementation of flow into the lagoon will definitely increase the available
spawning habitat. Only during periods of prolonged extreme cold spells would
the gains made during the summer be completely lost in the winter.
BEAK agrees, but the impact should be minimal for the time of the
pink salmon run (August-September) Is not a critical period for survival
of fish-eating wildlife and numbers of fish-eating wildlife In the town
are low. For example. bald eagles are not known to nest near Port Lions
(Roger Smith, ADF&G. pers. comm.) and do not usually utilize the pink
salmon resource (Alvin Nelson, POrt Lions resident, pers. conm.) on the
towns ite.
BEAK agrees that the dam at Crescent Lake will reduce the suitability
of the lake for use by beaver. It is 1 ikely that the number of beaver
presently 1 iving along the lake will be reduced. The extent of their
reduction is not known.
Beaver are common in the ponds and 1 akes near Port Lions. The
project will only influence beaver near Crescent Lake and will have a
negligible impact on the regional population of beaver.
It is correct that the potential exists for increases In suspended
sediment loading In the upper Port Lions River during periods when supple-
mental water is released froon Crescent Lake. However, supplementation will
result in "bank full" conditions only under conditions of unusually low
natural flow. During average flow years the maximum total discharge from
Crescent Lake is expected to be in the range of 20 to 25 cfs during periods
of supplementation. Flows of this level are below the average monthly flows
exper1enced presently in the upper river during spring and fall high flow
per10ds and are far below the maximum short term flows experienced after
heavy rainfall. Therefore. It Is not anticipated that flows of 20-25 cfs
in the upper river will result In much increase In sediment loading. Short
term increase In suspended sediments could occur If It was necessary, due
to extreme low flow conditions. to supplement with flows In the range of
35 to 40 cfs. Flows in this range could result in "bank full" conditions.
It should also be noted that some reduction In natural bank erosion
and suspended sediment loading will OCCur due to stabilization of stream
flows. By holding back water for storage during periods of heavy runOff,
Crescent Lake dam will reduce the magnitude of high flow events. This will
reduce bank erosion and streambed scouring.
Convnent noted.
A-a
A-9
LETTER A (CONT.)
for the cit of Port Lions and K£A the ro'ected month1
surp us 0 water, indIcated that t ere WI e an annua average
water surplus of 8 cfs over the Quantity required for the City's
consumption and generation at the 40 cfs demand. While the text
addresses this shortage capacity of the Crescent Lake impoundment,
it fails to describe the capacity of the forebay impoundment.
Would it be possible to store some of this excess in the forebay
Impoundment? This point should be classified because the only
fisheries mitigation proposed for the project is enhancement of
lagoon spawning areas through regulation of tailrace discharges.
In addition, the project engineer should work together with Depart-
ment personnel to develop an acceptable level of discharge into the
lagoon. If fresh water influx to lagoon is the limiting factor for
spawning success, mere stabilization of flows will not enhance
spawning if flows fall below an acceptable existing Quantity.
A-10
"Another area of concern with respect to fisheries is the 10cetion
of the tailrace discharge. It should be located in an area where
it wi 11 not ob1 iterate spawni ng. I t may be neces sary to f it the
tailrace with a diffuser.
A-11 "With respect to wildlife impacts, our concern Is with improved
access to the project area via construction roads which may result
in excessive hunting pressure with the area."
It is our understanding that a copy of a letter sent to us on November 3,
1980 from the Alaska Power Administration, has been forwarded to you,
therefore it will not be included in this letter.
The following comment was received from the Office of Coastal Management
(OCM) :
"The Office of Coastal Management (OCM) will review this project
for consistency with the Alaska Coastal Management Program (ACMP)
if it is determined that F£RC has jurisdiction. OCM has received
comments from interested agencies and local governments. These
comments indicate a number of issues exist which were not adequately
discussed in the Environmental Report and which relate to ACMP
standards. OCM will not issue a consist~ncy determination at this
time. The issues which require further treatment are provioed
below. Additionally, there are comments which indicate that suffi-
cient information exists in the Environmental Report, but that
further stages of the project which have impacts on resources may
require stipulations insuring that the project conforms to ACMP
standards. These issues are also separately listed below. These
issues should provide the applicant with information as to issues
which require resolution prior to a determination of consistency by
OCM.
"The following issues require further discussion in the Environmental
RESPONSE TO LETTER A (CONT.)
A-8
A-9
A-10
A-11
The max imum storage capacity of the forebay impoundment will be
BO-acre feet. It is possible that some of the water stored behind the
forebay dam could be released after the storage capacity of Crescent Lake
has been depleted. Only part of the maximum storage capacity of the
forebay dam could be released to downstream areas because Port lions
auxillary water supply intake, located at the 75 ft elevation, will have
to remain submerged to provide for emergency uses of water. The amount of
supplemental water available from the forebay dam is therefore quite
limIted and would not be sufficient to provide much benefit to either fish
or incubating ova in downstream areas.
The project engineer will work with ADF&G to develop an acceptable
level of discharge into the lagoon. According to proposed plant operation
schedules the minimum flow into the lagoon will be 40 cfs except during
periods of low winter flow when the storage capacity of Crescent lake
has been used up. At this time, natural stream flow will be reestablished.
The only times during the year that flow into the lagoon will be lower
than natural flows, will be during periods of heavy runoff when water Is
being held back in Crescent lake for storage. At least 40 cfs will be
maintained at the lagoon during those periods. As discussed in the
response to Comment A-3, the 1980-81 hydrograph indicates that the lagoon
area would have benefited substantially by increases in discharge during
and shortly after the pink spawning period when natural flows dipped to
only 3.3 cfs.
The location of the tailrace is Shown in Attachment A. The discharge
from the tailrace will be upstream from most of the lagoon gravel used for
spawning by pink salmon (Alvin Nelson pers. camm. April 18, 1981). There
will be some scouring in the immediate viCinity of the tailrace outfall.
A trash rack will be placed over the outfall and will tend to dissipate
some of the water velocity. There should be little or no loss of lagoon
spawning habitat due to operation of the tailrace.
BEAK agrees, the road to Crescent lake will result in increased
traffic to the Island-Crescent lake area. Hunting pressure is likely to
increase and will likely lead to better utilization of wildlife resources.
Whether or not the increased traffic will lead to "excessive" hunting
pressure is not known.
LETTER A (CONT.)
Report. (Relevant ACMP standards are cited in parentheses.)
A-12
A-13 1
A-14
A-15 1
A-16
A-17
A-1SI
A-19 1
A-20 I
"1)
"2)
"3)
"4)
"5 )
"6)
"7)
"B)
"9)
I "10) A-21
What is the storage capacity of the forebay impoundment, and
what will be the effect of the expected impoundment levels on
fish habitat? (6AAC BO.130 HABITATS)
What will be the effect of projected freshwater discharges
into the lagoon and what effect will discharges have on fish
spawning habitat? (6AAC BO.130 HABITATS)
The project is located in an area of frequent and severe
seismic activity. How will the siting and design of the
project allow' it to withstand seismic events? Local and
teleseismic tsuanamis and severe seismic shaking are a threat
in this location. Information should also be included concern-
ing geologic modifications of the streambed involved in the
project. (6 AAC 80.050 r.EOPHYSICAL HAZARDS)
What is the hazard involved from floods due to icing? What
mitigation measures will be employed concerning this hazard?
(6 AAC 80.050 GEOPHYSICAL HAZARDS)
Port Lions uses an auxilIary water supply when seafood processing
is taking place. The project may cause significant sedimentation
problems to occur in this water supply system. What is the
probable extent of this problem, what mitigation measures will
be employed, and what will the cost be? (6 AAC BO.140 AIR,
LAND AND WATER QUALITY)
The alternative to the project (which involves a tie-in to the
Terror Lake project) should be more thoroughly discussed.
What would the costs be, and how would the environmental
impacts involved compare to the proposed project? (6 AAC
80.070 ENERGY FACILITIES)
What is the exact location of the penstock, powerhouse and
related facilities? These facilities will be very close to
existing residences, and their location needs to be provided
in detail. (6 AAC 80.070 ENERGY FACILITIES)
The City of Port Lions water supply line will have to be
rerouted. What will be the cost and impacts related to this
aspect of the project? (6 AAC BO.070 ENERGY FACILITIES)
Apparently the penstock would flood Lagoon St. The applicant
also dlscusses another access road in this area. What are the
specific locations involved and what impacts will result? (6
AAC BO.070 ENERGY FACILITIES)
The project will increase the ease of access to Crescent Lake
(a traditional winter recreation area) while making the lake
unsafe for winter recreation during at least some periods due
RESPONSE TO LETTER A (CONT.)
A-12
A-13
A-14
A-15
A-16
The storage capacity of the forebay impoundment is 80 acre ft. The
effect of the impoundment levels on fish habitat are expected to be neutral
or positive. The reservoir will provide approximately 7.5 acres of addi-
tional habitat for the native population of Dolly Varden in the Port Lions
River.
The projected alterations in freshwater additions to the lagoon are
not expected to have any detrimental effects on existing biota (see page 8
of the ER). All of the estuarine organisms which presently inhabit the
lagoon have a wide salinity tolerance and will be able to eaSily adjust
to increases or decreases in the amount of freshwater entering the lagoon.
As discussed in the ER (page 69) regulation of flow into the lagoon should
have a net beneficial effect on pink salmon spawning success in the lagoon.
Effects of loss of regulation during the latter part of the pink salmon egg
incubation period (i .e., January -February) is discussed in the response
to A-3.
Siting and design criteria for Crescent Lake dam and the forebay dam
relative to seismic events is under study (see response A-I). The Crescent
Lake dam and the forebay dam spillways will be located at 312 ft and 86 ft
MSL, respectively. These elevations are well above the elevation reached
by the 27 March 1964 Tsunami wave. The powerhouse will be located at
about 12 ft MSL and therefore could be hit by a Tsunami wave similar in
magnitude of the 27 March 1964 wave. The powerhouse will be anchored on
bedrock and will be constructed of concrete.
There is no historical evidence to indicate that flooding due to ice
dam formation has been a problem in the Port Lions River. Flow charac-
teristics during the winter will not be altered by hydrogeneration to the
extent that the hazard for flooding should increase. The primary concern
with regard to icing will be the potential for buildup of ice on the
forebay dam spillway. The consulting engineer is looking into various
techniques to avoid such buildups. A plan showing the methods that wlll
be employed will be forwarded for agency review when it is complete.
Mitigation measures for flooding due to icing will entail daily
(or more often if conditions warrant) reconnaissance of the river between
the mouth and Crescent Lake. Any buildup of ice will be quickly reported
to KEA and the ice blockage will be blasted out by explosives if necessary.
Explosive charges will be available at all times for such emergencies.
The Port Lions hydroproject will have no impact on the City's
water supply system. The U.S. Public Health Service, Anchorage Office
is in the process of installing additional water supply capacity for
the City. The new system is being developed to meet the added demands
from the 35 units of HUO housing which will be developed in the near
future. Water will be taken from Branchwater Creek outside the area of
impact of the hydroproject. The water system is being designed with
enough capacity to supply the entire city plus any commercial development,
including a fish processor, that may occur in the forseeable future. The
auxillary water supply system would be used only for emergency needs. The
auxiliary water transmiSSion 1 ine will be hooked into the raw water line
from the storage tank on Branchwater Creek. Thus water from the auxilIary
system will pass through the new filtration plant that the USPHS is going
to construct. The filtration plant will have more than enough capacity to
filter water from the auxilIary supply system. Most of the funds for
development of the new water supply system are coming from the USPHS.
Funds for moving the aux illary system will be provided by KEA. No
estimate of cost for moving the auxillary water supply system is available
at this time.
A-22
LETTER A (CONT.)
to discharge of water destabalizing ice. What measures will be
taken to mitigate this hazard? (6 AAC 80.070 ENERr,y FACILITIES)
"The following issues have been sufficiently discussed in the
Environmental Report. However, at further stages of the project,
OCM may require specific stipulations to insure consistency with
ACMP in the following areas of concern:
"1) The tim1ng of construction activ1ties wh1ch may 1mpact anadramous
fish.
"2) The des1gn and location of the ta11race discharge."
Discussions with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) indicate
that a problem does exist 1n determining the legal owner of the land on
which this activity is proposed to occur. The land for the Port Lions
hvdroelectric facilities has been tentatively conveyed under the Alaska
~ative Claims Settlement Act however, legal title to the land presently
st111 resides with the U.S. government. Legal representatives of FERC
are attempting to determine whether or not the proposal site for this
project is still under federal jurisdiction, thus requiring a FERC
license. In the event FERC determines they do not have legal jurisdiction
in this matter, the Division of Policy Development & Planning will
w1thdraw the project from ACMP consistency until a decision has been
reached. This project will be held in abeyance with regard to ACMP
review. Therefore at th1s time, please consider the comments included
in this letter as relating to State Clearinghouse review only.
The SCH would like to ask that a written response be sent to US which
addresses the issues and concerns raised by the reviewers.
Provided th1s response 1s received, the SCH has no objection to this
proposa I.
Thank you for your cooperation with the review process.
CC: Comm. Lee McAnerney, C&RA
Comm. Ernst Mueller, DEC
Bruce Barrett, DF&G
Murray Walsh. OCM
James l. Cheatham, APA
Bob Ellis. Beak Consultant
Bob Carrier, rECR
~incerelY:l .\ r '.
'it~~ M~hael Whiteh:ad
State-Federal Coordinator
RESPONSE TO LETTER A (CONT.)
A-17
A-18
A-19
A-20
A-21
A-22
Since the ER was prepared, a document entitled "Transmission Line
Intertie Between Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project and the City of Port
Lions" was prepared for Kodiak Electric Association (Attachment B). The
document compares the relative economic merits of the Terror Lake in-
tertie with the Port Lions hydroproject. Basically the report concludes
that KEA and its customers in Port Lions would benefit most by construc-
tion of a hydroelectric project at Port Lions River for short-term gains
and construction of an intertie for long-tenn gains. With growing energy
needs. the construction of the transmission intertie can be economically
justified when the energy requirements of the city exceeds 2220 x 10 3 KWH
with 5~ financing. With the present trend it is expected to happen some-
where near year 1988. The Roard of Directors of KEA will consider incor-
porating the intertie plan into their long-range development plans.
A thorough environmental study of the transmission intertie will be
required to select the most appropriate routing. Comparisons of the rela-
tive environmental effects of the intertie and the Port Lions hydroproject
cannot be made without addition of information on the alternative intertie
routes.
The exact location of the penstock, powerhouse and related facilities
1s shown in Attachment A. The penstock will pass within 100 feet of houses
in the City of Port Lions. The penstock will be buried for its entire
length and will not be visible from the existing residences.
Only the auxilIary water supply line will have to be rerouted (see
response A-15). This work will be done during the summer. No cost
estimates for relocation of the auxilIary water supply system are
available at this time. Any cost incurred will become part of the project
costs.
We were unable to locate the Lagoon Street referenced in the comment.
We assume that Bayview Drive is the street referenced since it Is the only
street that will be affected by flooding from the forebay dam impoundment.
The location of Bayview Drive is shown in Attachment A. Bayview Drive is
a graveled city street. Approximately 160 ft of Bayview Drive will be
inundated by the impoundment. An access road leading from Bayview Drive
to the forebay dam will be constructed. The exact location of the access
road is shown in Attachment A. Some spruce trees will have to be removed
to construct the access road. Only those trees will be removed that are
absolutely necessary for access road construction.
The city of Port Lions (letter. November 7,1980) made a request that
KEA "dedicate the Crescent lake access road to publ ic use as far as Island
Lake. Beyond this point. KEA may restrict public access if it so desires."
KEA will comply with this request and will restrict public access to
Crescent Lake with a gate across the road between Island Lake and Crescent
Lake. The gate will discourage use of Crescent Lake during periods when
ice is unsafe. Crescent Lake will be posted with signs indicating that It
is unsafe to walk on the ice.
Comment noted.
B-1
LETTER B
:....:"'"'-_ 1-
, ,-•. ,
United States Department of the Interior
HERrr AGE CONSER VAllON AND RECREA nON SER VICE
ALASKA AREA OFFICE
.. 4., ••.•• •
lOll E. Tudor, Suile 297 Anc.boraae. A..lub 99S0J
AS 00
l20l-03a
Dr. Robert H. El11s'
Project Manager
Beak Consultants Incorporated
317 SW Alder
Portland, OK 97204
Dear Dr. El11s:
Tek.(907) 277-1666
NOv 2 1 1980
In response to your request of October 13, 1980. we have revieweJ the
Environmental Report for the proposed Port Lions hydroelectric project
and have the following comments concerning recreation and cultural
resources.
According to the report, proposed project impacts to the existing
recreational use and aesthetics of the Port Lions River are objectionable
to a significant number of residents. Although recreation mitigation
opportunities are identified in the report, there does not yet appear to
be a clear concensus among the river users or overall community as to
what will be acceptable. We recommend that a committee, composed of
residents concerned auout the river and community recreation, be formed
to consider the possible recreation mitigation alternative6 associated
with the project. This committee can then bring their proposal to the
community for conSideration. We believe that it is important for the
cOllllIlunity to approve of any proposed recreation mitigation that is
associated with the project.
Archeological surveys by Finn-Yarborough and Wier sum are identified in
the report. However. it would appear that a comprehensive survey which
would establish the effect of the project on sites which possibly may
exist within the construction or inundation area has not yet beC(l
conducted by a qualified archeologist as stipulated in 36 CFR 800.
If we can assist you further, please contact Larry Wright (re:recreation)
or Jim Thomson (re:cultural resources) of my staff at 277-1666.
Sincerely,
~<~"'-
Janet McCabe
Area Director
8 - 1
8-2
RESPONSE TO LETTER B
Several community meetings have been held in Port lions, the
project was explained and questions were answered. Since those meetings.
the City of Port lions provided KEA with a list of conditions that
must be met before the City will approve the project. Response to
those conditions and related comments are provided in sections 0-1 through
0-12,
A comprehensive survey as stipulated in 36 CFR 800 will be conducted
prior to project construction by a qualified archaeologist. This information
will be forwarded for agency review upon completion.
LETTER C
United States Department of the Interior
IN REPL Y REfER TO:
FISH AND WilDLIFE SeRVICE
1011 E. TUDOR RD.
C-1
C-2
C-3
C-4
ANCllORM'E. AI.ASKA 99503
(907) 276·3R(K)
1 g NOV 19110
Dr. Robert Ellis
Project Manager
Beak Consultants Incorporated
317 S.W. Alder
Portland, Oregon 97204
Dear Dr. Ell is:
The u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service has reviewed your Environmental Report
on the proposed Port Lions hydroelectric pToject. The September 1980
document will be submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) by the Kodiak Electric Association (KEA) as a part of FERC's shoTt
form license application.
Host of the concerns listed in our 8 July 1980 letter to you have been
addressed 1n the report. However, data related to fiSheries resources
Seem sketchy for purposes of recommending mitigation and/or enhancement
measures. We recommend additional on-site information gathering as
follows:
1. Page 10, paragraph 1 -Additional water temperatuTe data should
be collected to establish pre-project thermal regimes in the
spawning areas. This information will be the basis for measureS
to maintain the water temperature necessary for normal timing
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
of emergence of juveniles.
Page 18, paragraph 1 -We agree that the discharge Teadings to
date are insufficient. Before determining in-stream flow
requirements, it would be helpful to have more flow data on the
Port Lions River.
Page 22, paragraph 1 -We recommend that additional fish surveys
he conducted on the Port Liona River to determine the numbers
of spawning salmon present and the extent of spawning habitat.
Page 27. paragraph 3 -Presence or absence of spawning coho
salmon should be determined.
Page 81, paragraph 2 -Specific in-stream flow regimes for normal
and drought conditions to preserve fishery resources will need to
be determined. A program for maintaining these flows should be
discussed.
Page 81, paragraph 5 -The area
be quantified and compared with
habitat created in the lagoon.
the penstock and outfall to the
of spa"",1ng habi ta t lost should
areas of improved spdWlling
Also, the alternative of moving
area above the culvert {thus
preB~rving the present spawning area) should be consid~red.
C -1
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
C-6
RESPONSE TO LETTER C
Water temperature measurements in the lower Port Lions River have
been taken on a dai ly basis since July 1980. They will continue to
be taken throughout the pre-project period to establish baseline
temperature conditions. It should be noted that the lagoon spawning
habitat, which will remain after project completion. is periodically
inundated by salt water due to tidal action. Incubation temperature in
this area is therefore determined by a complex set of variables, i.e.,
stream temperature and ocean temperature. It would be extremely difficult
to regulate flow in the Port Lions River so that temperature conditions
are replicated exactly. IIlso normal variabil ity in year to year flow
conditions would be expected to have as much or more effect rn water
temperature in the Port Lions River then the changes brought about by
the project.
Daily flow measurements have been taken since IIpril 23, 1980 and will
continue to be taken throughout the pre-project period. II permanent
stream flow gage will be established after the project is developed. See
Attachment C for August 1930 -March 1981 flow records.
Counts will be taken in 1981 by a qualified observer to determine
the number of pink salmon in the lower Port Lions River.
A qualified observer will make observations in the lower Port Lions
River on a daily basis during the coho spawning season. Any evidence of
spawning will be reported.
