HomeMy WebLinkAboutBlack Bear Lake Project Feasibility Report Volume I 1981"'';, .. ,.., ____ '''<-~~_, _'l _________________________ _
BLACK BEAR LAKE PROJECT
FEASIBILITY REPORT
Prepared by
Harza Engineering Company
and
CH2M-Hill Northwest, Inc.
OCTOBER 1981
PROPERTY OF:
Alaska Power Authority
334 w. 5th Ave.
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
VOLUME I
'-----__ ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY __ ----'
ERRATA SHEET'
The tables on pages III-16 and III-17 should read as follc1ds:
Page III-16 'l'able III-3
SENSITDiITY ANAI.YSIS
POPL'lATION
Percent Change
in Population Population Energy Dem3nd Peal: Demand
GrO\vth Rates in Year 2001 in Year 2001 in Year 2001
9-0 t~'11:1 klrl
-50 1,995 9,755 2,230
-15 2,557 12,500 2,850
0 2,820 13,780 3,140
+15 3,166 15,460 3,530
+50 4,067 19,855 4,530
Page III -17 Table III-4
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION
Percent Change
in Per Capita Per Capita
Consumption Consumption Energy Demand Peak Demanc'l
Growth Rates in Year 2001 in Year 2001 in Year 2001
% kWh Bvm k\oJ
-50 3,580 10,100 2,300
-15 4,420 12,440 2,840
0 4,890 13,780 3,140
+50 5,360 15,120 3,450
+50 6,665 18,790 4,290
SUMMARY LETTER
Harza Engineering Company
and
CH2M-Hill Northwest
Alaska Power Authority
334 West 5th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Attention:
Subject:
Gentlemen:
Mr Eric P. Yould
Executive Director
Black Bear Lake Project
Summary Letter
October 16, 1981
We are pleased to present the result of our feasibility study
of the Black Bear Lake Project. The study includes a technical,
economic and environmental evaluation of the Project. The following
paragraphs briefly describe the Project and the studies which were
made. An issue of particular concern to the Power Authority,
alternative power projects, is also discussed.
The Black Bear Lake Project is located on the lake of the same
name about 8 miles east of Klawock, on Prince of Wales Island in
southeast Alaska. The Project will almost fully regulate the
outflow of Black Bear Lake. The Project will have a rated net head
of 1310 feet and an average flow of 26 cfs for power production.
The Project will have an installed capacity of 6,000 kW and, at full
production will generate 23,700 MWh in an average year. Firm power
output will be 4,000 kW and firm energy generation will be
22,000 MWh per year.
The Table of Significant Data at the end of this letter
contains pertinent data on the Project. A plan and profile of the
Project are shown on Exhibits 2 and 4, respectively, of the report.
The Project will consist of a dam, spillway, intake, water
conductor, powerstation, substation, and transmission line.
-1-
A 53-foot high concrete gravity dam will be built across Black
Bear Creek at the outlet of Black Bear Lake. The dam will raise the
normal lake level 35 feet, from El. 1680 to El. 1715, create a
reservoir with an area of 241 acres and provide 6,850 acre-feet of
live storage. An uncontrolled spillway will be located in the dam.
The spillway will have a discharge capacity of 1,680 cfs, which is
the outflow corresponding to a probable maximum flood inflow of
4,000 cfs.
A three-port intake capable of withdrawing near-surface water
through the entire drawdown range will convey water to a 4.0 foot
diameter steel penstock which will pass through the dam and enter a
4.0 foot diameter concrete-lined vertical shaft about 300 feet
downstream of the dam.
A 2.5-foot diameter steel penstock will carry the water
2,800 feet from the base of the shaft to a powerstation. About
1,800 feet of the penstock will be constructed in a tunnel. The
powerhouse will be a concrete building containing two single-jet
impulse turbines. Each turbine will be directly coupled to a
generator rated at 3000 kW. A substation containing two 4312 kVa
tranformers will be built adjacent to the powerstation. Power from
the Project will be transmitted to the towns of Craig, Klawock and
Hydaburg over 34.5 and 12.4 kV wood pole transmission lines having a
total length of 46 miles.
Access to the powerstation will be gained from an extension of
the Sealaska Corporation logging road. Access to the dam will be by
float plane or helicopter.
Beneficial and adverse environmental effects of construction,
operation and maintenance of the Black Bear Lake Project were
investigated. Alternatives were considered for power intake design,
transmission line design and routing, project operating regimes, and
construction aspects. Permits and other authorizations that will be
required are identified.
Protective measures incorporated in the project design to avoid
or reduce adverse impacts and mitigation measures proposed for those
adverse effects which cannot be fully avoided by the protective
measures are as follows:
1. The Forest Service cabin on Black Bear Lake will be
relocated to avoid inundation.