Due to the requirement of the hydroelectric facility for 40 cfs,
there will be periods during the year when no flow can be maintained
in the stream between the forebay dam and the tailrace. Economics
preclude diverting water for maintenance of sufficient flow in this
reach to support a viable fish population. However, as discussed in
the ER (page 69) very 1 itt1e of the area between the 1aqoon and the forebay
dam contains habitat suitable for resident ur anadromous fish populations.
Regulation of flow in the lagoon was discussed in response A-3.
Measurements for the map of suitable pink salmon spawning habitat
shown on page 24 of the ER were determined when flow in the Port Lions
River was 37.3 cfs. Therefore, the areal extent of suitable spawning
habitat shown on the map closely approximates the amount of spawning
habitat that would be available at 40 cfs, i.e., minimum operational flows.
IIpproximately 83 m2 of suitable habitat occurs above the highway culvert
and 697 m2 in the lagoon below the highway culvert.
The amount of spawning habitat that would be added in the lagoon with
hydrogeneration would vary from year to year depending upon what the
minimum flow conditions would be without the power plant in operation. for
example. in 1980 only a small part of the habitat shown on the map was
covered with fresh water when the flow dropped to 3.3 cfs. flows were so
low during the 1980 spawning season that pink salmon were unable to move
upstreafll past the lagoon (Alvin Nelson, Port Li~ns Resident, pers. comm.).
With the plant in operation approximately 697 m of habitat would have
been available in the lagoon for spawning.
LETTER C (CONT.)
Dr. Robert Ellis
The fact that th~ project is bdng studi~d in accordanc~ with short-form
licens~ application proc~dures does not diminish the necessity for thorough
analysis and ~vdluation of alternativ~s and impaLt~. Th~ environmental
report dra~s numerous conclusions from what appears to be a limited data
base and somt!wtlilt cursory investigations. 'WI;! anticipate commenting further
on the project as more ddt~ b~com~ available and plans aTe r~fincd. W~
will specifically comm~nt On the] icense application to fERC and the Army
Corps o( Engine~rs' Section 10/404 permit application.
Thank you for the opportunity to review your environmental report.
cc: AoES, WAES
ADFI>G, Nt1FS, ADEC, oCM, Juneau
ADF6EG, NNrS, ADEC, EPA, Anchorage
FERC, WaShington, D.C.
KEA, Kodi<lk
Sincert:!ly,
RESPONSE TO LETTER C (CONT.)
0-1
0-2
LETTER D
(14 0/ Pt»i ~io«,d,
'.0. lOX 271
POrT LIONS. ALASKA "550
Beak ConBul tant. J Inc.
8~ Floor Loyalty Bldg.
317 S.W. Alder
Portland, Oregon 97~U~
RE: Port Lion. Hydro Project
Final lmpact Statement
November 7, I'IHO
The City of purt Liona 8ubmit. the folloving commentA concerning the
Environmental Impact Statement prepared by B~'.AK. The City of I'ort
Lions finds the statementa 8ensitivity to i1l8U~8 .uTrounrlin~ the
project 'Very commendable. Hovever, the City feel. t~e document. ia
deficient wi th respect to technical detsi 18. Hany ci tizens 1 iv ..
~ithin yard. of project facilities which are not clearly de.tribe,1
or represented graphically.
The City t 8 reBpona@'s are divided into tvo cat.e~orieBj conditions
and comment_. The City'. approval oC tbe project ia contin~pJ)t upon
the conditioDs pre8ented herein. Commenta are intencied to help
BEAK, KEA, Bud tbp contractor to beneCl t from local knowledge.
CONDITIONS
I. BI::A.K presentl a very curlory di8CU88iOli DC a Terror Lake Tie-in a8
an alternative energy Bource which would otter indu.trial potential at a
better rate. Port I.ion. do •• not accept tbe validity of the idea that
Terror Lake ha. no "eIceae" capac i ty to aerve Port Lions. The cOlDDluni ty
teel. that the Port Lion. Project must not preclude the po •• ibility
of a Terror Lake Tie-in. Our approyal i. lubJect to the promi.e that
!G:A will commence with tbe design, Itudy, Slid acquisition DC permit. and
eSlementl for a Tie-in, and that construction ~i 11 be.,;in when Port Liolls
conlumption eIceed, the capaci ty oC the Port Lions Uydro Projec too
2. The re-installation of the City'_ aUIillary water supply pump and line
ia of eItreme concern. The document doe. not describe the rerouting oC
the water transmisaion line and does not aatiaCy our concerns reKarding
sediment in the water supply. The City mUBt have the ~uthorjty to review
and approve the design DC this installation prior to con8truction. Our
processor W8.8 recently ordered by Puhlic lIealth oCCicials to ceas ..
operation because or the excessive sediment in this watel" supply. We
0-1
D-2
RESPONSE TO LETTER 0
As a public utility KEA is charged to provide the following:
KEA will build a transmission intertie between Port Lions and
the Terror Lake hydroelectric plant when and if the load in Port Lions
develops to a point that it is economically feasible to do so. KEA
will prepare a letter of intent suitable to show any potential indus-
trial developer that if he intends to develop a load of sufficient
size to warrant construction of an intertie, KEA will do so. The KEA
Board of Directors will incorporate the tie-in plan on their 10n9-
range development plans. Specific loads and economic considerations
which will Justify construction of the intertie are discussed in "Trans-
mission Line !ntertie Between Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project and
City of Port Lions" which has already been provided to the City of
Port Lions for their review.
See response A-6.
0-2
(cont)
LETTER
flF.!lK Conoultant.
Po"e 2
November 7, 19AO
D (CONT.)
believe ttl8t for a period of time after construction of the forel)8Y
dam and re.ervoir, this situation may vorsen. The re-inlltallation
of the water Bupply By.tem must inclurle a proviaioJl for filtration to
minimize thi .. effect. Thia construction ahall he coordinated with
U.S.P.Il.S. plan" for 8 new transmiasion line to the dam 80 City water
service viII not be interrupted.
J. The lIumoer r~creation81 UBe of the fiivPT, and vinter recreational
u.e or Crescent Lake will be effectively pr.c1uded hy the Pro./ect.
However, the City r.elo that the Project itoelf provides oufficiellt
recreation alternative. to miligBte this lOB., provided that the public
18 ft..anTed Rece.a to the facilities for recreation purpo8e8. This
accea. ahall be aIJllured in tour vay~.
A. In the process of ohtainin.~ Project eSBePiente, KEA ehall
concurrently ohtai,) eaaemellt for plll)lic rec~eation use of
0-3
land. adjacent to the reservoir and Island Lake. The reservoir
easement shall incllule the lomh hounrled by the re.ervoir,
Dayview Street, to a line from the corner of the forehay (lHm to
the corner of llayvieli and Ptarmigan street •. (see map)
0-4
0-5
0-6
0--7 I
The .econd eaBement shall include a 200 ft. acceB8 corridor
from the Crescent lake Hoad at ita neareBt point to leland lake,
to thf' shore at leland lake. Easements .hall include permiAMion
tor the City to develop recreational racilitiee 011 theBe easemellts.
fi. KEA ahall ohtain any neceasary variancee or permits required
hy Borough Plannillg and Zoning authorities for hoth Project and
recreational activitieB in the City liatershed.
C. Kf:A shall dedicate ti,e CreBce"t lake BCCUB road to pllhlic
nee aa far aB IBland lake. Reyond this point, KEA may restrict
puhlic acceBS if it eo deBires. The City viII provicie routine
maintenance of the road vith State JUovenue Sharilll!; funciA.
Routine maintenance Bhall not include Bno'W'-ploving.
D. n;~ ehall further provide ~ picnic tahlea at each puhlic
recreation .i teo Kf.:I\ vi 11 inetall and lDBintaiu and pAy for it
Itreet liKht. aloog the reoervoir to provide lighting for
evening recreatiollal u.e of the reservoir in winter.
!CE,\ .hall clearly po.t .ignl "hich warll or any dan~ero
a.Bociated vith the Project, Bucll aa the hazard of r:relcent
Lake ice.
The City ha. attempted to mInImIze capital coetB for recreation alterna-
tiveB in order to allov tunda to he concentrated On the protection of
the City'. water Bupply.
RESPONSE TO LETTER D (CONT.)
0-3
0-4
0-5
0-6
0-7
KEA will request by letter that the landowners include recreation
with their easements on land use permits. Further, KEA will consult
with the city on a recreation plan.
KEA will attempt to obtain any necessary variances or permits.
KEA will attempt to comply with the City's
the permit application to the State of AlaSka.
regulations will determine what will be allowed
of access and maintenance funds.
wishes in this area in
State statutes and
with respect to dedication
KEA will provide two (2) picnic table~ at each public recreation
site. KEA will also provide for fGur (4) street lights along the forebay
dam impoundment.
Such signs will be posted by KEA.
0-8
0-9
0-1°1
0-11
0-12 1
LETTER 0
IIMK Con.ultanto
l'ap;e 3
November 7, I,}HO
(CONT.)
COMMENTS
The .tate-ment de.cribe. an BeCtoRs road (rom the highway to the pover
plant at the lagoon. We correct our earlier Btatellent concl!rniuK the
exi.tenel! of a road eaaement. There i. no eaaement, hut there i. 8 road
which .hould he .ufricient to this need. ProJect facilitie. mu.t not
r •• trict traffic on thia road. IO:!:.\ eft.ernents 8hould pro\"ide for tllis
road 811 a City .tre'et. ))eatruction of the natural besllty of the
lagoon mUlt be minimized.
We helieye that the cumulative effect. of the Settler'. Cove break-
water. and the releale of colder rreahvater into the Co\"e may re.ult
in ice vhich may interfere with boat traffic in the ney hBrb~r. The
effect. of relea.e •• hould be carefully monitored.
Citizena "oulff appreciate more apecifie details concerning reservoir
houndariea. water supply line rOllt~. penBtock route, po .... er plallt
location, and floodplain areaa from both dam8 ..
We aloo wi.h to point out that the people of Port Lions have already
onc~ paid for the installation of the auxilIary yater pump anfl trans-
mi8.ion line at the River, and are curr~ntly payinp; KJ.o.J\ a contract
rat.eo for the n~ceaaary electrical installation for thf" pump. The re-
location of all tlle8e facilitiea ia aure to he expensive. This COAt .... ill
he included in our rate baae and y~ viII be paying for .... hat ve h8'\'e
already paid for.
We helievc that the coat-benefit ratio ot tbf" Pro.iect ('ould he silllli-
fiearltly enhanced hy oi)tailling Arant funda for eonatruction. (;ivell
F~d~ral and Stat~ cormnit,.,ent8 to the de\"elopment of alternative f"nerp;v
aourees, ye helieve that aueh fundB ahould be mor~ actively pur8uefl.
vv
CIC: KLA. Inc.
Enc lo.ure: (Map)
CITY OF l'OItT LIONS
RESPONSE TO LETTER 0 (CONT.)
0-8
0-9
0-10
0-11
0-12
~EA will make every effort to maintain the scenic beauty of the
l.goon and absolutely will not cut any trees that are not essential.
It is possible that icing will be aggravated by the combined effects
of increased fresh water discharge and the breakwaters for the small boat
harbor. We agree that the situation should be carefully monitored.
All of this information is presented in Attachment A.
KEA will relocate the auxiliary water pump and transmission line.
These activities plus costs of picnic tables, lights, etc., will be
included in the City's rate base.
KEA is actively pursuing grants as well as low interest loans.
({(o o \)
, ,
~.~I
36 ".,
,"'_,) \ I
J'
LETTER E
e DEPARTMENTOFTHEARMY
ALASKA DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
~o 80': 7002:
_Iiii'Ll' TO
ATTI .. TION or
NPAEN-PL -E N
Or. Robert H. Ellis
Proj ec t Manager
Beak Consultants, Inc.
317 S.W. Alder
Portland, OR 97204
Dear Or. Ellis:
... NCHO ..... G£ .... L ..... K ...•• 810
22 [JCl l~elJ
The Alaska District, Corps of Engineers has reviewed the "'Port Lions
Hydroelectric Project, Environmental Report"' and we have the fol1owing
comments:
GENERAL
The Department of the Army has statutory responsibility under Sec-
tion 404 of the Clean Water Act for the discharge of dredged or fill
material in the waters of the United States, including wetlands.
Several of the proposed activities would be within Corps jurisdiction
and would require permits. From the project description it is diffi-
cult to state exact actions which would require a permit with the
exception of the two dams which are definitely under Corps juris-
diction. Other areas which may require permits could include the
powerhouse, penstock route, and access roads if the placement of fill
material in wetlands is required. For clarity, wetlands are defined
as those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground
water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do support, a prevalance of vegetation
typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands
generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, muskegs, and similar areas.
The Alaska District would like to adopt the final environmental
document for its regulatory permit process. If the environmental
RESPONSE TO LETTER E
E-1
E-3
E-4
E-5
E-6
LETTER E (CONT.)
NPAEN-PL-EN
Dr. Robert Ell is
document does not adequately address the area of Corps responsi-
bility, a supplement to the document would be required and permit
Issuance would be delayed.
SPECIFIC
Page I, Project Description. The Description of the proposed action
Is difficult to follow. Possibly the inclusion of quantities and
plans would clarify the proposed action.
Page 31, Vegetation. In several areas of the vegetation discussion
some areas are described as ·wetlands· or ·poorly drained". These
areas may be under Corps jurisdiction, and a better description and
impact assessment of these areas would aid in the permit process.
Page 65, First Parag. Although operation of the plant will produce
uniform flows, there are some aspects of hydroelectric power pro-
duction which could have adverse impacts on the spawning area and
on the life histories of the salmon. With uniform flows, natural
flushing of the spawning gravels does not occur. Water temperatures
will tend to be colder during the spawning season and warmer when egg
incubation is occurring. Although temperature changes may be slight,
this could change the time of emergence and the fry may enter the
marine habitat when sufficient food sources are not available.
Page 70, Vegetation. If any areas classified as wetlands are going
to be impacted by construction, regardless of whether or not it is
unique or 1 imited, Corps permitting may be required. A description
of impacts on these wetlands would be appreciated by the Alaska Dis-
trict.
Page 80, Water Quality. Number 3. Minor stream crossings and
temporary stream crossings can be permitted under the nationwide
permit system if they are culverted for the expected high flows.
Pages 91 and 92, Negative Impacts. The negative impacts stated
for a transmission 1 ine from the Terror Lake Project appear to be
excessive. The transmission line could be routed around possible
raptor nesting habitat. Although the transmission corridor for the
alternative is not included in this report, additional crossings of
Kizhuyak Creek does not appear warranted. The proposed powerhouse
2
RESPONSE TO LETTER E (CONT.)
E-1
E-2
E-3
E-4
E-5
E-6
See attachment A for details of project description.
Wetlands (as defined by Corps of Engineers' letter to Dr. Robert
£11 is. 22 October 1980), will be disturbed by fill material in the
following locations: 1) 650 ft. section of the access road between
Crescent Lake Dam and Island Lake: 2) That section of the access
road form where the road leaves the Island Lake perimeter to a point
4200 ft. east and; 3) the access road from a point 1530 ft. beyond
the end of the previous stretch to a point 3400 ft. east (see Attachment
A for map of wetlands area). The width of the access road will be
apprOximately 20 ft. A total of 3.B acres of wetlands will be affected
by construction of the access road.
The wetlands that will be impacted support wi 110." alder, lupine,
labrador tea, and blueberry. These species are well adapted to the wet
conditions that occur along the access road but certainly are not typical
of marshy habitats (e.g., cattail). The plant groups and species are
connlon in the Port Lions area as well as Kodiak Island. The r'\ad will be
constructed by laying a reinforcing fabric membrane over the wetland soil and
covering the fabric with at least 18 inches of gravel. The result will
be loss of 3.8 acres of wetland vegetation. No waterfowl or shorebird
nesting areas will be affected. Culverts placed as indicated in Attach-
ment A will reduce the impact of the access road on drainage.
The reference to uniform flow may be somewhat misleading in our
statement on page 65. Actually the lagoon will still experience
substantial flow variability. During runoff periods some water will be
held back for storage. However about 2/3 of the flow in the lower river
originates in the watershed downstream from Crescent Lake. During heavy
rainfall events the lagoon will still be subject to freshets which should
be adequate to flush out the gravel.
Effects of the project on water temperatures relative to salmon
spawning and incubation were discussed previously (see response C-1).
See response E-2.
All streamcrossings will be culverted. Culvert size has been de-
termined from appropriate tables in ARMCO handbook for standard road
culvertin9. Culvert sizes and locations are presented in Attachment A.
As discussed in response A-I7 a report has been prepared since the
ER was distributed that describes the economics and feasibility of the
intertie. The report also shows two alternative transmission routes from
Terror Lake to Port Lions.
E-6
(cont)
LETTER E (CONT.)
NPAEN-PL-EN
Dr. Robert Ell i s
for the Terror Lake Project is located on the west side of Kizhuyak
Creek. The proposed corridor to Kodiak would cross the creek where
an intertie to Port Lions could occur. The Terror Lake intertie
appears to be a ~iable alternati~e and possibly should be expanded
in the final environmental document.
The Alaska District appreciates the opportunity to cOlTJT1ent on the
Environmental Report and hope our comments are useful If you have
any questions, please feel free to contact John Burns of the
Environmental Section, at (907) 752-2572.
Sincerely,
~0it1~
Chief, Engineering Division
RESPONSE TO LETTER E (CONT.)
LETTER F
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminisu-.tian
NATIONAL MAHINE FISHE.RIES SERVICf
Alaska Reg ion
Post Office Box 1&68
Juneau, Alaska 99802
NOV 3 19BO
Dr. Robert H. Ellis
Project Manager
Beak Consultants Incorporated
317 S.W. Alder
Portland. Oregon 97204
Dear Dr. Ell is:
We have received the Environmental Report for the proposed Port Lion
hydroelectric project, which accompanied your letter of October 2, 1980.
We believe the draft statement presents an acceptable discussion of the
environ'.Jental impacts associated with most project features. However certain
features or impacts have not been thoroughly addressed. These concerns may
be significant in assessing project impact or in meeting federally mandated
responsibilities; they include:
F-11
I.
2.
F-2
F-al
3.
4.
F-4
Wetlands. No discussion of wetlands. per se, is presented in the
report. A description of existing wetland habitat within the project
area. and the effects of the project on this habitat. should be
provided.
Access Road. Page one describes an access road to be built along the
penstock right of way from the highway to the power plant. What type
of access to the Crescent Lake damsite is being proposed? Detailed
mapping of all roads and impacted tributary streams and stream
crossings or ford sites should be provided.
Material Sites. Quarries or other material sites should be identified
to allow for associated impacts and/or mitigative measures to be
addressed. Again, more detailed mapping of the project should be
made available.
Mitigation. Location of the tailrace from the powerhouse as far
upstream as possible is a necessary mitigative measure. It is not
clear just how far upstream this could go. Could this flow be provided
to spawning areas above the culvert? Section 404. fish should mention
that construction activities will be timed to avoid critical life
history stages of salmon. Also. the deposition of construction
generated silts and fines in the lagoon should be monitored. Should
excessive build-ups occur, a mechanical means of flushing these gravel
spawning areas should be considered.
(,~,
1,~
.... ~, ' .
10TH ANNIVERSARY 1970-1980
Netianal Dceanic and Atmospheric Administration
A young agency With a htSloru':
tradlll()n of service to lh~ Nation
F-1
F-2
F-3
F-4
RESPONSE TO LETTER F
See response E-2
A gravel access road will be constructed from the Forebay dam site
to Crescent Lake (see Attachment A). The first 2000 ft of road, starting
at the Forebay dam site, will require clearing of trees and brush. A
30 ft right-of-way will be cleared. None of this area is classified
as wetlands. The remainder of the access road will be constructed by
laying gravel on the existing trail. Clearing will not be necessary.
R~inforcing fabric membrane will be used in boggy areas to provide sup-
port for the gravel bed. The road will be approximately 20 ft wide
throughout this stretch. All creeks and small tributaries will be cul-
verted. Location of the access road and culverts are shown in Attach-
ment A.
Three borrow areas are proposed for the Port Lions project. Their
size and location is presented in Attachment D. The three areas and
the impacts associated with their use as borrow areas are described below.
Cresc~"t Lake site. Fill material for the Crescent Lake Dam will be ex-
tracted from a i-acre horrow area adjacent to the dam site. This area
is well drained, consisting primarily of silty-gravelly-sand and a glacial
till and is not likely to fill with water. The edges of the borrow area
will be contoured. Topsoil will be spread over the area and the site
will be revegetated. The area does not contain critical habitat for any
species of animal or plant.
Access Road. Gravel for the access road will be excavated from a borrow
site previously developed by the City of Port Lions. This area is lo-
cated near the Port Lions airstrip and is currently ~·eing used for con-
struction and maintenance of city roads. Impact of this borrow area will
be low due to the disturbed conditions that presently exist.
Forebay Borrow Site. Fill for the Forebay dam will be extracted from a
large abandoned river meander about 300 feet west of the dam site. The
area contains about five acres of clean gravel with 1 ittle soil cover.
A minimum five foot layer of gravel is apparently present. This borrow
area would be inundated by the forebay impoundment and therefore reclamation
of excavated areas would not be required. Impacts to this general area
have been discussed in the ER.
The location of the tailrace for the proposed hydroelectric project
is shown in Attachment A. At this location 1 ittle. if any, existing
spawning habitat in the lagoon area will be destroyed. According to the
design engineer, movement of the powerplant to a location upstream of
the culvert would result in loss of too much head. The project would not
be economically feasible.
All attempts will be made to schedule construction activities to
avoid critical life history stages of salmon. Spring and early summer
would be the best times of the year to schedule construction activities
to avoid such conflicts.
Deposits of construction generated silts and fines in the lagoon
will be monitored by KEA. Should excessive build-up occur KEA will
use a high pressure hose to flush the sediment out of spawning gravel.
LETTER F (CONT.)
We appreciate this opportunity to comment on this draft report, should you
have any questions regarding our comments, please contact Mr. Brad Smith
with our Western Alaska area office in Anchorage, phone (907) 271-5006.
Sincerely,
~~~ ,/t(' Robert W. McVey
Director, AlaSka Region
RESPONSE TO LETTER F (CONT.)
G-1
LETTER G
u. S. E N V I RON MEN TAL PRO TEe T ION AGE N C Y
.'PlY to
"nN01
f',/ S 443
4 NOV 1980
Or. Rohert H. Ellis
REGION X
\200 SIXTH .. VENUE
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
Beak Consultants, Incorporated
317 S.W. Alder
Portlano, nrHlOn Q7?04
Suhject: Environmental Report for thp FERC Short FnrOi L i, PO',e
Pppl ication for the Port Lions, Alaska, Pro.i,'ct
Dear Dr. Ell is:
Thilnk you for spndinq us the above r"port for revie". P,dS"!! Oil Iho
rroject description in the May 1980 Bilckgrounct Informiltwn cincument
and tl,(' envirormental impacts outlined ,n the environment,'1 reflorl,
we will have no objections tn the project if the mitiqation ~pasures
out 1 ined in Chdpter 4 are implemented.
In qcneral the rennrt was interest ina ilnd ans-'erer many of t b"
concerns Wf' raise" "arlipr. The use of photoqraphs was esper"llv
helpful. Therr are howev.'r, five issues for "hieh addif inn,,1
information wuuld be helpful.
1. There SA£?ms to he snmp ciis<lqrf-'f:lw>nt Q~)ty.iflpn your analv<.l<; of th(,
project's effert on domestic water qualily and thp Citv of Port
lion's an?ly~is in th"ir letter located in Arnc'lOix c. The r1lv'<
letter impl~es that this project would require ~VD.s<inQ of tho
w"ter treatment filcility at certain time,. The dfect of Slich a
bypass on the City's drink ina water qual,ty should he pvaluiltrd.
G-2 1 ~. The report should descrihe the location of, impacts nf, ard
mitiqation for any necessary borrow areas.
G-3
3. A discussion of the community's monthly electrical remand w(,"1(1
be uspful in evaluat inq future flo"s betwcen the for"ha" (1 a ", al1rl tht,
lagoon as well as flOl<5 frorT' the powerhouse into tlte Iiltlonn. M"rc
information is needed on the plant's operational olan tn clarify if
therp wi II be any riurnal or seasonal flow chonae, at t.he tai Iracp
due to varyino electrical loads. The effects of any such flow
chanqes shorJld be discussed.
G-1
G-2
G-3
RESPONSE TO LETTER G
See response A-16.
See response F-J.
The type of turbine that will be used in this project responds to
changes in load by deflecting water onto or away from the turbine blades.
Therefore the amount of water passing through the powerplant remains
constant. There will be no diurnal changes in flow leaving the tailrace.
Seasonal changes in flow from the tailrace were discussed previously
(see response A-3).
G-4
G-5
LETTER G (CONT.)
2
4. \oIhile electric heat does not appe~r CO'OOlon now in the City of
Port Lions. stahilizinq the cost of electricity when compared to the
rapidly increasing heatinq oil costs may encollrage such changes.
The likelihoon such switches and their eff~(t on hnth heatin~ oil
and electricity costs ann suppl ies shoulrl he examined.
5. Major impacts in any of these areas may require anditional
mitigation. 'In addition, monitorinq the imoacts of the project on
sensitive resources such ~s the salmon spawnin~ qravels ann Dink
salmon runs should be considered to ensllre that these valua"le
resources are maintained.
Aqain, we appreciate the opportunitv to review this report. If you
t"lve any questions reqarriinq our comments, please fpel free to
contact either myself or Judi Schwarz of mv staff. We Cdn be
reached at (206) 442-1285.
Sincerely yours,
/
El izabeth Corbyn, Chief
Environmental (valuation Branch
cc: David Nease, Jr., KEA
FERC
RESPONSE TO LETTER G (CONT.)
G-4
G-5
When the ER was prepared, it was assumed that financing for the
Port Lions hydroproject would come through REA with 5% financing. Since
that time the State of Alaska has proposed a bill that would provide
outright grants for hydroelectric projects. The bill has passed the
Senate but is being held up in the House for revlSlons. It is likely
that a revised bill will be passed that will provide monies for hydro-
projects with an interest rate in the neighborhood of 3 percent. The
Port Lions project has been included on the list of projects which would
receive state funding. If such funds do become available, the cost of
electricity in Port Lions would be less than originally anticipated.
This could result in some shifts to electric heating, However, the number
of conversions will probably be small because most of the people in Port
Lions cannot afford the capital outlay for new electrical heating systems.
The present trend is toward more reliance on wood stoves for heating.
Wood is relatively plentiful in the area and will probably continue to
supply a large proportion of the heating requirements in the forseeable
future. KEA estimates of power requirements for Port Lions do not
include an increase in demand from residents switching over from fuel oil
to electricity for heating.
Comment noted.
LETTER H
ALASliA I·O'fl~It A(TTIIOItITl'
333 WEST 41h AVENUE· SUITE 31 . ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 Phone (907) 277-7641
H-1
Mr. Robert H. Ellis, Ph.D.
Project Manager
Beck Consultants, Inc.
317 S. W. Alder
Portland, Oregon 97204
RE: Beck Project 02672
Dear Dr. Ellis:
(907) 276·2715
October 10, 1980
We have completed our review of your Environmental Report for the proposed Port
Lions hydroelectric project at Port Lions, Alaska. We'd like to commend you and your
staff on an exceptionally well written and beautifully illustrated document.
The position of the Alaska Power Authority relative to the project continues to
be favorable; provided the construction of the project will result in lower consumer
power costs than would otherwise result from continued dependence on diesel powered
generators. However, we note, with some concern, that reduced fuel requirements for
the generation of electrical power may cause a significant increase in the cost of
heating oil. The obvious result is that some of the savings in electrical costs will
be lost to higher heating costs. Since this issue may adversely affect the cost of
living 1n Port Lions, we agree with your statement (p. 86) that mitigating measures
for the escalation of heating oil costs need more investigation. Also, while reducing
the operation of diesel generators is the net objective, we do not think it wise to
totally replace (remove) diesel generators as you imply in Section 3.3 (p. 68). Some
equipment should remain as a backup for or to supplement the hydroelectric facilities.
Sincerely,
:k·P. S:~JL
Executive Director
cc: David Nease, Jr. Kodiak Electric Ass'n.
H-1
RESPONSE TO LETTER H
As discussed on page 67 of the ER, diesel generation will continue to
be used to supplement hydropower during months of inadequate flow in the
Port Lions River. Therefor~ periodic bulk Shipments of fuel oil will con-
tinue to be brought into Port Lions for diesel generation. The frequency
of those Shipments will be reduced to approximately one shipment per year.
KEA is willing to continue sharing the bulk shipments with the City's
fuel oil supplier. Therefore. the people of Port Lions will be able to
continue to secure most of their fuel oil at bulk quantity prices.
LETTER I
•" .. "
"'--~ ~-j.
... ~ ...
United Stales Department of the Interior
BUREAU Of' LANO MANAGEMENT
Anchorage District Office
4700 East 72nd Avenue
I ...• '''L l' ... ..-... TO
AK-O 16-0 I OH
2Y2U (Ulb)
1-1
Anchorage, Alaaka 99507
Or. Robert Ellis
Beak Consultants Incorporated
317 Southwest Alder
Portland, Oregon 97204
JAil ~ P 19111
RE: Port LIons Hydroelectric Project. Envlronm(~ntal Report -R(lvif'''
Dear Mr. Ellis:
The Bureau of Land Management has reviewed the F.nv1ronm(>ntal~.:~.p~~ Cpm-
pleted by Beak Consultants Incorporated in September 1980.
11le report presents a rathl'r broad scope of project rl:>iatt'd t>nv{ ronmt"lt,'ll
and socioeconomic factors; howevt!r, it does not pre~<"nt <:'1 t('chnic,li illl.dy-
sis sufficient to either identify the benefits of ttle projPct {Jr (lllil11tLfy
potential overall project costs. In particular, the report dol'~ not
justify the proposed project as the most suitAhle of the alternatives
discussed.
We are particularly concerned that the lev~l of stlldy and Inf{)rmation
,ccumulated concerning the effect of tIlt.' project on tht' environment dlld
the socioeconomic status of Port Lions is at times conjPcttlral <'inti incon-
clusive. In particular:
-The "sizeilble" benefit to local employment during the prnjl.'ct
construction is not quantified.
1-2
-long-range effects of the project upon the entlrp city dn not
indicate th£' effect upon the local fuel all dl.,trihuttJr nr tlH'
availahillty and price of fuel oil to be uspd for heatln~ 311d
auxilIary power.
1-3
1-4
1-5
-Streamflow baseline data is insufficient; flow data is inconclnslvp
when it is basf'd upon precipitation rl.'cords. particularly wllL'1l slIch
datB was not generated in the local area.
-There is a lack of soils data. Without this. only unsuhtant iat('d
predictions can be made indicating stream sedimentation ilnd sillmon
spawning habitat alteration.
-There is no bathymetry of Cresent Lake itself, concerning potentlill
sedimentation at the dam site.
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
RESPONSE TO LETTER I
The benefit to local employment during project construction is quan-
tified as follows:
1. Six to eight local persons will be hired for clearing of timber
and bru~h in thE forebay and Crescent Lake impoundment fireas.
Approximately one month of labor will be required for t~is
operat ion.
2. There are two or three licensed heavy equipment operators in
the City of Port Lions. Every attempt will be made to utilize
these persons during the construction phase if they are available.
See responce H-I.
At the date of this writing, stream flow records for the Port Lions
River have been monitored daily for over one year. BrAK agrees that it
would be desirable to have more years of flow data upon which to estimate
hydropower potential. However, with one year of flow data and precipi-
taUon and temperature records it is possible to develop reasonably re-
liable correlations between measured flows in the Port Lions River and
measured flows in nearby streams which have a longer record of flow.
Those correlation studies have been completed by Roland Jones Consulting
Engineers, Kodiak and support the original projections discussed in the ER.
A soils report was prepared after the ER was distributed. The text
of the ~oil~ report can be found in Attachment E. Boring logs, labora-
tory tests and figures attached as Appendices A, Band C to the original
soils report are available from KEA upon request. Results of the soils
analy~es did not change our conclusions regarding effects of the project
on salmon spawning habitat.
Transects will be made in the upper one-third, middle and lower one-
third of Crescent Lake. Depth soundings will be taken at 100 ft intervals.
These readings will be used to provide a rough characterization of Lrescent
Lake's bathymetry. Results of the survey will be forwarded to the Bureau
of Land Management upon completion and will be available to other agencies
upon request.
1-6
1-7
1-8
I-J
LETTER I (CONT.)
I -The impact on the city ~ater supply, ~ater quality and quantity is
insufficiently analyzed.
I -There 1s no discussion of earthquake or tsunami related effects
upon the project.
Further, several major issues remain 1n question:
I -It 1s not clear that the residents of Port Lions either Bupport
this project or understand its scope and benefits.
I -The benefit of this project, which will theoretically supply only a
portion of Port Lions power demand for nine months of the yedr, Is
questionable. There 1s no excess capacity.
1-10 I -The benefit of supplying limited hydroelectric power, assumin~ zero
environmental impact, has not been adequately comp<1.red with the
economic cost of the project, given low cost financing.
1-11
-It remains quite possible that the most cost effective alternative
for Port Lions is via hydroelectric power transmitted from
Terror Lake. The fact that this would capture a percentag~ of
power theoretically earmarked for Kodiak 1s understood. However,
the relative cost effectiveness of the Terror Lake transmission to
Port Lions over an entire separate project has not been indicated.
This relationship should be studied.
Please feel free to contact MiKe Kasterin or Ron Huntsinger at tile Anchor-
age District Office (~07) 344-9661 for information or aSSistance as neces-
sary.
Sincerely yours,
J+.t; 7N1/l«)Z
Uahn :rrick
Area Manager
Peninsula Resource AreH
RESPONSE TO LETTER I (CONT.)
1-6
1-7
1-8
1-9
1-10
1-11
See response A-16.
See responses A-I and A-14.
See pages 88-89 of the ER. Al so see response to COlll!lents sut:mitted
by the City of Port Lions.
See r,ttachment B "Transmission Line Intertie Between Terror Lake
Hydroelectric Project and the City of Port Lions.
See Attachment B.
See Attachment B.
ATTACHI~ENT A
i .
{
VIC!NITY MAP o 1/2 I 2 t=-=31 I • .-1
SCALE IN MILES
F ReM' US G S t! A P K 0 D I A K D - 3
i '/'
~. ,l··
V
SHORE LIlm
NOR'1AL POOL LEVEL ELEV. 312
pL.!',n
b----==-:z~----2_c:c-"--"C--_ -. -----r
PURPOSE:
SCALE IN :·11 LES
DATU~: ~EAN SEA LEVEL
POWER PROOUCTION
ADJACENT PRClPERTY O\\;JERS:
1: STATE OF ALASKA
DIVISION OF LANDS
lu"JCHORl1.GE, AL1,SKA
2: AFOGNAK NATIVE CORPORl.TION
P.O. BOX 14
KODIAK, ALASKA 99615
Cr.ESCE~IT L!\f~~ 1
AT: PORT LIONS, ALAS~A
l-.PPLIClITION BY:
KODIAK ELECTRIC ~SSOC., I~C.
P.O. BOX 787
KODIAK, ALASKA 99615
DlITE: JAllUi"lRY 26, 1~81
SlIrr:'::': 1 OT" G
I Length: nOr) lin ft.
Mate~ial and Quantity:
~
:1
~
J
II I,.
U1 ,., .. ;-:: U) ,-r::':' c.i ::-:. 0--4
H ..c
Cl ~
W
u c,
H
rl
( :~
U In L-'\ a rl r-i
l!) ":-.
(j) G' ,.c Cl' U>
"I ,)
H ,::; >< 0::: ~ 0:::
1. Ernbankment-'-'~8, sou eu. Yd,;, of Clay, S;'md, Grc,vcl dnd C,)bblc~;
2. Riprap -2600 OJ. Yds.
(i' ~n If) .. E--< r--(j) ,-r: -0 5? ;2: >< u co ,::; :J (5 0 co W r--...:I ~ 0
Nu \vL:tl.:ll1ds unc1cr t:mbankrrll!l1t l\rc~il
26'-0"
l ') I
r~ ~ I
SicEi)I,:r, SLOPE ---"
LJ\ 'f, s:r L'I', S f'\ Jl D !\tID
CR.I\\,EL P.oLLED TO 6" L,WI':HS
t·1l\X. SIZE i\CC;Pj~C;ATE C". -2 _____
r-
w
c...
U
;:::
'-
H
...:I
, ~
~:
0 ,:..
..
,.<
H
...:I (5
E--< H
r~ ['-<
0 r'::::: u
H
....c .. Il.
~ r~
'-<::
,E!·:EFq;ilCY~-,r.\·li\Y F:1.EV. 316.0
...:I ~
U X
0
:.~ co :.~ ..:: ~
H H
~ 0 "
0 C :-.:: p., :.::
D!',np INLET SPILL\"'.-', 1':1,.312.0
, -~
IJ 0
C'J ..
n
~ '-E--<
Cl r,~
r'-1 ::r::
Ul
r---2 FUO'l' DUMPED rUPFAP
S!\ND, c;r~'\vr::L ,; COBBLES-'
EXISTING LAKE
LEVEL EL. 298.0
/ -=""'" .,
j>. , ',--G FOOT MIN. UNLES,; /L /1 CUTOF~" Tj{[~NL'11
/ GLACIAL TILL
~ '~ BEDROCK EIlCOUNTEr-ED.
""---=2:-:(-:-) j----c..,,, -BED j{ 0 CK
"'----CONCRETE GHOUT CAP I-lHERE BEDROCK
ENCOCNTERE':D WITH G;~OUT HOLES AT
10 FOOT CENTF. RS , LL --REHOVE OHGANIC HATERIALS
ORIGINAL GROUND LINE
CRESCENT ~AKE
SECTION
NOT '1\) SCALi~
I
I
~ I
~J
-r l " j ,·jl) ,
~G+O .,
1·1 :. -1 5\ 1
,
Ci·J,;SG:r:T Ll\l:r: ACCESS EO!,L~
LIST G:" Cl'I'IEF:TS
1·14+81
1:'.7+70
LJ:': +.le
1] -; ~ 7 (I
11;-1;0
104+40
')l eSO
91 .. 70
.:38+5:?
G'~} 1-69
61+18
/1,1-;:i 3
1:'+1 C'
ll+GF
_ .. r r (,
")""") , "
,I )(')
PIP1~ SI ~E
24"
18"
2,1 "
60"
3G"
36"
13"
3G"
,lR"
G~) II
J "
j r, c, "
~,~ljO
3C '
') ,-. ~U
30'
20 I
"') r, I -}
26'
26'
38'
3:j ,
,10 '
:'C'
:2 ':) I
2('
:...,:
'l'() 1:.0 1 (J • ~ :: I~, .")
,., , , 1i~ 'J I·' ."
I __ l~'
~. I I ~}
---~ ~-.-~ l~~~~~~~~
w (f)
i-' 'D
t-..J '"-1
:..., :s
>' ><
w -.;..::..
.;;.
tJ
H
>'
i'.::Ii;i'Gl:C.:r:1 :; i.i\',: cC ;.: ,.":01[,:::·;
l':,Il:;r:7\T, Gi:OU;;:,
j\CCESS F.Ol\D---Tfl'ICl\L s::=,-.:cn.::c
J~. T. S .
r j\.'JPOSED ~).~~~ ~~.
I:;: POr<T L10:)3 PI\'i;·,
7.T: peRT L10I1S, !1L1,Sj~}
7\PPL!.Cl.TIOn BY:
KODIAK ELECTRIC ASSOC.
P.O. BOX 787
;:ODUIl':, ld,ASPI 996 1 :i
DATE: J1\NUARY 26, 19B1
SIIEET: 3 OF 6
SHEET; ':i OF 6 -F:-MATCH
f------------------.
.-::--
P ~"I"D "r·l·~l-·I u~ L n I J U .' ~ ,I
;::XISTIN:; Gh0;J:~D P "ILrI'" I !' 'u U l.j(,'l
!llivi 10.0
?J
:'l
(,1 .,..
t'l
rt:
>-:l
V1
5TATE.
'U ::--;::.
>-:J
H
:.:-' " 'D
l'
~
1J1 o
f-' o o
.
"~l 3 0 I !::'~" i
50 I "j'" i
~~ TUBE
-\1.\;;/\\ /~
CO:~CPETr: LI,;,:D
TAIL,.z,.-,C2 CU'l IN B:::DP0:::;:
'j 5 10 :' C
b:z:::L--:-:!. J
SC,',LS---FEET
HIGHWAY
-l
1) o
~
\l1
~
r o
c
(fI
{l1
()l !
OJ r
0 n ~ T-
-l\}
_____ I
11
O
Al
-l
r
o
Z
(Jil
I
/
/
/
-<.-~ --~ \ ~ \ /
pr·O?OSED D/Y·jS
II:: PORT LIO:JS EI\''::;i
T.T; j>ORT LIOnS I l\L!ISU,
/,PPJ,ICilTIOl~ BY;
\
\
](OD111]( ELECTfG C 1IS.3C,C., rr:c.
P.O. BOX 787
KODI~K, ~L~SKiI )9C~~
;}TITi':; F:C::BF.~;!\I'Y 25, 19S1
:':i:EET: ,.; OF 6
I
\
l
0> V
-.,....j IP 0 ~'a' 11 JJ rrr: r G r' lJ r a ~
" ~
!vi AT C. H L~---r'--"--__ ~.I...I.--~"";;;;"'~~~"""-~.
~;llI':ET: ,; (.)[' ()
50
!
100
!
"on ~ r
SCilLE-----I='EET
PV'TIAL PLAN---PE1;STC:K I POI·IE? !lOUSE
AND TAl LRl,CE
RE: SHEET 4 OF (, FOF:. COl,TINU"\TIO:l
Pf,OPOSED J)i.::S
II:: 1'OP,'1' LTO!:S RIVEP.
lIT: POET LIONS I AL!\SYJ,
1,PPLIC/:rrON BY:
KODI1\}: ELECTRIC ASSOC., WC.
P.O. BOX 787
}~()r)Im: I AL!,SU, 99615
DlITE: n:l2F:.Jl,!?Y 2S, 1901
Sm;r:::T: j OJ' G
<
LL'ngth: 310 ft.
:-latl,riJll; Sand, gravel [, cobblL':; tvitll :oill'L'l: ,;tl'L'l [l~l'll1hr~n,"'
Quantity; 7580 Cubic Yclrc1:3 of ErnbcwklfK'!lt
No, wetlands undc:r Dnbankml'nt: i\rl'il
TOP S'IT:,:L .. '::B,'J1: I:LEV. '.H.C1
";','; ... , ...
'~ .. ' -, <.--....