2. Guidelines for location of the transmission line within
the proposed transmission corridor are established which
will minimize visual and other effects. Measures are also
proposed to reduce visual impact of project civil works.
-2-
3. Vegetation will be cleared from the reservoir to avoid
unsightly snags and debris.
4. Increases in suspended sediment in Black Bear Creek above
Black Lake will be minimized by control measures during
construction.
5. Entrainment of fish at the power intake will be minimized
by proper intake design.
6. The potential for changes in water temperatures in Black
Bear Creek due to the Project will be greatly reduced by
the three-level power intake. Mitigation measures are
also proposed to hold increases in winter water
temperatures in the stream above Black Lake to a minimum.
7. The proposed power release regime will reduce the
potential for downstream fishery impact.
8. The feasibility of a small spawning channel
the project tailrace will be considered if
salmon escapement monitoring indicates
facility is required.
downstream of
post-project
that such a
Further environmental studies are proposed, with emphasis on
fisheries and other aquatic aspects. The scope of these studies is
based on recommendations from state and federal agencies. The
studies are designed to provide additional information that would be
used to further refine project operations to insure that adverse
impacts are avoided or reduced to a minimun. It is our opinion that
no changes will be required in design or location of project civil
works as a result of these studies.
Although project
carefully controlled
effects, it appears
adverse effects would
construction and operation will have to be
to avoid or reduce adverse environmental
that the potential magnitude of unavoidable
not preclude project development.
Costs
The construction cost of the Project includes the direct cost
of civil works, contractor's overhead and profit, purchase and
installation of equipment, contingencies, engineering and owner's
administration, but excludes interest during construction and price
escalation beyond the date of the estimate. The estimated
construction cost of the Project, at January 1981 price level is as
follows:
-3-
CONSTRUCTION COST
Item
Land and Land Rights
Powerstation and Improvements
Reservoir, Dams and waterways
Waterwheels, Turbines and Generators
Accessory Electrical Equipment
Miscellaneous Powerstation Equipment
Roads and Bridges
Substation and switching Station
Equipment and Structures
Poles and Fixtures
0verhead Conductors and Devices
Subtotal Direct Cost
contingencies
Civil Works
Electrical and Mechanical Equipment
Total Direct Cost
Engineering and Administration
January 1981 Construction Cost
15~
8%
Costs
399,000
737,000
13,258,000
1,380,000
695,000
48,000
660,000
1,088,000
1,711,000
1,698,000
21,674,000
2,769,000
257,000
24,700,000
3,300,000
$28,000,000
Operation and maintenance costs at January 1981 price level for
the Black Bear Lake Project are estimated at $120,000 per year
including transmission.
Economics and Finance
The economic analysis, cost of energy determination, and
estimate of cash flow for the Project were based on criteria
established by the Power ~uthority in accordance with State draft
feasibility study regulations. In accordance with those regulations
a "base case" plan, a "preferred" plan and a "second most preferred"
plan were developed.
The power market would continue to be served by diesel units
under the base case plan. The preferred plan would be the Black
Bear Lake Project followed by the Lake Mellen Project. The second
most preferred plan would be the Lake Mellen Project followed by the
Black Bear Lake Project. The preferred plan has a benefit-cost
(B/C) ratio of 3.32 when compared to the base case plan and of 1.02
when compared to the second-most preferred plan. The Black Bear
Lake Project was also compared to the Lake Mellen Project assuming
-4-
each project was operated independently of the other. In that case
the Black Bear Lake Project has a B/C ratio of 1.21 when compared to
the Lake Mellen Project. The economic analysis was performed
assuming 0% general inflation, 3.5% differential fuel escalation for
the first 20 years of the study and held constant thereafter and a
3.0'" discount rate. An economic life of 50 years was used for the
hydro projects and 20 years for the diesel units.
The average cost of energy over the first twenty years of each
plan, at January 1981 price level, would be 31.3 cents/kWh for the
preferred plan, 79.3 cents/kWh for the base case plan, and
32.1 cents/kWh for the second most preferred plan. The cost of
energy from the Black Bear Lake Project alone is 17.9 cents/kWh and
that of the Lake Mellen Project 21.8 cents/kWh. The analysis was
made assuming an interest rate of 8.5 percent, an inflation rate
of 7%, and 3.5 percent differential fuel escalation.
Funding requirements for the Project are estimated to be
39.9 million, assuming an annual rate of 8.5 percent for interest
during construction and an annual inflation rate of 7.0 percent.
Schedule
The implementation schedule is shown on
report. The schedule assumes 13 months will be
FERC to process the license application and
application is submitted and project design begins
1981. Commercial operation would begin in January
Exhibit 33 of the
required for the
that the license
at the end of
1986.
The scope of work for this feasibility study includes a
comparison of the Project with all alternative means of satisfying
the area's power needs so that the Power Authority can be in a
position to recommend for or against construction of the Project.