3/8" SHI';::T S'\'J:r:L
'·'E:·\B 1~J\tlE -.
o ·--7
O<b (._ S.r..ND,
.Q:, UJIlU Ll:~-; 7
','
o
<:r2-GLACI AL TI LL -?
L.---D
FORE8AY DAM
SECTION
NOT TO SCALE
C . ..---·
CONCRETE GROUT CAP
GROU'f HOLES AT 10 I CTHS
r,'"
~'"
,-l , .~
~~~: [)l
0 ::.1 ...::
~1 ....:i
[f) H < 0 ~ .,
0 if, [f)
R ~ -7
P-o 0
H ~ >-1
~ [~
,~ ~~
0 \' ..... .::.
.. ..
[--<
H -<
u
H
U
H c: .. E-<
>--u m L:.l
...:1
L:.l o
H ~
f~ -<
'---H u 0
H P ~
!2-
~ ,<
r--
co
r-
>;
0
p:J
0
~
L,
rl ,,-'
0 U' C'\ rl
VI [J,
-< 0J
U
.".
U) >--...:; ~ .-:: -< :::;
h -c.:.
~ '"" -< "" H
0
0 ..
~ r:
'-,~
HlTl.'·.c: EL. 7 () . 0
RE",IOVE ORCANIC H}\Tl:H.IALS
,~
ro.
0
\.:J
f--< eo:
v-:
...
I ,
i
I
" ,~
.• 't
.(
::l
,':; .,
; ~ ,;"
10. P.I. STA. 72 + 32.27
8 .
7 .
l::,.= 05°13' 18"
R = 7017.67'
T = 320.00'
L = 639.56'
R
T = 235.00'
L 464.87'
P.I. STA. 56 + 59.43
R
T =
L
060 37' 27"
4008.90'
232.00'
463.48'
~. P.I. STA. 31 + 98.99
h. == 27 0 24' 19"
R 471.65'
T 115. 00'
L = 225.60'
5. P.I. STA. 28 + 82.12
h. 09° 45' 14"
R 1054.79'
T 90.00'
L = 179.56'
4. P.I. STA. 24 + 92.09
h. == 41° 39' 01"
R = 420.65'
T = 160.00'
L = 305.78'
3. P.I. STA. 16 + 39.77
D = 21° 40' 36"
R= 1619.19'
T = 310.00'
L = 612.59'
2. P.I. STA. 4 + 31.34
LJ 12° 51' 45"
R = 1774.30'
T = 200.00'
L = 398.32'
1. P.I. STA. 0 + 00.00
: 1./
"
,I "
\ . .f .
I "I'
K.
.
"
, , ,
, --
, ,
" .
IN: PORT LIONS RIVER
AT: PORT LIONS, ALASKA
APPLICATION BY:
1\ a
KODIAK ELECTRIC ASSOC., INC.
P.O. BOX 787
KODIAK, ALASKA 99615
DDATE: MARCH 26, 1981
SHEET: W-2 OF W-2
;.: .. ,
rr'-:
, '_' "J r
~ '-'-
, 'r-
/
z
:,
'I
-I •
"
I:
"
" -
, • r-• . ". ~'~ 1:_ ""'
-:.r" , .:
~ -(. t ....... · ,-(' .
. 1 ': l ......
,. ,
\ "f
i
; i_
, " ,-
16. P.I. STA. 152+45.27
=1,413,354.053 N
702,361 .303 E
15. P.I. STA. 134+50.76
= 64° 34' 23"
R= 600.00'
T= 240.00'
L= 676.21'
14. P.I. STA 126+35.96
=29 c 17' 56"
R = 918.13'
T = 240.00'
L = 469.50'
13. P.I. STA 92+89.59
12.
1l.
= 16 0 35' 35"
R = 754.34'
T = 110.00'
L = 218.46'
P.1. STA 87+69.24
= 24 0 34 ' 35"
R = 780.46'
T = 170.00 '
L = 334.77'
P.1. STA. 81+87.80
= 24 0 07' 12 ,.
R = 819.09'
T = 175.00'
L = 344.82'
PROPOSED DAMS
IN: PORT LIONS RIVER
AT: PORT LIONS, ALASKA
APPLICATION BY:
KODIAK ELECTRIC ASSOC., INC.
P.O. BOX 787
KODIAK, ALASKA 99615
DATE: MARCH ~6, 1981
SHEET: w-1 OF W-2
ATTACHr·1EtH B
kea007/al
TRANSMISSION LINE INTERTIE
BETWEEN TERROR LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
AND CITY OF PORT LIONS
Prepared for
Kodiak Electric Association, Inc.
Kodiak, Alaska
by
ROBERT W. RETHERFORD ASSOCIATES
Consulting Engineers
Anchorage, Alaska
April 1981
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY
SECTION II: DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
SECTION III: ROUTE SELECTION, LAND OWNERSHIP AND
CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES
SECTION IV: DESIGN CRITERIA & COST ESTIMATES
SECTIm~ V: ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
SECTIOrl VI. SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS
SECTION VI I: APPENDICES
A. REFERENCES
B. POWER RATE DEVELOPMENT FOR CITY OF KODIAK
C. ECONOMICS OF SUPPLEMENTAL DIESEL GENERATION
FOR PORT LIONS VS CONSTRUCTION OF TRANSMISSION
INTERTIE
kea007/a2
1-1 to 1-4
11-1 to 11-8
II I -1 to II 1-7
IV-1 to IV-4
V-I to V-12
VI-l to VI-3
kea007/a3
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION & HISTORY kea07/b1
INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY
Port Lions is a small, predominantly Alaskan native village with a
population of approximately 227 (1979 count) located in the Kodiak
Island Borough on the North end of Kodiak Island. The inhabitants are
primarily residents relocated from the village of Afognak on Afognak
Island following the March 1964 earthquake.
The new townsite is situated on the west side of Kizhuyak Bay and is
about 19 air miles from the city of Kodiak. Travel to Port Lions is
poss'ible only by sea and air. A state-owned, city-operated 2600 foot
gravel airstrip is located one mile northeast of Port Lions. The
community is serviced daily (weather permitting) by scheduled flights
out of Kodiak as well as by wheeled and float plane charters also from
Kodi ak. The community is served by the Alaska Mari ne Hi gh\'t'ay System
with a twice weekly visit from a ferry.
The cost of living in Port Lions is substantially above that of nearby
Kodi ak.
POWER REQUIREMENTS:
The electrical energy is supplied to Port Lions by Kodiak Electric
Association, Inc. (KEA) which suppl ies power to the city of Kodiak and
the surroundi ng areas. At present KEA operates and rna; ntai ns two sep-
arate and independent systems at Port Lions and Kodiak. The generating
capacity at Port Lions is 1100 kilowatts as compared to 25 Negawatts for
Kodiak. These are mostly diesel engine driven generators. Due to size,
consumption and other operating conditions, the cost of energy for the
KEA consumers in Port Lions is much higher than in Kodiak. (The consumer
pays about 24~/kWh in Port Lions as compared to 7.7¢/kWh in Kodiak l .)
This high and ever increasing cost of energy in Port Lions has dimin-
ished the demand and the usage has declined somewhat since 1975. It is,
however, expected to go up again in early eighties when the new HUD
1 December 1979 figures from KEA operating report (Ref. 3)
I - 1
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION & HISTORY kea07/b2
homes, the small boat harbor and the seafood processing plant are con-
nected to the system.
The energy requirement for Port Lions ;s shown below ;n Table 1-1. This
data has been taken from KEA Power Requirements Study done in October of
1980. The data has been extrapolated to year 2000 and rearranged.
TABLE 1.1
PORT LIONS ENERGY REQUIREMENT
1980 1985 1990 1995
Annual MWh required 648 1950 2323 2441
Non Commercial Monthly
Peak Demand (kW) 200 500 535 563
The cost of electricity for KEA customers has risen drastically in the
past two years as has the cost of fuel oil for heating. The average
cost of fuel oil to KEA has risen from 56¢ a gallon in 1978 to $1.36 a
gallon in the first part of 1980. It is expected to go even higher in
the eighties. To combat the ever increasing cost of fuel oil, KEA is
investigating various alternatives. A recent study was done to con-
struct a hydroelectric plant at nearby Terror Lake. The cost of the
electrical energy from such plant is shown in Table 1.2 below.
Financing
5%
9%
TABLE 1. 2 1
ENERGY COST FROM TERROR LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
1984
5.7
8.7
Cost of Energy
2018
9.0
12.0
in ct!kWh
2019 --
3.8
3.8
Another recently completed study indicate the energy available from
a small 200 kW hydroelectric project on Port Lions River funded under
1 From Terror lake Hydroelectric Project, Kodiak Island, 'Alaska
Supplemental Information Report 2, February 1980. (Ref. 1)
I - 2
2000
2566
591
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION & HISTORY kea07/b3
di :--ect State appropri at i on scheme I for 1 ess than one cent per k\VH.
The busbar cost from such a plant for Port Lions is developed in
Table 5-6 Section V.
A comparison of the energy costs for Kodiak after the completion of
Terror Lake project and Port Lions wi th continued di ese 1 gene rat ion
is made in Table 1.3.
TABLE 1. 3
ENERGY COST ¢/kWh
1979 1 1980 1985 1990 1995
Kodi ak 2 7.7 10.8 6.4 8.7 12.5
Port Lions 3 24 24.7 27.6 36.1 48.1
1
2
Taken from operating report for KEA, December 1979.
Developed in Appendix B.
3 From Table 5-3 Total Diesel Generation.
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS
2000 --
15.0
64.0
To subdue this enormous cost of energy in Port Lions, different alter-
nates were investigated. These are very briefly listed below.
Wi nd Energy: Utili zat i on of wi nd energy is poss i b 1 e but has to be
cons i dered s tri ct ly as a source of secondary energy wi thout energy
storage facil ities. Without storage the breakeven point for energy
costs has been calculated to occur when diesel fuel costs more than
$3.50/gal 1 for a system of Port Lions size.
Biomass Conversion: The present state-of-the-art and costs of the
technologies for biomass conversion processes of the required size do
not allow an accurate assessment of this resource for the Port Lions
community.
1 Assessment of Power Generation A lternat i ves for Kotzebue, from
1980.
I - 3
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION & HISTORY kea07/b4
Port Lions Ri ver Hydroproject: The planned development of a 200 k\ol
hydroproject on the Port Lions River will benefit the costs of electric
energy but will be too small to meet the future energy needs of the
community. The economics of energy for such a plant is discussed in
Section V.
Transmi ss i on Li ne I ntert i e to Terror Lake Hydroproject: The site for
the proposed Terror Lake Hydroproject is located about ten miles south
of Port Lions. This hydroelectric project after its completion is going
to supply all or the major share of Kodiak energy needs via a 138 kV
about 20 mile long transmission line. Some suggestions have been made
to feed Port Lions from this hydroproject via another transmission line.
Due to the attractiveness of the project this report will discuss the
feasibility of such an intertie and compare it with other alternates.
1 - 4
kea007/a4
SECTION II
DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
SECTION II: DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT kea07/c1
The following data on the existiT'g environment has been taken from
IIAssessment of Envi ronmental Effects of Construction and Ope rat i on of
the Proposed Terror Lake Hydroel ectric Faci 1 ity" prepared by AEIDC in
November 1979.
1. Water
Water in streams and lakes in the Kodiak Island area generally has a
dissolved solids concentration of less than 60 mg/1 (Jones et al. 1978).
Nelson and Edmondson (1955) found that Bare Lake contained 30 to 40 ppm
dissolved solids. Physical and chemical data collected on several
Kodiak Island streams (Van Julle and Murray 1978, 1979) indicated that
chemi ca 1 parameters fl uctuate wi thi n a narrow range for each ri ver
system and show minor differences between systems. For example, pH
ranged from 6.2 to 6.7, low values for hardness (as CaC0 3 ) indicated
very soft waters, and alkalinity never exceeded 34 ppm for any system.
Jones et al. (1978) summarized these water quality features by character-
lZlng stream waters from the calcium bicarbonate type to the sodium
chloride type. A summary of some of the physical-chemical characteris-
tics of these waters, collected by USGS in previous years, is provided
in Figure 10. Figure 11 gives a general indication of the amount of
major dissolved constituents in Kodiak Island streams. USGS also has
conducted numerous analyses of minor elements in streams and lakes of
the Kodiak Island Region.
Transparency measurements have been made on several lakes in this area.
Prior to lake fertilization experiments, Nelson and Edmondson (1955)
measured Secchi disc depths of Bare Lake; they ranged from 5.5 to 7.0 m.
Hilliard (1959) found Secchi disc depth at Karluk Lake varied from 4.5
to 8.6 m.
Dur'ing winter, lakes on Kodiak Island typically freeze to depths of up
to a meter and mayor may not be covered with snow. The severity of
winter, therefore, and the elevation and surrounding physiography large-
ly determine the physical and chemical conditions of Kodiak Island
II - 1
SECTION II: DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT kea07/c2
lakes. For example, Marriott (1968) reported ~hat the winter of 1967-68
was fairly mild, and lake ice thickness was less than normal. Subse-
quently, relatively high dissolved oxygen values were found in lakes
tested by ADF&G. However, moderately severe conditions can occur lo-
cally even during mild winters. During the winter of 1968-69, oxygen
values in some lakes were fairly low, and one lake contained no dis-
solved oxygen during mid-winter (Marriott 1969). Mild winter conditions
again occurred in 1969-70, and ADF&G investigations of five lakes near
the city indicated no winter mortality of sport fish was anticipated due
to thin ice and high dissolved oxygen concentrations (Van Hulle 1970).
2. Land
The mountainous island of Kodiak is a structural continuation of the
Kenai-Chugach mountain system of the Alaska mainland. The island's
axis, trending northeast-southwest, consists of an exposed, Late Cre-
taceous to Paleocene, granitic batholith with rugged peaks rising 900 to
more than 1,200 m in elevation. Surrounding the central granite divide
on the east and west are mountains rising 600 to 900 m, composed of
earlier Late Cretaceous graywacke, slate, and argillite. The valJeys of
Terror River, Kizhuyak Creek, Shotgun Creek, and Falls Creek are under-
lain by this rock series.
The entire island was eroded by glaciers during various stages of the
Pleistocene epoch, but the highest horns and aretes of the central range
stood above the ice. (The southwestern part of the island was not
glaciated during the last major glacial stage). Glacial erosion carved
the island into broad, U-shaped valleys, such as the Kizhuyak Creek
valley, separating rugged alpine peaks and ridges. Many of the valleys
were eroded below present sea level in their lower reaches and were
inundated by the Sea, creating spectacular fjords. Typical of these are
Terror and Kizhuyak Bays. Many fjords extend deep into the island's
interior; no point on the island is more than 24 km from the sea.
II - 2
SECTION II: DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT kea07/c3
In many places glacial erosion ir the valleys created dt:ep basins that
became lakes. Many small ponds on the glacially sculptured terrain are
the result of this process. Permafrost is essentially absent from most
of the island.
Unconsolidated materials are generally absent at the higher elevations
but cover the lower slopes and valley floors. Most of these materials
are glacially derived, either directly deposited by ice or, more fre-
quently, by glacial meltwater. Most consist of well-graded sand and
gravel, characteristically forming terraces along valley sides where
they were deposited by the old, receding glaciers.
More recent sediments consist of valley alluvium, alluvial fans, and
talus deposits laid over the older glacial deposits and erosion sur-
faces. The lower Kizhuyak Valley has a large amount of valley alluvium,
alluvial fans, and talus deposits laid over the older glacial deposits
and erosion surfaces. The lower Kizhuyak Valley has a large amount of
valley alluvium, consisting of particles that range in size from fine
sand to gravel, extending to an unknown depth.
Katmai ash, a loose, fine sand with rounded particles, was deposited
over the entire region by the explosive eruption of nearby Mt. Katmai in
1912. The ash deposit has been washed from most of the upper slopes and
concentrated in the lower valleys. It is usually underlain by older
alluvial soils and overlain by more recent peaty soils and vegetation
but is frequently exposed along streams.
3. ECOlogy
Fi sh -The fresh waters of the project area are i nhabi ted by pi nk
(Oncorhynchus gorbuscha), chum (0. keta), and coho (0. kisutch) salmon;
Dolly Varden/Arctic char (Salvelinus spp.); and coastrange sculpin
(Cottus aleuticus). Threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) and
starry flounder (Platichthys stellatus) can be found in brackish delta
areas. The average Kodiak Island salmon catch for the years 1948 through
1977 (ADF&G 1977b) was: 6,007,211 pink, 706,174 chum, 35,148 coho,
II - 3
SECTION II: DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT kea07/c4
496,14 0 sockeye (0. nerka), and 1,187 chinook (0. tshawytscha) (total
average catch = 7,245,526). The salmon catch in the Kizhuyak Bay area
contributes only a small portion to the total.
Climatic events and processes, both past and present, have had a pro-
found effect on the ·indigenous biota of the archipelago. Over time
these factors have essentially shaped or molded the biota into the
communities we recognize today.
Vegetation -The flora of Kodiak Island is typically coastal. Most
species are characteristic of those indigenous to a narrow band that
extends along the entire southern coast of Alaska, which have apparently
invaded the area since the last glacial epoch. There are, however,
several species present, primarily inland plants, which do not occur
along the coast. Hulten (Karl strom and Ball 1969) surmised that these
inland species survived the last glacial period in the unglaciated
southwest area of Kodiak. After retreat of the ice, these plants spread
to favorable habitats elsewhere on the island. Most of these plants,
such as Carex scirpoidea, are now considered alpine. Others, such as
spirea (Spiraea Beauverdiana), Kenai birch (Betula kenaica), and cotton-
wood (Populus balsamifera) are lowland species.
Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) forest covers Afognak Island and many of
the smaller islands to the northeast of Kodiak. It is confined to a
rather small area northeast of Kodiak Island. The edge of Sitka spruce
di stri but i on forms ali ne runni ng northwest-southeast, approxi mately
from Cape Chiniak to Kupreanof Peninsula. When extended to the north-
west, this line roughly corresponds to the forest front on the Alaska
Peninsula. Pollen samples taken from bogs within the spruce forest of
Kodiak in 1930 provided data to support Robert Griggs' assumption that
the forest front on Kodiak is advancing westward into new territory
(Griggs 1934, Ruth and Harris 1979). Scattered individuals and small
clumps of Sitka spruce can be seen beyond this forest line.
Cottonwood and occasional Kenai birch are a common overstory at the
mouth of major drainages of the northern portion of the island. Sitka
II - 4
SECTION II: DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT kea07/c5
alder (Alnus cri~pa sinuata) and willows (Salix spp.) produce extremely
dense thickets below 700 m elevation. Red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa),
salmonberry (Rubus spectablilis), and fireweed (Epilobium angustifolium)
are very common among the alder and willow.
Grass-herb meadows are abundant as understory below cottonwood and
alder-willow communities as well as forming subalpine meadows above the
shrubline. These meadows are primarily bluejoint (Calamagrostis cana-
densis) but also contain fireweed, devil's club (Echinopanax horridum),
false hellebore (Veratrum viride), Angelica spp., cow parsnip (Heracleum
lanatum), ferns, and salmonberry.
Alpine areas are typically covered by herbaceous tundra. Sedges, Arnica
spp., fleabane (Erigeron perigrinus), and dwarf willows are predominant
in moist areas, and crowberry (Empetrum nigrum), heath (Cassiope Stel-
leriana), and mountain heather (Phyllodoce aleutica) are more common on
dry ridges. Lupine (Lupinus nootkatensis), Luetkea pectinata, and
sedges are abundant throughout the alpine areas.
Coastal vegetation is dominated by lyme grass (Elymus arenarius), which
grows in dense stands along beaches and in river deltas. Eelgrass
(Zostera marina) may be found in some of the delta areas.
The 1912 eruption of Mount Katmai deposited a layer of ash over Kodiak,
which seemingly devastated the previously lush vegetation of the island.
Only trees and taller shrubs were visible. After a short time, some
fireweed and lupine emerged; however, blowing ash severely stressed
these exposed plants.
Open Deciduous Forest. Open deciduous forest is found in two forms on
the major floodplains below 150 m elevation. Cottonwoods occur within
the floodplains at an elevation of 300 m or lower. Cottonwood provides
30 to 40 percent crown cover in the Kizhuyak drainage and approximately
50 percent in the Terror drainage. The understory is usually a bluejoint-
mixed herb community. An open shrub stratum of alder and willow is also
present, with willow being more dominant near the delta and alder more
II - 5
SECTION II: DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT kea07/c6
so up in the valleys. Fire':eed occasionally forms dense stands in open
areas. Cow parsnip, bluejoint, and lady fern are common understory
species.
Kenai birch occurs on rolling hills between 150 m and the floodplain.
It is uncommon in the Kizhuyak drainage but ranges over a relatively
large area in the lower Terror drainage. The understory for Kenai birch
is also bluejoint-mixed herb meadow with scattered alder and willow.
Closed Alder Shrubland. This community consists of alders with a crown
cover of 75 percent or more. This unit occurs primarily as narrow bands
on hillsides at 300 m elevation or lower. Pacific red elder (commonly
called elderberry), salmonberry, bluejoint, and lady fern are the prin-
cipal understory species.
Open Alder Shrubland. The open alder shrubland community is character-
ized by bluejoint-mixed herb meadows interspersed with open, well-spaced
alder. Shrub crown cover is 10 to 75 percent of the total area. Clump-
ing of alders is minimal. (Areas of clumped shrubs interspersed with
bluejoint-mixed herb meadow are classified as closed alder-meadow mosaic).
Dominant species in open shrubland community are bluejoint, fireweed,
lady fern, and salmonberry.
Closed Alder-t·1eadow ~losaic. This classification refers to the rela-
tively large areas covered by small clumps of closed alder interspersed
with bluejoint-mixed herb meadow (see descriptions of these communi-
ties). The complex patterns created by these communities precl uded
mapping them separately. Shrubs provide a 25 to 74 percent crown cover
for the total areas, as in the open shrubland communities. This com-
munity is distinguished by the abundance of elderberry and salmonberry
near the margins ·of the alders as well as the open grassland areas.
Willow Shrubland. Willow shrubland generally occurs in moist areas of
relatively low relief. The willows (primarily Salix pulchra and ~
alaxensis) are usually 1 to 2 m tall and generally grow in clumps.
Those communities between 500 and 700 m are generally more open than
II - 6
SECTION II: DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT kea07/c7
those at lower elevations (70 to 650 ~). Willows at lower elevations
tend to be associated with low-relief floodplain areas. The understory
is often rather sparse, with patches of barren sand. Major species in
this vegetation type are Salix pulchra, ~ alaxensis, horsetail, burnet
(Sanguisorba stipulata), lupine and Indian paintbrush (Castilleja
unalaschcensis).
Bluejoint-Mixed Herb Meadow. This community is variable and can occur
in large open stands by itself or as an understory beneath cottonwood,
Kenai birch, and shrubland communities. Together, the closed brush
community and the bluejoint-mixed herb meadow community form the closed
brush-meadow mosaic association. Major species present are blucjoint,
fireweed, salmonberry, and lady fern. Salmonberry occurs most often on
slopes below 500 m. The relative abundance of these species varies from
unit to unit, but the species composition is fairly consistent. This
community may incl ude some small patches of dwarf birch (Betula nana
exilis) and highbush cranberry (Viburnum edule).
Coastal Elymus. Lyme grass with a tidal fringe of the tall, coars~
sedge, Carex Lyngbyaei, forms dense, almost pure stands on river deltas,
gradi ng into a b 1 uejoi nt-mi xed herb meadow where cottonwood stands
begin. Lyme grass stands may continue along riverbanks for short dis-
tances into the cottonwood zones.
4. Economy
The present economy of Port L; ons depends primarily on the fi shi ng
industry, especially the harvesting of crab and salmon. The local 12
vessel fleet provides employment for 50-60 people for varying periods
from 3 to 9 months a year. The Wakefield Fish and Shellfish Processing
Plant provided the major source of employment until April 1975 at which
time the plant caught fire and burned to the ground. A floater-processor
was operated after the fire by the Port Lions Native Corporation, the
ANCSA (Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act) corporation of the Native
residents of Port Lions, for two years. It was then removed from the
community thus eliminating local employment in the processing sector.
II - 7
SECTION II: DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT kea07/c8
The fl oater-processor has been purchased by a p"'i vate fi rm and was
recently returned to Port Lions. Unemployment has been substantial with
a 50% rate since the closing of the floater-processor. However, the
reopening of the processor should provide the much needed employment.
The City of Port Lions is actively working towards having a shore-built
processor to replace the Wakefield plant.
As a result of the Alaskan Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1971,
a regional corporation (Koniag, Inc.) as well as two local corporations
(Port Lions and Afognak) were created for persons of at least ~ Alaskan
Native percentage born prior to 1972. In addition to a small cash
settlement to each shareholder and a larger one to each corporation,
these corporations were deeded additional assets in the form of land and
sub-surface mineral rights. The two village corporations were merged in
1978 to become Afognak Natives Inc., which now has a total of 512 indi-
vidual shareholders. The corporation will eventually own much of the
land surrounding Port Lions as well as important stands of timber on
Afognak Island.
S. Resources
The resource of the area is fish. Future development of potential oil
and gas discoveries have not been fully addressed in this report. Any
finds in these fields would change all other aspects mentioned in pre-
vious parts of this section.
II -8
kea007/a4
SECTION III
ROUTE SELECTION, LAND OWNERSHIP &
CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES
SECTION III: ROUTE SELECTION, LAND OWNERSHIP AND
CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES
kea07/dl
If the Terror Lake hydropower is to be transmitted to Port Lions econom-
ically the only reasonable alternatives available are:
1. Overhead transmission line
2. Submarine cable
For alternate 2, approximately 9 miles of three phase submarine cable
would have to be laid. The cost of such a line is estimated to be
prohibitively high (over 2 million dollars by 1980 estimate). There-
fore, this study would be confined to the first alternate only.
Figure 1 shows the general location of future power plant, City of Port
Lions, and two different routes IIA" and IIBII for an overhead pole line.
The cost of construction for both routes is anticipated to be in close
proximity on per mile basis. These two routes are briefly discussed
below.
ALTERNATE "All:
Under this alternate the proposed transmission line will be routed in an
approximate 3~' wide corridor from the future jetty of Kizhuyak Bay up
the hillside to an elevation of approximately 200 ' and follow the west
shore of the bay for approximately 3 miles. The line then follows the
valley of a small stream inland to be routed west of a nameless mountain
(elevation 1,678 feet) and after approximately 3 miles turns northeast
and crosses several small creeks before connecting to the existing Port
Lions distribution system. The total length of the line for this route
is little more than 11 miles.
The advantages of such route are less visual impact on the coast line,
maybe little more reliability as compared to alternate IIB II , and compara-.
tively fewer people to negotiate right-of-way access.
III - 1
·"kV""'~
ALASKA \
\' "Q" . ~
'AIR&.v<KS ' C. I>-
\
"NCH~.Ct: \
"~ .
" .J\~[.., ,
~ODIAK "
KODIAK ELECTRIC
ASSOCIATION
24.9 KV LINE TO
PORT LIONS
ROUTING
SECTION III: ROUTE SELECTION, LAND OWNERSHIP AND
CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES
kea07/d3
ALTERNATE "8":
Routing for this alternate follows the west shore of Kizhuyak Bay in its
entirety. This route allows the utility to supply the possible future
consumer near the coast which might be a plus in negotiating right-of-way,
but would definitely involve more people in such negotiations. It will
be slightly less expensive than Alternate "A".
LAND OWNERSHIP:
Land ownership of the planned transmission corridor is presently as
follows (all Seward Meridian)
A lternate A
T28S, R22W, Sec.20:
Sec.20 NE!.i through
Sec.18,7:
T28S, R23W, Sec.12, 1&2:
T27S, R23W, Sec.35:
T27S, R23W, Sec.25,24:
T275, R22W, Sec.19,18,7,8:
Sec.8: NVf"4 :
Sec.5:
Alternate B
T28S, R22W, 5ec.20:
Sec.20 NE~ through
Sec.6:
Sec.6:
Power Site Withdrawal
Claimed by Afognak Native Assoc.
Claimed by Afognak Native Assoc.
State of Alaska selection
Claimed by Afognak Native Assoc.
Claimed by Afognak Native Assoc.
Private (Madsen)
Port Lions townsite
Power Site Withdrawal
Claimed by Afognak Native Assoc.
Also contains two state selected
parcels overlapping a native
allotment and a village selection.
III - 3
SECTION III: ROUTE SELECTION, LAND OWNERSHIP AND
CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES
kea07/d4
T27S, R22W, Sec.31 WI",· 2·
Sec.31 SP:s:
Sec.31 NE!;j:
Sec.3D & 19:
Sec.18, SE!;j:
Sec.18, NE~:
Sec.7:
Sec. 8, S!Z:
Sec.8, N~:
except for:
Sec. 5:
Claimed by Afognak Native Assoc.
Native Allotment overlapping state
selection.
State selection
Claimed by Afognak Native Assoc.
except for parcel on Barabara Cove,
which is a village selection over-
lapped by private ownership.
Claimed by Afognak Native Assoc.
Vi 11 age selection
Claimed by Afognak Native
Vi 11 age selection
Claimed by Afognak Native
private parcel (Madsen)
Port Lions townsite
Assoc.
Assoc.
The choi ce between 1 i ne routing accordi ng to Alternate A or B wi 11
probably depend on the ease of obtaining right-of-way and the relative
importance placed by the people concerned on visual impact versus avail-
ability of electric service. For purposes of this study an arbitrary
choice is made for Alternate "NI as this route will be a little more
expensive and, if proven economical and feasible, the selection of the
other route will have no adverse effect in the project.
CONSTRUCTION METHOD:
The proposed transmission line would be three phase overhead line rated
at 24.9 kV, constructed with single wooden poles following standard REA
(Rural Electrification Administration) design as shown in Figure 2. The
right-of-way clearing is shown in Figure 3. The individual poles will
be set into up to 3 1 diameter holes to a depth of 6 1 to 8 1
• The holes
wi 11 be dug by augeri ng equipment mounted on Nod",e 1 type vehi cl es;
backfill will be with gravel or the excavated material if suitable.
Angle and deadend poles will be anchored with suitable means depending
on the soil conditions (screw anchors in soil, rock anchors in rock).
Little right-of-way clearing is expected due to the sparse tree growth
III - 4
4", 3' -8" 3' -8" 4' ,
I ~~i I 1 11 .1 to 191
9 is' I I t! 1 c-d ~I~~~------~~--~I r'=I~----------~~
I _ I -, °1
I ! _ ,
Nt
I t
when
I
I I 1 j
I I --~---l~-
/1 I
bs-ct I I
I I I ,
I I I
) I· I
I It./'" Neu!ral I
d-eK f:(i ec
.......... I i I / ~-r:--,..;W;
I I
I I
I I
I I
l~~.J
I~! I -f?Cf.~' ~,f--) =-=-~"1.-i=-=ek/=\~fl =I ......... >~,· ==~i,="=-=-3~1:-
I . "o-f "9 I I
I : I . .
I i J"
l ""1 1'-
Specify VCIS for
offsa~ neiJ'ral assembly
'TC'~ 'NO! ~ -"! . ! MATERIAL
c 13 ~. ,. p~ ';nSJ,D.or In type · :?in 20" b 1 I pol~ toP. · c 13 i=:l':, r.1ochi:"l:!, 5/8"1. req·d.
d I~ :'.· .. cs~er square 2 1/4 ..
fer.~:h
f i2 I .
;?n, crossarm, steel, 5/8" x 14"
I ! Cross:::rr.1 3 V2" x 4 112" x s' -0" 51 • I ;
j ; 3 ~_~e!!'.La..,gJ.L2"x.4" (VCIB only )
I I I I
I I I I
PLAN
ITEM NO. MATERIAL
I cu 2 Brace, woo ~ 28"
I i 2 Bolt carria~e 318" x 4112' :
j I r Scre ..... log 1/2" x 4"--,-(vcr only) I
bs I B:>I~ singre ups~! insula!ed ,(VCI only)
eil I Loc~.nuls i
ec I I IBrocket. of/set, insulated,(VCIS onty)
14.4/24.9 KV. 3-PHASE
CROSSARM CONSTRUGTION-SINGLE PRIMARY SUPPOR
0° TO 5° AN GLE
Jon. 1,1963 vel ,vel q
1II-5
ELEVATION
BUORE CL E ARINC>
CLEARING RIGHI-OF-WAY GUIDE
JO~ 1,'952 I
F,,:' !o.llr hy tllt' SOJprrintrndcnt ot Don:lnrl\t~. to.s.. Go\trj\~~('n! J'rir.tll\~ OfT.cC'
\\';uhm"ton, D.C. :-,"J04ry:. Prict ~~ '!-'
IIl-6·
FIGURE 3
RI
SECTION III: ROUTE SELECTION, LAND OHNERSHIP AND
CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES
kea07/d7
in the area. with the use of tracked vehicles it is not anticipated
that a regular access road will have to be built.
The following manpower requirements are anticipated:
Clearing (brush only)
Pole Hole digging
Pole framing/setting
Wire stringing
(including sagging and chipping)
3 men
3 men
5 men
5 men
Construction time is not expected to exceed three to four months.
Construction equipment will consist of a tracked vehicle mounted auger,
a small dozer for brush clearing, pole erection and wire stringing
equipment (low surface pressure vehicles).
I II - 7
kea007/a6
SECTION IV
DESIGN CRITERIA & COST ESTIMATES
SECTION IV: DESIGN CRITERIA & COST ESTIMATES kea07/e1
DESIGN CRITERIA
study.
The followi1g basis of design is selected for the
Voltage Level Selection:
After comparing economics and practicability of different voltage levels,
a vo 1 tage of 14.4 kV phase to ground and 24.9 kV phase to phase is
recommended for transmitting year 2000 power requirements to Port Lions
(See table 5-1). Considering the terrain, etc., the choice is made in
favor of a 3 phase overhead transmission line to be constructed with
single wooden poles following standard REA (Rural Electrification
Administration) design as shown in Figure 2.
Conductor Selection:
The load current for the above voltage and for the peak demand of year
2000 at .8 P.F. is: IL = 17 Ampere. After checking voltage drop calcu-
lations and the mechanical strength criteria, a 110 ACSR Conductor is
recommended to carry the eneigy. This would enable us to carry power
with less than 3% voltage drop and with very minimal line losses.
Mechanical Loading:
The individual weather data could not be obtained for Port Lions, there-
fore the Kodiak data is used for basis of choosing the design criterias
as below.
Temperatures: Average 30°F to 55°F
~lax 86°F
t~in -12°F
Precipitation: 40 -80 inches/year
>56 inches/year (Average)
Wi nd: NW prevailing, 10 knots average
gusts >50 knots up to 120 knows have been noted
IV - 1
SECTION IV: DESIGN CRITERIA & COST ESTIMATES kea07/e2
The conditions in this study necessitate the following minimum basic
design criteria.
1. Transmission Line:
Loading:
Cl ass ifi cat ion:
NESC Heavy Loading
~II ice and 4 lbs. wind pressure
Class C Construction with added
Safety factor of 66%
Pole Selection: 40'-45' Class - 4
Average Span: 425'
Conductor Selection:l/0 ACSR for Phases
#2 ACSR for neutral
Line Length: 11 miles (Approx. AL.A)
2. Substation:
Consi deri ng vari ous aspects as di scussed earl i er a transmi ss i on
voltage of 14.4/24.9 kV was selected. This would require a tapping
of the 138 kV Terror Lake-Kodiak transmission line. Our load for
year 2000 is close to 591 kW or 740 kVA at .8 power factor.
The following tranformation equipment would be needed:
Supply end:
Transformer: 138 to 24.9 kV, 750 kVA, 3-Ph. stepdown with
olc protection for the above transformer (supply side)
Receiving end:
Tr.ansformer: 24.9 kV to 277/480 V, 750 kVa, 3-Ph with
olc protection on L.T. side.
IV - 2
SECTION IV: DESIGN CRITERIA & COST ESTIMATE kea07/f//
COST ESTH1ATES
The following cost estimates have been prepared from the price infor-
mation obtained from suppliers and past experience for similar jobs.
These estimates represent 1980-81 construction cost. An escalation of
about 7% should be used for any future construction.
1. Transmission Line Cost
Structures: 138 @ $625 ea
Conductors:
3-1/0 ACSR $275/MFT
1#2 ACSR $200/MFT
Anchors etc. 12 @ $300 ea
Survey/Staking
Cleaning $15,000/mile
ROW acquisition etc $250/mile
Permits/Bonds
Freight
Labor $70/hr -5000 hrs.
Contigencies 15%
Profit 10%
Engineering 10%
Subtotal
TOTAL TRANSMISSION LINE COST
(Cost per mile -Sl03,500/mile)
IV -3
$86,250
49,000
12,000
3,600
80,000
165,000
27,500
10,000
35,000
350,000
$818,850
122,800
$941,650
94,000
$1,035,650
103,000
$1,138,650
SECTION IV: DESIGN CRITERIA & COST ESTIMATE
2. Substation Costs (2-Required)
Transformer
Switchgear
Misc. Equipment
Freight
Labor 300 man hours @ $70
Contingencies 15%
Profit 10%
Engineering 10%
(Cost for 2 Substations = 219,500)*
Subtotal
TOTAL
kea07/f//
$35,000
15,000
5,000
3,000
21,000
$79,000
11,750
$90,750
9,000
$99,750
10,000
$109,750
TOTAL COST = (Transmission Line Cost + Substation Costs)
= $1,358,150
*The cost of the two sUbstations would be close. Its
doubled for the purpose of this study.
IV -4
kea007/a7
SECTION V
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
SECTION V: ECONOMIC ANALYSIS kea07/g1
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
,
In this section an economic comparison is made between different alter-
nates available to combat the rising energy cost for Port Lions consumers.
The following four scenarios are analyzed here.
A. Continued diesel generation.
B. Construction of transmission line intertie cost Terror Lake
Hydroelectric Project.
C. Construction of Port Lions River Hydroelectric Project supple-
mented by diesel generation.
D. Construction of Port Lions River Hydroelectric Project plus
transmission intertie.
Each of the scenarios is discussed here briefly.
PLAN A:
Continued Diesel Generation: This case assume that no alternate
plan is developed for Port Lions and the existing diesel-generation is
continued for the period of this study. The energy rates until year
2000 are developed in Table 5-3.
PLAN B:
Construction of Transmission Line intertie with Terror Lake Hydro-
electric Project: Under this plan the transmission line between
Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project and Kodiak is taped and power is
brought to Port Lions by another transmission line. The cost of
energy for this scenario is developed in Table 5-4. In development of
these costs, the cost of energy from Kodiak rather than that from Terror
Lake Hydroelectric Project is used (these costs for Kodiak are developed
in Appendices B). This is due to the fact that all the power from Terror'
Lake Hydro Project would be absorbed by Kodiak as soon as it comes on line
in 1984. To meet the future demand for the City of Kodiak and U.S. Coast
Guard load, KEA will have to supplement this power by their diesel
generation in Kodiak. It is, however, anticipated that there will be
enough surplus energy available from such combination (i.e., hydro and
di ese 1) to meet the Port Lions energy needs until year 1993 (Ref. 1).
V-I
SECTION V: ECONOMIC ANALYSIS kea07/g2
At that time, KEA will have to make a choice of either adding additional
units in Kodiak or use the eXlsting diesel plant at Port Lions. In
developing the energy cost for the City of Kodiak (Appendices 8), new
7 ~r..J diesel units have been included to meet such additional energy
requi rements.
PLAN C:
Construction of Port Lions River Hydroelectric Project: A study has
recently been completed by KEA to build a small hydroelectric project at
Port Lion River. This is a small 200 kW plant located about three miles
from the City. The estimated cost of this project is $1.758 million and
it is expected to come on line by 1982 (See Ref. 5) The output of this
plant though adequate to meet the Port Lions immediate energy needs, is
not large enough for future energy requirements. The energy output of
this plant, along with Port Lions requirements, is shown in Table 5-5.
The additional energy needs under this plan would be supplemented by
existing diesel plant. Table 5-6 shows the development of energy rates
for this plan. Under a recent bill passed in Alaska Senate S8 25 and SB
26, the financing for this project is anticipated to be by direct State
appropriations.
PLAN D:
Construction of Port Lions River Hydroelectric Project + Transmission
I ntert i e: Under thi s scheme, the Port Li ons Ri ver project is to be
built as soon as possible and the additional power requirements for the
City are supplemented by the existing diesel plant, until such time that
these additional energy requirements are large enough to justify the
construction of transmission line intertie between Port Lions and Terror
Lake Hydroelectric Project. The time frame for such a scenario is
discussed in detail in Appendices C.
For Plan BJ C, and OJ the existing power is considered to stay as a
back-up system. The 0 & M cost for this plant is included in developing
the energy rates under all the plans.
V-2
SECTION V: ECONOMIC ANALYSIS kea07/g3
The cost benefit ratios for the plans Band C are compared with Plan A
and are shown in Table 5-7. The other parameters used for this study
are as follows:
A. Base Year: 1980 is used as the base year. All cost data and pricing
is done in 1980 dollars.
B. Figures & Facts: Various figures have been used in this study from
previous studies done. A list of such studies and reports has been
included in the Appendices under IIReferences li
•
C. Inflation: In diesel fuel cost, the average cost of fuel to KEA -
Port Lions has risen from 56~ in 1978 to $1.36 a gallon in 1980.
This is an escalation of about 65% a year. It is, however, expected
to slow down. An inflation rate of 10% is applied to fuel cost
until 1984 and 6% thereafter. The fuel cost is shown on Table 5.2.
A general inflation rate of 7~{' is applied to all other costs.
D. Insurance: The existing insurance rate is assumed to hold good for
the period of this study. It is, however, adjusted for inflation.
All new insurances are calculated at $3 per $1000 of investment.
E. 0 & ~1 Cost: The present 0 & ~1 cost for Port Lions is taken from
KEA operating report of December 1979. It is about $42,OOO!year.
This cost is adjusted for inflation.
F. Fuel Efficiencies: The fuel efficiency is calculated to be 10 KWh!
gallon for Port Lion from KEA operating report.
G. Fuel & Lub Oil Cost: Lube oil etc. is assumed to be 10% of fuel
oil cost. The fuel oil cost is calculated by dividing energy
requirement by fuel efficiency and multiplying by fuel oil cost.
H. Transmission Line ~laintenance: Transmission line maintenance is
included at a rate of $1000!mile. Inflation rates have been applied
to this cost.
V-3
SECTION V: ECONOMIC ANALYSIS kea07/g4
1. Transmission Line Construction Cost: This cost has been taken from
Section III of this report.
J. Debt Services: The existing debt service is taken from KEA oper-
ating report. The values of existing plant & equipment was not
available. The debt service on new investments have been calcu-
lated at 5% and 9% financing except where funding is anticipated
to be provided by direct appropriation by the State.
K. Discount Rate: The discount rate of 5% is used for present worth
calculations.
L. Power Rate for City of Kodiak: The power rates for the city of
Kodiak were not available after the completion of the Terror Lake
hydroelectric project. These rates were separately developed and
are included in the Appendices. These rates were used to calculate
the cost of energy for Port Lions by constructing a transmission
intertie with Terror Lake hydroelectric project.
V-4
KEA007/H
YEAR
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Table 5-1 2
PORT LIONS
POWER REQUIREMENTS
System Peak 1
Demand (KW)
200
250
315
390
490
500
510
515
520
530
535
541
546
552
557
563
568
574
580
585
591
System Energy 1
Requirement (KWH x 10 3 )
648
850
1100
1420
1850
1950
2030
2120
2220
2300
2323
2346
2370
2393
2417
2441
2466
2491
2515
2541
2566
1 Forecasts for 1981-1989 taken from Power Requirement Study, October
1980, then 1% growth 1989-2000.
2 Same as used in Reference 5.
v -5
3000
:J: 2500
3=
:;;:
z
z o
I-
0.. ::>:
:J 2000
(f)
z o u
>-
<.9
0::
W
Z w
53 1500
I-
<t
:;;:
l-
V)
W
1000
o
I--
V t-V V
-1---
/
~o-
-.
~ I
V I--VO
~ /
~.
-800
-700 -
~
v~
r-ENERGY CONSUMPTION
. L-----.--
0 0-~.--0 L.-o -
1-0
-
~o--~ 0 -«"OoEMANO
600
-
-400
-300
PROJECTED YEARLY
ELECTRICAL CONSUMPTION
& ELECTRICAL DEMAND FOR
PORT LIONS 200
1900 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000
YEAR
KEA007/H
1
2
YEAR
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000 .
Table 5-22
PORT LIONS
DIESEL FUEL COSTS
Diesel Fuel Cost l
$/Gall on
$1. 36
1.50
1. 65
1. 82
2.00
2.12
2.25
2.38
2.52
2.68
2.84
3.01
3.19
3.38
3.58
3.80
4.02
4.27
4.52
4. 79
5.08
Based on Actual 1980 price of $1.36/gallon, escalated at 10% to
1984 and 6% thereafter.
From Reference 5.
v -7
TABLE 5-3
ECONOMICS STUOY
PORT LIONS, ALASKA
ENERGY RATES WITH CONTINUED USE or DIESEL-GENERATORS
~AN A:
19R.Q 19A1 19B2 1983 19M .1985 1986 1987 19R8 1909 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
1. a) Load D.~and' kW 200 250 315 390 490 ~OO 510 515 520 510 535 541 546 5.,2 557 563 568 574 580 585 591 b) [nrrgy Nrr~ HWH' [,48 8~0 1100 H2O 1850 IY~O 2030 2120 2720 2300 2323 234& 2370 2393 2417 2441 2446 2491 2515 2541 25&6
2. Pow.r Sourcl'
Existing Units-kW
1 350 3~O 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 7 )~O 3~lO 3~0 3~0 3~0 350 350 350 350 )~O )50 )50 350 350 350 ]50 350 350 350 350 350
3 2UO 700 200 700 700 700 200 700 700 ]00 700 700 200 200 700 200 200 200 200 200 200
4 200 700 lOa 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 700 200 700 700 200 200 200 200 200
~
&
Total Capacity -kW 1100 1100 1100 1100 lIDO 1100 1100 1100 1100 lIDO 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 Largest Unit -kW 3~O 350 )50 3~0 350 )50 3~O 3~O J~O 3~0 )~O 350 3~0 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 <:: rir~ Capacity -kW 7'>0 750 750 750 7~0 750 7~0 750 7~0 7~0 7~0 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750
Surplus or (Deficit) kW !.~O 500 435 )(.0 7&0 2~0 740 735 7)0 270 715 209 204 198 193 187 182 176 170 165 159
00 3. Invrstment Costs (S1000)
E.;~t;ng Inye~tm~nt HIA HIA N/A N/A N/A N/A H/A NIII N/A NIA N/II N/II N/II N/II NIII N/II N/II N/II NIII N/II HIli
Additional Inv.stmrnt
Tot.l (Ca'. Y.ar S)
Total (Inflated S)
4. ri.pd Cost (SIOOO)
(Inflatrd Valu.s)
II. O.bt Socvic.
a. hi,tlng 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13
b. Additions
8. Insurancr (nisting)' 5 Ii 6 8 8 9 9 10 11 11 12 13 14 1., 16 17 18 20 21
C. Ta.('S
Total Fix.d Cost 18 19 19 20 20 21 21 22 22 23 24 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 33 34
19f1O lQfll 1982 1983 1984 1985 19B6 19B7 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 19'16 1997 1998 1999 2000
5. Production Cost (S1000)
Jnflated Values
A. 0 & 11 Co,t1 45 48 51 55 59 63 67 72 77 83 88 95 101 J08 116 J24 133 142 152 163 174
B. F UP 1 & Lube 011 Cost~ 97 140 200 284 407 455 502 555 615 678 72G 777 832 890 9S2 1021 1090 1170 1251 1339 1434
Total Production Cost 147 188 251 339 466 518 569 627 692 761 814 872 933 998 1068 1145 1223 1312 1403 1502 1608
6. Total Annual Cost (4'5) 160 207 270 359 486 539 590 ('49 714 7M 838 896 958 1024 1095 1173 1252 1342 1434 1535 J642
7. [NERGY COST (Mills/kWh)
(5 ~ 1b) 247 244 246 253 263 276 291 30G 322 341 3Gl 382 404 428 453 481 512 539 570 604 640
B. Total Cost of Energy
for city ($1000) IGO 207 270 359 406 539 590 649 714 7M 838 11% 958 1074 1095 1173 1252 1342 1434 1535 1642
9. Prpst-nl worth lor tor
~'t 1.000 .,)~24 .9070 .8G3A .87(7 . 7n3~ .74"7 . 7107 .t;7MJ . 64~G . G139 .5R47 .55G8 .5303 .5051 .4810 .4581 .4363 .n55 .3957 .3769
<: 10. Prp5ent worth 01 total
(nprqy Cost ($1000) 1(,0 197 246 310 401 427 4~0 4Gl ~n~ 505 514 524 533 543 553 565 574 586 596 607 617
'" 11. Accumulatrd P.W. 01
Tot .• l [nrrgy Coq
(1000) 1[,0 357 G03 913 1314 173G 7176 7637 3171 3(,7& 4140 4GG~ 5197 5740 6293 (jBS8 7432 8018 8&14 922J 9A38
From Rf'f('rpnc:~ ~.
• Th~ 0 1. M Cost is taken from Rpference 3. An ~sc~lation of 7X is ~pplied on ~ yearly b~sis .
3 Based on Fuel efficiency 01 10 kW/gallon (Same ~s uspd -Rpf. 5). lOX I. ~dded for lubp oil etc. to fuel cost.
[,cJl~trd at 7X annually.
11\8l£ 5-4
ECONOMICS SlUIlY
PonT liONS, ALASKA
(N[RGV RA1ES wITM TRANSMISSION LINE INTERliE
PLAN B:
~_'l.~ 1981 198.2 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 !".~ !989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
1-a) load D~mand' 'W ?OO 2S0 315 390 490 ~OO S10 S15 S20 S30 535 541 546 552 557 563 51;8 514 580 565 !>91
b) [nprgy N,'rd ,HII}l' Mil 8!,O 1100 1420 11150 I'1S0 2030 2120 7.220 21')0 2373 234& 2370 2393 2411 2441 244& 2491 251S 2!>41 2566
2. Pow~r Sourcp (kW)
ExiHinq lJnit~
1 350 350 350 3S0 350 350 350 350 350 J!)O 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350
2 3S0 3')0 3S0 350 350 350 350 3,0 350 350 JSO 350 350 350 350 3S0 350 350 350 350 350
3 700 lOO 200 200 200 200 2UO 2('0 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
4 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 iOO 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
5
&
Additional dips~l Un;B
1
.-.:: ;>
J
4
.....
0 Additional Alt~rnat~
(Transmission Int.Tti~) 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500
lotal Cap.city -kW 1100 1l0O 1100 1100 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 1600
l~r9pst Unit kW 350 lSO 350 350 1500 1500 1500 1500 l~OO 1500 1500 1500 IS00 IS00 1500 IS00 1500 1500 1500 IS00 1500
r; rll! (al'de Jty -.W 750 l~O 7~O 750 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100
Surplus or (Opflcit) kW 550 500 ~37 3&0 610 S82 S9~ 587 576 S70 5G2 !J!.1 !.40 529 S18 50(, 494 481 410 457 444
3. InvestlllPnt Costs (SlOOO)
a. [.istinq lovestment NIA N/A KIA MIA MIA N/A N/A MIA N/A MIA MIA MIA N/A MIA MIA MIA MIA MIA MIA H/A MIA
b. Add it ion.1 Investmrnt
(1980 dol Ian) 1358 1350 1358 1358 1359 1358 1358 1358 1358 1358 1358 1358 1358 1358 1358 1356 1356
lotal (BHP V"ar S) 1358 1358 1358 13S8 1359 1358 USB 13S6 1356 1356 1358 1356 1358 1358 U58 1358 1358
Total (Inflated $) 1180 17110 1700 17110 1780 1700 l71l0 1780 1760 1780 1780 1780 1760 1780 1780 1780 1780
1"110 19B1 1_967 lJIl3 1'l~ 1~!l2 190(, 19f1l 1980 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 19% 1997 1998 1999 2000
4. rl.ed Cost (SIOOO)
(Inflated Values)
A. Debt Sprvice .. (xisling 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13
b. AdditloMI ~
l) 5% 109 109 109 109 10~ 109 109 109 109 109 109 109 109 109 109 109 109
2)~ 168 ]f.8 Ih8 168 IuS ]68 H8 1G8 168 168 168 IG8 166 166 166 168 166
B. Inwrann p)(isting" 5 6 6 7 6 6 9 9 10 11 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 20 n
C. 1 ax!'!.
10ta1 ri.ed Cost ( SlOOO)
1) ~X 16 19 19 20 129 130 130 131 131 132 133 133 134 13S 136 137 138 139 140 142 143
2)9:t 18 19 19 20 I1S 189 189 190 I,JO 191 192 192 193 194 195 196 191 198 199 201 202
S. Production Cost (SIOOO)
(Inflated Values)
A. 0 & H Cost'
a) hlsling 45 46 51 55 S9 63 67 1Z 77 113 08 95 101 106 116 l?4 133 191 IS2 163 114
h) Addil ions 14 15 )7 18 19 20 n 23 25 26 28 30 32 35 37 40 42
B. F up 1 & tub" 0 i1 Cost~
< II) £Xisting 97 140 200 2114
b) AddiUo<>
lot~ I I'roduc It on Cos t 147 188 251 339 7J 76 84 90 96 103 117 116 126 134 146 IS4 165 171 169 203 216 --6. lotal Annual Cost (SlOOO)
S't 160 207 270 359 202 208 214 221 227 735 245 251 260 269 282 291 298 316 329 345 359
'I'.\, 160 ZU7 270 3:'9 248 267 273 2BO 286 294 304 310 319 328 341 350 357 375 388 404 418
7. [n"r9Y Cost (Hills/kWh)
fl. I\nnu"l Co<l Oi !Jbur~emE'nt
51: 2~7 244 Nt; 2!o3 109 107 105 104 10<' 102 lOS 107 110 112 117 119 123 127 131 136 140
~ 247 244 246 253 134 137 134 13£ IZ9 128 131 132 135 137 141 143 146 lSI IS4 159 163
8. [nHqy Purchn,p
Mi 11,/Kllli lro,"
kodiak 106 64 69 72 11 81 87 92 96 105 117 125 133 141 144 147 150
19AO 1991 1982 1983 19114 1985 n8b 1987 1988 1999 1990 1991 1992 1993 199.,! 1995 1996 .1 997 1998 !999 2000
C. (N[RGY COST (A-B)
5% 747 744 746 753 21S 171 114 176 179 184 192 199 208 217 234 244 256 268 275 283 290
'It. 247 744 746 253 240 701 703 704 706 710 218 224 233 242 258 2&8 279 292 298 J06 313
8. Total Cost of [nerqy
for city ($1000)
5% 160 701 271 359 398 333 353 313 397 473 446 467 493 519 566 596 626 668 692 719 144
9% 1&0 707 271 3'>9 441\ 3~2 4I? 432 457 483 ~O& 5~" , , 552 579 624 654 682 727 749 778 803
9. "r .. s~nt worth f aC,tor
!J:t 1.000 .9524 .9070 .8638 .8217 .1035 .1462 .1107 .67(.8 .644fi .6139 .5841 .5568 .5303 .5051 .4810 .4581 .4363 .4155 .3951 .3169
10 Pr~s~nt worth of tot,,!
£nt"rQy Cost (SIOOO)
5% IGO 197 24G 309 321 7Gl 2[,3 ?GS 769 273 ,/74 273 215 215 286 281 287 291 288 285 280
'It. ItO 197 746 309 )(;5 301 )07 307 309 311 311 307 307 307 315 315 312 317 311 308 303
11. Accumu!atpd P.W. of
Total [n~rqy Cost (SlOOO)
5% 1&0 357 603 912 1739 1500 1703 2028 2297 2570 2844 3117 3392 3667 3944 4240 4521 4818 5106 5391 5671
9't If;O 357 603 912 1777 15114 1891 7198 2~.01 nn8 3179 3436 3743 4050 4365 4680 4992 5309 5620 5n8 6231
.-::: 17 . rr .. s~nt Worth of
Annua! Cost (S 1000)
Sl 160 197 :1'45 310 156 Ib3 IbO 157 154 151 150 147 145 143 142 140 137 DB 137 137 135
'It. 1(,0 197 245 )10 204 209 204 199 194 190 181 181 178 174 172 168 164 164 161 160 158
N 13. AccuMu!atpd P.W. of
Annua! Cost (SIOOO)
5% 1&0 357 602 912 1068 1231 1391 1<,48 1707 185) 2003 2150 2293 2438 2580 2720 2857 2995 3132 3269 )404
'1% lGO 357 &02 912 l11b 1375 1529 1128 1972 2117 2799 24!)0 2658 2832 3004 3172 3336 )!>OO 3661 3821 3919
r rom R~fprencp 5.
t Thp 0 & H CoH is tak~n fro~ Rpf~r .. nc~ 3. An pscalatlon of 7t. I~ applied on a yearly basis.
~ 8as~d on Fuel efflc;pncy of 10 kW/gallon (Sa~e as used -Ref. S). 10% is added for lube 011 etc. to fu~l cost.
Escalated at 7l annually.
KEA07/0
TABLE 5-5 1
ENERGY BALANCE FROM PORT LIONS RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Year
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
System Energy
Reguirement (KWHxl0 3 )
1100
1420
1850
1950
2030
2120
2220
2300
2323
2346
2370
2393
2417
2441
2466
2491
2515
2541
2566
1 From Ref. 5
Sources (KWHxl0 3 )
Port Lions Diesel
Hydro Supplement
1581 2 (481)
1581 (161)
1581 269
1581 369
1581 449
1581 539
1581 639
1581 719
1581 729
1581 765
1581 789
1581 812
1581 836
1581 860
1581 885
1581 910
1581 934
1581 960
1581 985
2 Assumed energy available 90% of the time.
3 Parentheses indicate surplus capacity of hydro, no diesel supplement
requi red.
V-13
TABtE 5-6
[(ONOMleS STUDY
PORT lIONS, ALASKA
[NERGY RATES WITH PORT lIONS RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT • DieSEL SUPPLEMENTAL
PLAN e
1980 1 'lIB .1982 1'183 1984 1905 1986 1987 J9Hfl 1989 19~ 1991 1992 1'193 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
1. a) Load D.mand' kW 700 lSO 315 390 490 500 510 515 5?0 S10 535 541 546 552 S51 S63 568 574 580 58S 591
b) [nPrgy N .... d MIoIll' &48 850 1100 1420 10::'0 1950 20]0 2120 2220 2300 ZJ23 2346 2370 2393 2417 2441 2446 2491 2!l15 2541 2566
2. Power Sourer (,W)
[. i sting Uni ts
1 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 3S0 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350
2 150 350 3~O 350 350 350 350 350 350 3S0 350 350 3!l0 350 350 3!l0 350 350 350 350 3!l0
3 200 200 700 200 200 700 200 200 20U 200 700 200 200 200 700 200 200 200 200 200 200
4 7hQ 200 200 200 200 200 200 700 700 700 700 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
5
&
Add; t ion." (Ii,·',,'! On i t~.
I
<: 7
3
4
.....
J.-A,ldit'n"Jtt Al ".,.",,\,.
Porl tlfw~ Rtv.·r HYlh:u 700 700 700 700 7UO ;'00 700 700 200 200 700 70U 700 700 700 200 200 200
TotA! C~I'aci\y lW 1100 1100 )l()O 1300 1300 DOO 1300 1300 nOD ])00 noo 1300 DOO 1300 1300 1300 1300 1300 1300 1)00 1300
lllrll,·,t Unit· ~W )~)O JI,O 3~O 3!JO )',0 ]~,o )~(l J~O Jt.O J~O )'.lO 350 J~O 3S0 3~0 3!>0 3;0 J!.oO 3',0 J!>O 3!>0
fir .. Capacity -,II I~O 7!>O 9~O 9!.tO 9~,O (J~O 9;0 9~O t)~O 'J~,O 9~,0 9;0 950 9~U %0 9;0 %0 %0 9~O 'l~O 950
Surplus or (Dpficit) kll 550 300 G), 51>0 460 4~O 440 4)~ 430 420 415 409 404 3'18 393 307 382 376 370 365 359
Total Hydro [n .. rgy
Ilvoi lahl!' (~""I) 1581 1501 1501 I~Bl 1501 1581 1581 l~Bl 1~81 1!l81 1591 1581 1581 1591 1581 1581 1!>81 1581 1581
Itydro f nt·''!)' Suq,l us or
(O~fi cit) kWI! 481 161 (769) (3('.'!) (449) (!l39 ) (GJ9) (719) (742 ) (7&5) (789) (012) (83G) (eGO) (885) (910) (934) (9GO) (985)
3. Inv.'t .... nt Cost, (SIOOO) .... [,listing Illvfl\llf>ent NIA HIA NIA NIA HIA HIA NIA NIA NIA N/A NIA NIA NIA H/A NIA NIA NIA NIA N/" N/" H/A
b. Addltiona I lnvf!\tl'l'ent
(1980 dollars) 1726 172& 1726 17Z6 1726 1726 1726 17<6 1726 1726 1726 1126 1176 1726 1726 1726 1726 1716
19AO 1')81 1982 1983 1')84 10 B5 l'lBfi 1987 I~P8 19119 1<)90 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1996 1999 2000
4. fixed Co~t {S1000}
A. Ol'bt Sprvice
it. C. i ~tino 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13
b. Additional'
8. J nsurancp p.1 ~ tI ng' !. (, I> 7 7 8 6 9 9 10 11 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 20 21
C. TaxI'S
Total Fixpd Cost (S1000) IB 19 19 20 20 21 21 n 22 23 24 24 25 26 21 26 29 30 31 33 34
5. Production C~~t (SlOOO)
(Inflated Valups)
fl.. 0 ,. H Cost'
a) E.istinq 45 48 51 5!> 59 63 67 n 77 83 08 95 101 lOB 116 124 133 142 152 163 174
<: b) Mditions 6
B. F UI' 1 ,. l uhl' 0 i 1 Co~t' 97 140 60 86 111 141 177 212 232 253 277 302 329 360 391 427 464 506 S50
......
V' Total Production [o.t 142 18B 51 55 119 14'1 178 213 2!i4 295 370 348 378 410 44~ 484 524 569 616 669 124
6. Total Annu«1 Cost (SIOOO)IGO 707 70 7!> lJ9 170 1')9 23!J 17& 311l 34~ 372 403 436 472 517 553 S99 647 702 758
7. HIU!GY COST (Hi I h/kWh) 747 7~4 64 53 75 87 98 III 174 136 H8 159 170 182 195 209 226 240 257 276 296
.:!J.~ !9Bl 19B2 1983 1984 198!> 19B!; 1987 PIPS 19~ 1990 1991 H92 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
8. Total Cost of Energy 1&0 207 70 7!i 139 170 199 235 276 318 344 372 403 436 472 512 553 599 647 702 758
9. Pres~nt worth factor
5'.1. 1. 000 .9524 .9070 . B638 .8217 .7835 .7462 .7107 .6768 .6446 .6139 .5847 .5568 .5303 .5051 .4810 .4581 .4363 .4155 .3957 .3769
10. Pr~~~nt worth of total
[npryy Cost ($1000) 160 197 &4 65 114 132 148 167 187 20S 211 218 224 231 238 246 253 261 269 278 286
II. Accumulated P.W. of
Tot!l [nrrqy Co~t ($1000)160 39 421 486 600 733 081 1041l 1235 1440 1651 1869 2093 2324 2!>62 2808 3061 3322 3591 31169 415!>
rrom R"'errnc<, ~.
2 The 0 & M CO\t is takpn from R~f~r~nce 3. An esc!13tion of 7t Is !pplipd on a yparly basis.
<:: 3 8ased on Furl efficiency of 10 kW/gallon (Same as used -R~f. 5 ). lot is added for lube oil • te. to fu.1 cost •
..... Escalated at 7t annu~lly .
0' • Ho addiUonal d"bt ~prvic .. h Includpd IS p.r S('nate llill SB 2S and S8 26. The projPct ;s anticipated
to bp fundrd with dirpct ~ppropriJtinn~ by the State .
• Th ••• Isting 0 & M on dipsel plant would rpduc~ and bp divrrted to hydro 0 & M. Ho additional cost i~ a~~umed.
KEA07/K
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Table 5-7
PORT LIONS
PROJECT BENEFIT COST RATIOS
(COMPARISON OF ACCUMULATED P.W. OF ENERGY COST)
Plan A Compared Plan A compared
to Plan B to Plan C
5% 9%
1.43
1.88
1. 06 1. 03 2.19
1.16 1.10 2.37
1. 23 1.15 2.47
1. 30 1. 20 2.52
1. 36 1. 24 2.53
1.41 1. 29 2.52
1. 46 1. 32 2.51
1. 50 1. 36 2.50
1. 53 1. 39 2.48
1.57 1. 42 2.47
1. 60 1.44 2.46
1. 62 1.47 2.44
1. 64 1.49 2.43
1. 66 1. 51 2.41
1. 69 1. 53 2.40
1. 71 l. 56 2.38
1.73 l. 58 2.37
V-17
kea007/a8
SECTION VI
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENOATIONS
SECTION VI SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS
SUMMARY:
The energy rates and cost-benefit ratios from different alternative
plans are summarized in Table 6-1.
The comparison of these plans reveal that Plan A (do nothing), i.e.,
continued use of diesel plant, is the worst choice and should be avoided
if at all possible. The cost of energy would go as high as 64¢/kWH by
the turn of the century under this plan. These are very conservative
figures. The actual cost is anticipated to be even higher. The accumu-
lated present worth of cost of energy for the City at 5% discount rate
under this plan is used as base for comparison to derive the cost-benefit
ratio for other plans.
Under Plan 8, i.e., construction of transmission line intertie between
Port Lions and Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project, the energy rates would
stabilize between 20 -30e/kWH. The cost-benefit ratio for this plan
indicates that this plan is economically feasible, even at the first
year of operation, though by a small margin. As the price of fuel goes
higher and the consumption in Port Lions increases, the City and the
consumers would realize more and more economic benefit from such an
intertie.
The cost of energy under Plan C, i.e., construction of Port Lions River
Hydroelectric project, would drop to about 5-6C/kWH for the first two
years of operation, i.e., 1982-83. This plant is, however, too small to
meet the growing electrical needs for the City. For this plan, all
additional electrical energy requirements would have to be supplemented
by the diesel plant. This can be clearly seen in Table 6-1. As more
and more energy ;s supplemented by the diesel plant, the energy rates
start to climb up'again. The cost of energy under this plan would just
surpass that of Plan B in the 2000. This is also indicated by reversal
of cost-benefit ratio after year 1988.
KEA07/P1 VI-1
SECTION VI SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOM1~ENDA TI ONS:
After comparing the economic benefits from the above alternates, i~ is
clear that KEA and its customers in Port Lions would benefit most from
Plan C, i.e., by construction of a hydroelectric project at Port Lions
River, if this project is funded under the latest State proposals.
This, however. is a short-term solution and would yield maximum benefit
until the energy consumption for the City surpasses the available energy
from such a plant. Although this scenario is much more beneficial
over the continued diesel generation, with more diesel supplemental
energy needed for the growth of the City, the composit energy rate
under this plan would just surpass that from Plan S, i.e., construction
of transmission line intertie.
The best long term solution for Port Lions, therefore, lies in scenario
"0" which is a combination of Plan 8 and C, i.e., construction of a hydro-
electric project on Port Lions River for immediate benefit and that of
transmission line intertie for long term gains. With growing energy needs,
the construction of such a transmission intertie can be economically justi-
fied when the energy requirements for the City exceeds 2220 x 10 3 kWH with
5% financing. With the present trend it is expected to happen somewhere
near year 1988 (refer to Appendices C for details.)
KEA07/P2 VI-2
SECTION VI SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS
TABLE 6-1
ECONOMIC SUMMARY
Energy Cost (Mills/kWH) Cost-Benefit Ratios
Plan A Plan Bl Plan C Plan A vs Plan Bl Plan A vs Plan C
1980 247
1981 244
1982 246 64 1. 43
1983 253 53 1.88
1984 263 215 75 1. 06 2.19
1985 276 171 87 1.16 2.37
1986 291 174 98 1. 23 2.47
1987 306 176 III 1. 30 2.52
1988 322 179 124 1. 36 2.53
1989 341 184 138 1.41 2.52
1990 361 192 148 1. 46 2.51
1991 382 199 159 1. 50 2.50
1992 404 208 170 1.53 2.48
1993 428 217 182 1.57 2.47
1994 453 234 195 1.60 2.46
1995 481 244 209 1.62 2.44
1996 512 256 226 1.64 2.43
1997 539 268 240 1. 66 2.41
1998 570 275 257 1. 69 2.40
1999 604 283 276 1.71 2.38
2000 640 290 296 1. 73 2.37
1 For 5% financing
KEA07/P VI-3
J:
3:
::£ -V'l
t-
Z
W
U
.
COST OF ENERGY IN ¢/KWH
70
-
60
-
IV ~
50 /,
V
!
-
40
-
30 I
I
I I i ! i I
I D1
---~ r"--
t
I I I, ! : ' I I 'r' i c.:\ ,...... I
: i, i '.-'---' I o~~ ,.. !
i I I '--, 1 \.~ ~/ ,I , ;----:1' \~o~\;'/ I I
I I, ('I \ ,/ I I :,
I : ; : ! v\.t>-~,..'j """;'1' I I I '
t i:! ,../ I: I i
1 : I ! 1/"'''' I I + ! '~/j I 10 ~-+--~~--r--I~/7,~~!--~,--+--+--+--r--~-r~--~~I--~-r~1 ~ ~~ i I :
i .... 1-••• / I I: I I
+ t--......... "/ I
20 +
f
t
T
5 I
1980 1 2 3 .4 5 6 7 8 9 1990 1 2 3 .4 5 6 7 8 9 2CX)(
YEARS
\' 1 - 4
kea007/a9
SECTION VI I
APPENDICES
SECTION VII: kea07 /r~
APPENDICES A
REFERENCES
The data from the following published reports and studies was referred
to or used in this report.
Ref. 1.
Ref. 2.
Ref. 3.
Ref. 4.
Ref. 5.
Ref. 6.
Ref. 7.
Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project Kodiak Island, Alaska.
Application for License Project #2743, Supplemental Infor-
mation Report #2. February 1980.
Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project Kodiak Island, Alaska.
Definite Project Report, December 1978.
KEA "Operation Report (REA Form 12f)" for City of Kodiak and
Port Lions, December 1979.
KEA II Power Requi rements Study" October 1980.
KEA Report on "Port Lions Hydroe 1 ectri c Project" November
1980.
"Assessment of Power Generation Alternatives for Kotzebue",
1980.
IlAssessment of Envi ronmenta 1 Effects of Construction and
Operat i on of the Proposed Terror Lake Hydroe 1 ectri c Facil i ty"
prepared by AEIDC in November 1979.
APPENDICES B
CITy OF KODIAK
[NERCY RATES WITH TERROR LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
1980 1981 1982 1983 1994" 1982 1986 1981 19!1B 1!~~ 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994"* 1995 1996 1991 1998 1999 2000
A. fIX[D COST (S1000)
1. DIESEL
I. £X;H Ing debt
'Stt"r"Yic(II:J . 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519 519
b. Addition 1 debt
servic@' 405 405 405 405 405 405 40S 405 405 405 405 405 405 405 40S 405 405 40S 40S .liDS
c. AddH ion 11 debt
servic(II2 925 92S 925 925 925 925 925
d. I MurIneI' on
existing' 60 64 69 14 19 84 90 96 103 110 118 126 135 144 155 165 111 189 203 211 232
e. Insuranc .. on
Addition I 23 25 26 28 30 32 35 37 40 42 45 48 52 55 59 63 68 7J 78 8l
f. Insuranc .. on
Addition II 69 74 79 85 90 91 104
9· T ..... s
2. HYDRO
a. O .. bt St'rv\c .. 6719 6719 6779 6779 6119 (,779 6179 6779 6179 6719 6179 6179 6779 6179 6179 6719 6779
b. Insurance 333' 356 381 408 436 467 ')00 535 572 612 655 701 750 802 859 916 9SJ
c. Taxes
e. PROOUCTION COST (S1000)
1. HYDRO"
(Plant & Trans~iss;on
line 0 & H) 318 340 364 390 417 446 417 511 546 585 626 669 716 766 820 877 9J9
2. SUPPl[MENTARY DJ[S£lo 69&5 9088 10595 11995 5[,65 400 ISBI 2311 3314 4416 5£>42 6794 8279 9688 11460 13200 15352 17310 16354 194~2 20622
C. TOTAL ANNUAL COST 7544 10099 11613 13019 14126 9001 10151 10943 12010 131112 14487 15714 17283 18784 21668 23496 25765 27848 19027 30267
0. ANNUAL CONSUMPTION
(kWh" 10")' 70 83 88 94 133.5 140.7 }47.7 151. 7 IS6.7 161. 7 166,7 110.7 l1S. 7 179.7 184.7 188.7 193.1 197.7 201 206 211
[. fNfRGY COST
(Mills/kWh) 108 122 132 138 106 64 69 72 77 82 87
Addition of 7 HW Unit to mppt
Addition of 7 HW Unit to Me.t
taken from Ref. 1. Tabl. 8-3.
1982-83 demand. The construction co~t Is ta~en from Ref. 1. Table 8.3.
th. additional Power requirement after 1994. The construction cost is
The d.bt service is calculated on lOX 3~ year loan.
, from Ref. 3
• from R.f. 1. Table 8-2
, EstiMat.d at $l~/KW 8S In R.f. 1. Th. Transmission lin. 0 & H I, $lOOO/mll. for 18 mile lln.s. These
are 19B4 flgurps and Inflatpd at 7t therp.fter.
• From Ref. 1. Tablr B-7. Calculated for 1980-84.
Calculated as $3 per $1000 investment In 1964.
total Investmp~t' .
• Partial Hydro Pow.r. The USCG load Is Integrated with K£A system .
92
•• Additional Puwpr requirement to m •• t the future demand. Extension of In e.lstlng diespl plant Is assUMPd.
98 lOS 117 125 133 141 144 M7 150
KEA07/Qllqll
APPENDICES C
ECONOMICS OF SUPPLEMENTAL DIESEL GENERATION
FOR PORT LIONS VS CONSTRUCTION OF TRANSMISSION INTERTIE
Economic justification of a transmission line intertie from the Terror
Lake -Kodiak transmission line to the town of Port Lions is based upon
a comparison of annual cash flows associated with such an intertie (See
section "AII below) and with the alternative possibility of continued
supplementing of the power to Port Lions using local diesel generation
(See section "8 11 below).
The assumption is made that sufficient power to supply Port Lions (as a
supplement to the Port Lions Hydro Facility) will be made available to
Port Lions. Presumably, the power will be available upon completion of
the Terror Lake Hydro Facility and Transmission Line to Kodiak, beginning
in late 1984.
Two trends are relevant. First, the differential between the cost of
Kodiak supplied power and the cost of Port lions local diesel supplied
power increases continually. Second, the demand of Port lions consumers
for energy to supplement the Port lions Hydro increases continually.
The first year when the costs of the tie line are smaller than the costs
of local diesel generation, is the year when the construction of such an
intertie would be justified, i,e., when the annual debt service plus 0 &
M cost for transmission line intertie becomes less than the annual cost
of diesel generation minus cost of energy supplied by the tie line from
Kodiak, then the transmission intertie to Terror Lake Kodiak line
becomes economical and should be built.
If the present trend in growth of energy consumption continues, the
difference between the above two cost starts to shrink, until year 1988,
when the supplemental diesel generation is large enough to offset the
annual debt service and associated 0 & M cost for the transmission
intertie. It may be pointed out here that this conceivably could
happen earlier, if demand of energy reached the 1988 figures.
KEA07/Q//q//
Annual cash flows associated with the two alternatives and optimum
(1988) load is analyzed here.
A. Transmission Line Intertie:
The cost of building an intertie to Port Lions in 1980 has been
estimated as $1,358,000. If the tie line were built in 1987 (to
serve 1988 load), using a general inflation rate of 7% per year,
the cost would become $2,180,650. At 5% cost of money and a 35
year loan, a capital recovery factor of .06107 would require annual
debt service payments of $133,000.
The only other cost of the transmission line would be maintenance.
If 1980 costs of $1000/mile were inflated at 7% per year, maintenance
in 1988 would cost $1720/year/mile. The intertie to Port Lions at
11 miles would cost $18,900/year.
Approximate annual cash flow associated with the tie line if built
in 1988 = $133,000 + $18,900 = $151,900.
B. Diesel Generation
Costs associated with this alternative are based upon the differential
of the rates of the local diesel generation to supplement the Port
Lions Hydro power and intertied supply sources. In 1988, it would
cost Port Lions 320 mills per kWH to supply itself with local
diesel power. (This;s taken from Table 5-3.)
By comparison, energy rates for the City of Kodiak at this time
(i.e., after construction of Terror Lake Hydro Facility) would be
77 mills per kWH. (This is from page VII-3.) Assuming power could
be delivered to Port Lions via the transmission line at this rate,
the differential cost of the two alternatives would be 243 mills
per kWH.
KEA07/Qllqll
J~ 1988, 639 MWH of supplemented energy would be needed in Port
Lions.
Cost of supplemental energy = $.243 times 639,000 kWH = ~155,277.
This means that by continued dependence on local diesel for
supplemental energy, Port Lions consumers would pay $3,780 more
than if power were supplied to them at Kodiak rates.
Thus for 1988 load, the equivalent annual costs associated with the
construction of tie line to Port Lions are slightly less than the
costs associated with continued use of local diesel. ($151,900 compared
to $155,277).
It may be pointed out here that the above comparisons are made for
5% financing. If the financing ;s at a higher rate than 5%, the load
has to be higher than the one considered above (1988 load) to justify
such construction. The contrary is true also, i.e., if the financing
can obtained at lower than 5% or if the diesel prices escalate faster
than assumed in this report or if the energy consumption grows faster
than anticipated in the report, the construction of such transmission
intertie would be justified and beneficial much earlier than 1988.
ATTACHMENT C
. ~ -~ .
.! ~"ll -
ROLLAND A. JONES ~IH ( f rJL: Q'-
Consulting Engineer
POBox 375 CAL elj, Al[O 11)' OATE -------
KODIAK. ALASKA 9%15
CHl,-,,,(O fly. DAH ______
SCAl f -----_._._-
Month Da Str m Flow (c.f.s.) Temperatureo F.
September 1 0.175 7.4 52°
1980 2 O. 15 6. 1 46
3 0.15 6.1 45
4 0.2 8.8 45
5 0.175 7.4 42
6 0.175 7.4 44
7 0.3 16.3 48
8 0.625 51.2 48
9 0.475 34. 7 50
10 0.4 27.0 48
II 0.4 27.0 50
12 0.7 59.4 50
13 0.675 56.7 52
1<1 0.55 42.9 56
15 i 0.525 40.1 52
0.475 34.7 54
17 0.475 34.7 54
18 0.475 34.7 53
19 0.45 32.2 49
20 0.425 29.6 50
21 0.425 29.6 54
22 0.45 32.2 48
23 0.425 29.6 50
24 0.425 29.6 50
25 i 0.425 29.6 50
26 1.3 129.6 50
27 0.8 70.2 50
2" 0.9 82.1 48
0
29 1.5 153.9 48
30 1.4 141.8 50
~ ,
.) I
, .,..... . , .. " \ I If , ' ... ' .• ,
r'1onth
October 1980
ROLLAND A. JONES
Consulting Engineer
POBox 375
KODIAK. ALASKA 9961:)
Da GQge Readin
1 1.0
2 0.85
3 0.7
4 0.775
5 0.7
6 0.9
7 0.8
8 0.75
9 0.7
10 0.575
11 0.55
12 0.5
13 0.5
1 '1 0.5
F .J (l.S
1 [) O.!j 7 5
17 1.2
lb 1.0
19 1.1
20 0.9
21 1.4
22 1.9
23 1.9
24 1.8
25 1.2
26 1 .0
27 1 .2
2") ' ) 1 .0
29 0.8
30 0.775
31 0.75
J0n
Port Lions Hydro
~~~~~-~ -.------
SHll T r-.lU _~~~ OF
CALCUl A1[IJ flY DATE ___ _
CHEUEDO<_ LAfE _~ ______ ~ __
Strear.1 Flow (c.f.s.) TeP.1perature OF.
94.0 48
76.1 44
59.4 46
67.5 47
59.4 44
82.1 46
70.2 44
59.4 42
59.4 40
45.7 38
42.9 40
37.3 41
37.3 44
37.3 I' --d)
37.3 43
34.7 , "
I-
117.7 I I --!'-I
94.0 45
105.8 44
82.1 42
141. 8 46
203.5 48
203.5 46
190.4 46
117.7 44
94.0 44
117.7 42
94.0 40
70.2 38
67.5 39
59.4 38
l _________ ~ __ ~ ____________ ~ ______________________________ ~
, ,,' ", '01 fJ, " I".
t'UI L L lOriS HyU ro
F)ll
ROLLAND A. JONES Sf II [ I t~!) OF __
Consulting Engineer
p 0. Box 375 r,Ai CUI A, lr () fly OATE __ . __
KODIAK, ALASKA l)')0 1 "
CHe C'> U) (jY .-OATE
Sr:>l r -~.-~---.-
t"onth Day qQ.ge Reildino Streilm F1 ow {c.f.s.} 0 Temp F
November 1980 1 0.6 48.5 36
2 0.6 48.5 38
3 0.7 59.4 40
4 0.7 59.4 40
5 0.8 70.2 40
6 0.775 67.5 38
7 0.7 59.4 37
8 0.7 59.4 36
9 0.6 48.5 38
10 0.6 48.5 39
11 0.55 42.9 38
12 0.7 59.4 33
13 0.65 54.0 37
14 0.6 48.5 40
15 0.65 54.0 39
16 0.6 48.5 30
17 0.55 42.9 38
18 0.6 48.5 37 ..
19 0.8 70.2 40 ...• ,~,----, .. -... -
20 0.7 59.4 , 36 j
38
-r-
21 0.65 54.0 I
22 0.8 70.2 38
23 0.7 59.4
24 1.1 105.8 37
25 0.8 70.2 37
26 0.7 59.4 37 ..
'ice damps form 27 0.7 59.4 36
'affecting read 28 0.35 21.7 I.
i 1 ngs
29 -0.7 59.4 36
30 0.95 88.1 35
31
ROLLAND A. JONES
Consulting Engineer
p 0_ 80)( 375
KODiAK, ALASKA 9'Jld:)
JOB
I'ur l L lUll;:' tlJuru
---------
CAICU!i\lfOl'y ______ DAlE
C"fC~[() nv _______ DATE ___________ _
S,AI r -------------------------------'.--~-.*."------*---
r~onth Da GD_9.~.RCil d i!l
December 1980 1 0.95
2 0.7
3 0.6
4 0.5
5 0.5
6 0.5
7 0.7
8 0.625
9 0.6
10 0.575
11 0.9
12 1.1
13 1.1
14 1. 15
15 0.9
16 0.75
17 0.6
18 0.5
19 0.4
20 0.4
21 0.4
22 0.4
23 0.4
24 0.4
25 0.35
26 0.325
27 0.325
28 0.375
29 0.45
30 0.4
31 1.8
Stream Flow
88.1
59.4
48.5
37.3
37.3
37.3
59.4
51.2
48.5
45.7
82. 1
105.8
105.8
111 .75
82.1
64.8
48.5
37.3
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
21.7
19.0
19.0
24.3
32.2
27.0
190.4
(c.f.s.)
38
36
37
37
38
38
37
36
35
35
34
34
34
36
34
35
35
34
33
33
34
34
34
Month
January 1981
1
I
I
I
!
i
!
I
i
:
i
I
j
!
I
I
I
!
!
I
I
! ;
I I
ROLLAND A. JONES
Consulting Engineer
p,o. ROJ( 375
KODIAK, ALASKA 9(30] 'i
Day G£l.2 ~.Re lLQU19
1 2.1
2 1.0
3 1.1
4 1.1
5 1.1
6 1.1
7 1.25
8 .95
9 1.2
10 1.0
11 0.95
12 0.875
13 1.0
14 1.0
15 1.0
16 1.0
17 1 .1
18 1.j
19 .9
20 0.85
21 1.0
22 .7
23 .8
24 1.0
25 1.1
26 .85
27 .75
28 .75
29 .8
30 1.1
31 .9
• ".~ .,.1 I" '''It''l, '\'/;,f,'.?,fj, 10.!,.,.,t .. ll.~.I"~,1·'.1' 1
.
,
JOII
SII! [1 tU ________ OF ____________ _
CAl CUI'" 1fl) III O~l£ ____ . _____ ~
CH[C¥fO [JV "_ .. ____ ........... ___ D~TE
S t LQ.il.i1J Flow C . f . S. Temp o f
229.8 34°
94.0 33
105.8 3~
105.8 3~
105.8 35
105.8 35
123.7 35
88.1 35
117.7 35
94.0 34
88.1 36
79.1 36
94.0 36 ,
9~.0 36
9~.0 36
94.0 36
]05.8 37
105.8 37 ..... ,
82.1 37 :
76.2 ~6 I
94.0 36 , .... .,-,"'--
59.4 34 .. .. o.-
70.2 34
94.0 36
105.8 36
76.2 34
64.8 34
64.8 36
70.2 36 .... _-,' .... _-
105.8 37 ,. ~ .. " . ..
82.1 36. .. ....... ,
, :
•• f "f , .... ,'
j I ; I .-,
I
i ,
•• f i
i
I : , ,
"W', • f·... '.'_3'"' n & •• -.... , "[ "-.. -......, __ •• " • _-==_ ...... __ ""' ..... _____ -=-_____ ------
/·1onth
February 1981
ROLLAND A. JONES
Consulting Engineer
P,O Box 375
t<.ODIAK. ALASKA 9961~)
Da Ga p
1 1.3
2 1.1
3 .9
4 .9
J .85
6 0.85
7 0.8
8 0.8
9 0.7
10 0.7
11 0.65
12 0.6
13 0.6
14 O.h
15 0.6
16 1.2
1 7 1 , 1
W J • ~ 0)
1 q ,~ 1 '.'
20 0.5
21 0.7
22 O.S
?" L~ 0.65
r 1
L. '.
"',... .. ,
'--
L ::'
27
? L.
29
30
31
. ',' ; , ~ \' II: • ."'\' ",1 '.'".
_____ OF __________ _
.-_________ OA1£ _____ _
Cill C~f:) flY _____ OA1E ____ _
.:.L....,......--___ --"s t reum [1ow (c. f. s. ) Rearling Ie:::p :p
129.6
105.8
82.1
82.1
76.2
70.2
70.2
5 {).!,
59.4
5':;.0
48.5
11 7 . 7
l' 9 . fi
1 j 5. 7
1] 7.7
37.3
59.~
70.2
54.0
36
35
36
36
37
37
37
J7
36
36
35
54
34
J:'
J' -. ;
33
3lt
33
i
I
----.~---.--.. ----
r·1ofl t h
April 1981
ROLLAND A. JONES
Consulting Eneineer
p O. Bo~ 375
KODIAK, ALASKA 99615
Da Ga e Readina
. 1 0.6
2 0.6
3 0.55
4 0.5
5 0.5
6 0.5
7 0.5
8 0.5
9 0.475
10 0.450
11 0.450
12 0.425
13 0.4
14 0.4
15 0.5
16 0.475
17 0.475
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
-_OF
CAlCULAHDOY • _________ OATE ____ _
CII(CKEDDY. __ ~ _____ DATE ____ _
5cnf .
48.5
48.5
42.9
37.3
37.3
37.3
37.3
37.3
34.7
32.2
32.2
29.6
27.0
27.0
37.3
34.7
34.7
36
37
38 ,'._
38 '
,
!--'I"-'-
! , .... ---~.--+. , , I i_J
I
:---Ft:---[ ! I j'-l'
.~ __ i
·H :\"--r ' ., !.----L-r-
" !---l--'-L'
I' ,.--i-J ID ' 'I , ' I I, ,., " •
, -'j --l-' 'J ;':~ l __ --__ ~~ ________ ~ ______________ ~~, ~~.~~'. __ '
Port Lions Hydro JOEl----__
ROLLAND A. JONES
Consulting Engineer
SII('[ T tir) OF
P 0.80>: 375 CALCUl ... TfO llY DATE
KODIAK, ALASKA 99615
CHECt<EO BY_ OATE
SC~H
Month Da (c.f.s.)
March 1981 1 0.8 70.2 34
2 0.7 59.4 34
3 0.6 48.5 33
4 0.55 42.9 34
5 0.6 48.5 35
6 0.575 45.7 35
7 0.55 42.9 36
8 1.2 117.7 3p
9 1.3 129.6 3p ,
10 1.2 117.7 3..7
11 1.6 166.1 37
12 1.1 105.8 36 -,
13 1.3 129.6 I 36
14 1.1 105.6 36
15 1.0 94.0 36
16 1.0 94.0
17 1.1 105.8
18 1.3 129.6
! 19 1.0 94.0 I
... !.-
20 ; .
0.9 82.1 .. 1
21 0.85 76.2
22 0.8 70.2 37
23 0.7 59.4 36 ,),H .. '
24 0.65 54.0 3.7
25 0.6 48.5 3.6
26 0.675 56.7 36 ! ,
27 0.650 54.0 37
28 0.6 48.5 38 --
29 0.6 48 • .)
30 0.6 48.5
31 0.575 45.7
--' \ f' It.';,' '" "! ,,.. "",,,"',,. ... ," L'~, ,
ATTACHMENT D
I or
WATER SURFACE EL 312
C>
Location of borrow areas MS-1, MS-2 and MS-3.
ATTACHMENT E
SOILS-FOU~mJl.TION HNESTIGATI01~
FOR
PORT LIONS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
PREPARED FOR
KOD I AK ELECTR I C ASSOC L~ T I art 1 NC.
MlD
ROLAND A. Jor~ES -COrJSCL TI NG ENG 1 NEER
PREPARED By
Hm':~,RD GREY & ASSOC I f,TES., I NC I
GEOLOGISTS & ENGINEERS
ANCHORAGE., ALASKA
OCTOBER., 1930
INTRODUCTION
Field examinations were conducted during the summer months of
1980 in the vicinity of Port Lions, Alaska to gather geologic
information pertinent to the design and construction of the
proposed hydroelectric project.
Port Lions is located in the northern portion of Kodiak Island,
about 30 miles west of the City of Kodiak.
The hydroelectric facility will consist of a storage reservoir,
located about 3 miles west of the city and the main facilitv
da~EJin8 the Port Lions River adjacent to the to~~site. WaLer,
with a head of some 90 feet, will be delivered to the power
generation station via penstock.
The on-site investigation examined both surficial and bedrock
deposits to determine their applicability to the project.
The contents of this report contain the results of the examinations
at both sites. Also included is an evaluation of building materials
within close proximity to the selected sites.
Locations at both damsites are depicted on the vicinity map.
(Figure A)
FIELD l1ETBODS
The field ~ork at Kodiak was performed in three phases. An
initial reconnaissance trip was conducted to obtain general
information on both sites. This included identifyin~ general
surface features, ~apping bedrock exposures and hand excavation
of test pits.
The second phase consisted of drillin~ a series of holes along
the darn axis. The drilling machine was a Mobil-t1inute Man drill
eouiped \'7i th 6.' solid flieht augers combined wi th a 2" spli t
spoon sampler and a 70 pound hammer. The split spoon equipment
was used to obtain samples and penetration resistance values of
the underlyin8 material.
A total of 15 holes at 6 separate locations were drilled Rlong
the Cresent Lake dam axis. In all cases, the holes were abandoned
due to refusal on larse rocks. Generally, the holes were drilled
to about 7 feet, but in no case did any of the borings reach
bedrock.
Due to the dense nature of the subsurface materials, the drilling
machinery was not transported to the Forebay dam site. A series
of four hand du~ test pits were excavated along the axis of the
IOv-Jer dam. Two of these holes did reach bedrocy., while the t'/.'O
holes furthest from the river did not.
- 2 -
Percolation tests were also performed at both the upper and
lo\"!er site s .
The final phase of this investifation utilized a Bison Model
1570 C, sirnal enhancement seis~ograph, to deteroine the approx-
imate thickness of the surficial deposits and the depth to bedrock.
Seismic lines were located along both dam sites as illustrated
in Figures No.l-l and 2-1.
Seismic velocities and strata denths were deterffiined and are
graphically displayed in Figures No.1-2 and 2-2.
As noted on these illustrations, the seis~ic velocities of similar
horizons vary. This is due to topographic variations, the thick
accumulation of volcanic ash and to an irrer,ular bedrock surface.
Logs of all test holes and borin~s as well as percolation results
are included with the report.
In general, both sites exhibit the same basic features: a surface
layer of organics, organic silt and volcanic ash over a gravelly-
till material of various denths which covers an irregular slate
and graY'.Jacke bedrock surface.
- 3 -
LAB ANALYSIS
Samples of the dense glacial materials recovered durinefield
work were returned to Anchorage for laboratory analysis,
The analysis included particle size distribution, moisture contents
and Atterberg Limits.
Results of these tests indicate that the till material overlying
bedrock at both the upper and lower sites is a silty-sandy-
gravel.
A lateral moraine which sub parallels the Port Lions River along
the north side in the vicinity of the Forebay Darn was also
analyzed. This material is a clayey-gravelly-sand.
Results of all laboratory analysis are included with this report.
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
The present surface topography of the subject area is a result
of Pleistocene glaciation, bein~ modified by present erosional
forces. Evidence of this is characterized by the glacially
sculptured ridges and cirques of the surrounding mountains.
Glaciers apparently occuppied the wide valley west of Port Lions,
originating in the higher mountains and flowing toward the sea.
-4 -
As the glaciers advanced they scoured the bedrock and UDon re-
treat deposited various amounts of glacial till nn the valley
floors. The till is a dense accu8ulation of unsorted silt,
sand and rock Darticles up to boulder size. The particles
are generally sub-rounded to sub-angular and consist of slates,
graYHackes and granites.
The present hutnlTIocky surface 'I,d th numerous Donds and small lakes
is a typical product of 8lacial activity. Cresent Lake is the
result of glacial scour and ponding behind moraines.
Since the last glacial retreat, an orp,anic silt of about 2 feet or
less in thickness developed over the glacial drift. In June, 1912,
the erruption of Mt. Novarupta blanketed the area with volcanic
ash. The ash grades from a fine angular sand to a silt. The
present ash accuTT1ulation varies between ridges and intervening
valleys but is 8enerally about l~ feet thick.
Draina~e in the area is poorly integrated, with numerous streams
draining small areas.
Water from Cresent Lake flows for some 3 miles to the East,
through lakes and marshes and meandering streams before joining
with two southward flowing streams to form the Port Lions River.
The topography of the area between Cresent Lake and the village
-5 -
of Port Lions, which is characterized by nurrerous Donds and
marshes, is typical of terrain developed on a glacial I:round
moraine.
GEOLOGY
Geologically, Kodiak Island is an extension of the Kenai
mountains. Bedrock through this portion of Kodiak Island is
composed of Cretaceous slates, grayv;rackes and argillites.
Kodiak Island is sei'arated by two major fault syste~s, into
three areas characterized by different types of sedimentary rocks.
The eastern portion of the island contains Tertiary marine and
continental sediments. The western part is characterized by late
Triassic to earlv Jurassic volcanic and sedimentary rocks.
Sediments of the central section, whic~ cover the majority of the
Island, including the subject study area, are described as pre-
dominen tly Cretaceous s la tes, gr ayv;racke sand argi 11 i tes . (Hoore,
1967) Some minor amounts of conr,lomerate and tuff are associated
with these rocks, but none was evident at any of the outcroppings
studied. The rocks are extensively folded and faulted. The
general geologic structure of Kodiak Island and vicinity is
illustrat~d on Figure B.
Bedrock in the Port Lions vicinity is a thin to moderately thick
bedded, hrittle, dark gray to black slate. At the lower site
it trends north 35° -45° east, wi th a \vesterly dip of 15° -20".
-6 -
Strata at the upper site trends northwest ~ith a 20° -27" dip
to the east.
The slates weather into platey sheets and generally no soft or
hign ~eathered rock was observed. The bedrock contains tight folds
and is fractured, with no apparent pattern.
Structure
Two major faults, both of which trend to the northeast, extend
across Kodiak Island. As previously mentioned, these faults
separate the major rock groups of the Island. (Figure B)
A normal fault displaces rocks on the eastern side of the Island,
while a thrust fault extends alonr, the western coast.
Numerous other faults representing local stress adjustments have
been r:1aooed in the cen tral por ti on of the I s land. (noore, 1967)
Quaternary Deposits
Quaternary deposits consist of unconsolidated silt, sand and
gravel deposited as a ground moraine during Pleistocene and
Recent geologic time. This material covers extensive areas be-
tween mountain ridges, to depths from a few feet to 40 feet and
more.
A generalized map (Figure B) illustrates the surficial geology
of the study areas.
- 7 -
SITE DESCRIPTION
Forebay Damsite
The lower facility, the Forebay Da~, will be constructed on the
Port Lions River. immediately south of the townsite.
The stream draining Cresent Lake together with two creeks flo\ving
from the mountains to the north, form the Port Lions River. West
of the damsite the stream is some 30 feet wide and flows on a
gravel stream bed. At roughly the Forebay Darn site, the stream
is incised into the slate bedrock with steep, near vertical banks.
Do~~stream these walls approach 50 feet in height at some
locations.
Bedrock is well exposed alonG the lower portion of the Port Lions
River. The rock is a thin to medium thick bedded, dark gray
slate. It is well indurated and contains extensive tight folds
and fractures. The rock separates along bedding planes when
struck. Generally, the exposed rock showed little deterioration
due to weathering.
~he strata trend N35° -400E and dip to the west frow 17° to 25°.
A plan view of the area is illustrated in Figure No.l-l. Figure
No.1-2 represents a cross section along the darn axis based on our
test hole notes and geophysical surveys.
-8 -
The surface bedrock apparently rises to the south with frequent
dips and peaks.
Overlying the basal slate unit is a till material similar to that
encbuntered in the Cresent Lake area. The till varies in thickness
from 0 to 30 feet, and is composed of an unstratified mixture of
gravel, sand and silt. Analysis of this silty-gravelly sand is
included in the appendix. Covering the till is an old organic
silt overlain by volcanic ash and a recently developed organic
silt. The depth of material covering the till varies, but is
generally under 4 feet. Seventy-five feet north of the Port
Lions River and running some 500 feet to the west, is a moraine
deposit of clayey-gravelly-sand. Results of analysis of this
material are presented in the appendix. The material is very
dense and a percolation test indicated an infiltration of 80
mintues per inch.
About 300 feet west of the damsite a large abandoned river meander,
coverine some 5 acres, contains a substantial amount of clean
gravel with little soil cover. (Figure C) No test pits were dug
at this site due to lack of access, but a minimuM 5 'foot layer of
gravel apparently is present. The gravel, mostly derived from
slate, gra~7acke and granite is well-graded with about 10% greater
than 3 inches. An estimated 40,000 cubic yards could be removed.
Other meanders with gravel deposits exist further upstream. All
are at greater depths and contain more fine material.
- 9 -
Cresent Lake Damsite
Cresent Lake is located approximately 3 miles west of the villAge
of Port Lions. The lake is about 1 mile long and % mila wide.
The lake is at an elevation of about 300 feet and lies in a large
broad east-west trending valley, flanked by 1000 to 2000 foot
mountain ridges.
The proposed dam will raise the water level of the lake about
12 feet.
A plan map amd cross section of the da~ axis are illustrated in
Figures No.2-1 and 2-2.
There are three bedrock exposures within the immediate damsite
areas. (Figure No. C) Two are located along the north edge of
Cresent Lake, on each side of the discharge stream at water level.
Bedrock at these outcropings trends northwest and dips to the east.
About 500 feet east of the Cresent Lake shoreline, another outcrop
is exposed at a bend in the stream. Here similar rock strikes
to the northeast and dips to the east. The difference in trends
could be due to faulting, folding or the exposure may be a dis-
placed block which has shifted from its original position.
Another bedrocl( exposure is visible on a small, whale back shaped
island, east of Cresent Lake. No data was collected from this
island since there was no access.
-10 -
The bedrock is a thin to moderately thick bedded dark gray slate.
The slates are well indurated and separated alon~ bedding planes
when struck. They are only slightly weathered and exhihit ti[ht
folding and fracturine.
Figure No. 2-1 is a plan view of the Cresent Lake area, all
locations of test holes, borings and seismic lines.
Figure No. 2-2 depicts the subsurface depths along the darn axis
as established by test holes and geophysical methods. As sho~~,
the uppermost layer is composed of or~anics, volcanic ash and
organic silt. This layer grades to a till comprised of silt and
silty-sandy-gravel., containine numerous large boulders. The
contactsho~~ between the uppermost soils and the till material
is actually at depths corresponding to the boulder layer.
Bedrock depth across the axis varies between 15 and 40 feet. The
surface slopes upward at both the north and south ends. A pro-
nounced depression in the rock surface at point 25+00 along the
survey line may be an ancient stream cut. Although no change in
materials was noted, alluvial gravels might be present in the
lower portions of this depression.
Itis assumed that th€ Cresent Lake da~ will be of earth fill
construction. The till will be used for fill, compacted and keyed
into similar gravelly-material. The till analyzed is a silty-
-11 -
sravelly-sand containing :
gravel 4J~, sand 45% and silt l2~. Percolation testing
in the upper 2 feet of the till showed infiltration rates of
between 20 and 26.7 minutes per inch.
RECOM}~ENDA TIONS
General
Foundation conditions at both damsites include glacial till over
bedrock. At both sites, in some areas, the till has been eroded
away and rock is exposed at the surface.
Blanketing both sites are oreanic silts, volcanic ash and organics.
At the Forebay site, construction materials for an embank~ent
dam include sands and gravels from an abandoned river channel,
and a clayey-gravelly-sand, morainal deposit. At the Cresent Lake
site, silty-gravelly-sand and a elacial till is available for darn
construction. The surficial ash and organic rich soils would not
be suitable for darn construction or foundation materials.
Site Preparation
Due to the potentially unstable and compressible nature of the
surficial organics, volcanic ash and organic silts, these
materials should be removed from the foundation area. i~ere the
darn will be founded on the hard slate bedrock, a ke:~lay should be
cut into the rock surface. Such a key should slope downward,
going upstream. In addition. dependin[ upon the width -of the
embankment, a slot at least ten feet wide may need to be cut into
-12 -
rock, to form a cutoff trench. Once a dam configuration has been
tentatively selected, we should be allowed to evaluate seepage
potential and dam stability to provide for foundation sloping,
cutoff and embankment stability.
Where the dams are supported by the glacial till, a keyway may
still be required. It may. however, not need to extend to rock.
Filling
Earthfill dams should be constructed with compacted structural
fill. Typically, such fill is compacted to at least 90~~ or 95'10
density based on AASHTO Standard: T-99. On Kodiak Island, due
to the generally rainy weather, the silty-soils available for dam
construction will probably become moistioned during grading. Once
they are moistined even slightly and become wetter than optimum,
they will become difficult or impossible to compact to the de-
sired degree. Thus, it may be necessary to design the dams with
less dense fill. This would, however, call for relatively flatter
sideslopes.
Another option for design may be to improve fill strength and
stability through the use of soil-cement. This approach has the
advantage of eliminatine the need for riprap.
However, earthwork may be appreciably more difficult, especially
since large rocks would need to be removed from the fill. Also,
soil-cement construction reauires the use of extra machinery,
\>!hich would beed to be transp!)rted to the remote si tes. Finally,
soil-cement construction should be performed by a contractor
-13 -
familiar with the technique.
Outlet: Horks
Condui ts vlhich penetrate through the daDs or their abut:rnents can
be sources of leakage. In order to control such leakge, cutoff
collars or diaphrams around the lines will be necessary. Spill-
ways and low level discharges should be aligned with the stream
channels, so that bank erosion does not become a problem.
Spillways will probably need some form of lining to control
erosion. Depending upon dischar~e ouantities and velocities,
spillways may be lined with sod, gravel riprap or concrete.
Slopes
Commonly. embankment dams are designed with the sideslopes of
3H:IV to SH:IV. Depending upon foundation conditions and em-
bankment materials, slopes as flat as lOH:IV may also be necessary.
Thus, once an embankment material type is selected and a fill
density is established. specific er.bankment sloDe ansles can be
evaluated.
The face of the embankment exposed to the reservoir should be
protected from ,vave erosion. This may be acco~plished with rip-
rap. soil-cement or durable facing. The appropriate form of bank
protection should be based upon wave heirht, frequency and
embankment slope angles.
Honitoring
Prior to construction, permanent. groundwater elevation monitoring
-14 -
points should be installed dOvmstream of the Cresent Lake damsite.
A minimum of one piezometer stould be located in the swale about
150 feet southeast of the stream draining Cresent Lake. This well
should be located within 50 feet of the downstream toe of the dam.
It would also be prudent to install a second groundwater monitoring
-
well, in the swale about 200 feet south of the bend in the darn axis.
This well should be set on the order of 10 to 30 feet from the toe
of the darn.
These monitoring wells should be installed as soon as practical.
They should be read on a refular basis, prior to construction of
the dam, to establsih background data, against which operational
changes may be compared. These wells shnuJd be monitored
continuously during the initia] pool filling and thereafter until
any changes in the groundwater regime are established and under-
stood.
If during or shortly after pool filling, water levels begin to
rise appreciably, it may be necessary to install a network of
relief wells, construct a toe berm or improve dam stability or
to blanket portions of the reservoir with impervious materials,
to prevent a potential failure.
We appreciate having the opportunity to provide these initial
design recommendations. As plans develop, please do not hesitate
-15 -
to contact us for additional geotechnical data.
Respectfully submitted,
Hm'7AR.D GREY &. ASSOCIATES, INC.
Geologist
: I
\ /
.-~