The two principal alternative projects identified during the course
of this study are the Alaska Timber Corporation (ATC) wood-fired
steam-electric plant near Klawock and the Lake Mellen Hydroelectric
Project near Hydaburg.
No feasibility study has been made of the ATC plant and
detailed information on that project is unobtainable. with the
passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, Alaskan Natives
through their regional corporations can now export round logs.
Non-natives must process the logs into cants or other forms before
shipping. Sea1aska Corporation is now undertaking an ambitious
logging operation on Prince of Wales Island and will be exporting
-5-
much timber without processing. Any processing which will take
place will probably be done in Hydaburg, therefore the source of
logs for ATC and the need for the mill is somewhat uncertain.
Future market conditons are uncertain and wood-chips which could be
burned to produce electricity after the existing waste pile is gone
might more profitably be sold. Construction of the plant has
resumed, after some earlier delays, and THREA has entered into a
contract with ATC for secondary energy, but the on-line date and
status of financing for capacity in excess of ATC's needs is
uncertain.
These uncertanties surrounding the ATC plant make reliance on
that plant as a major source of supply for Craig, Klawock and
Hydaburg undesireable. The ATC plant might conveniently serve as an
interim source of generation prior to operation of the Elack Bear
Lake Project and as energy reserve once the Project is in o~eration.
The economic studies discussed above show the Lake Mellen
Project to be less attractive than the Black Bear Lake Project. The
Lake Mellen Project appears to be the next most attractive hydro
development on Prince of Wales Island after Black Eear Lake.
Feasibility studies should be made of the Lake Mellen Project and of
the whole Reynolds Creek Development.
Conclusion
We find the Black Bear Lake Project is technically,
economically and environmentally feasible, and we recommend
submittal of the license application to the FERC. We would be
pleased to provide the Power Authority the assistance required to
implement the Project.
Very truly yours,
l:~~~'~v~-. /
Richard D. Harza
President
-6-
TABLE OF SIGNIFICANT DATA
BLACK BEAR LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
RESERVOIR
water Surface Elevation, ft above mean sea level (msl)
Under Probable Maximum Flood 1121
1115
1685
Normal Maximum
Minimum
Tailwater Elevation, ft msl
Surface Area at Normal Max. EI., acres
Estimated Usable Storage, ac-ft
Type of Regulation
HYDROLOGY
Drainage Area, sq mi
Avg. Annual Runoff, cfs/mi2
Streamflow, cfs
Ma ximum Mon thl y
Average Annual
Minimum Monthly
DAM
Type
Maximum Height, ft
Crest Elevation, ft msl
Crest Length, ft
Dam Volume, cy
SPILLWAY
Type
Crest Elevation, ft msl
Width, ft
Design Discharge, cfs
WATER CONDUCTOR
Type
Diameter, ft
Length, ft
Shell Thickness, in.
Steel
Penstock
4.0
294
5/16
-i-
253
241
6850
Seasonal
1.82
14.3
18.0
26.0
0.3
Concrete Gravity
53
1123
368
6400
Ungated Concrete Ogee
1115
30
1680
Concrete
Shaft
4.0
1296
Steel
Penstock
2.5
2190
11/16-3/4
TABLE Qf SIGNIFICANT ~ (Conti d)
POWERSTATION
Number of Units
TUrbine Type
Rated Net Head, ft
Generator Unit Rating, kW
POWER AND ENERGY
Installed Capacity, kw
Firm capacity, kW .
Avg~ Annual Energ~ Generation, MWh
Avg. Plant Factor %
COSTS AND ECONOMICS
Construction Cost, $x10 6
Unit cost, $/kW inst
B/C Ratio 3%, with 3.5% fuel escalation
Project Funding Requirements, $x10 6
-ii-
2
Single Nozzle Impulse
1370
3000
6000
4000
23700
45
28.0
4666
3.32
39.9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter
I.
SUMMARY LETTER
TABLE OF SIGNIFICANT DATA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD
Purpose and Scope of Report
Background and Previous studies
Authorization
Acknowledgements
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Location and Access
Project setting
General Description
Project Arrangement
Project Functional Design
Geology of Foundations and Construction l-1aterials
Description of the Project Facilities
Concrete Dam and Spillway
Power Intake
Penstock
Powerplant
Access Road
switchyard and Transmission
Reservoir
Land Ownership
Recreation Facilities
Project Construction
Construction Schedule
Construction Plant
Construction Camps
Sediment Control
Spoil and Waste Disposal
Project Costs
Construction Cost
Operation and Maintenance Cost
-i-
Page
i
F-l
F-l
F-2
F-2
F-2
I-l
I-l
I-l
I-2
I-2
I-3
I-3
I-5
I-5
I-6
I-6
I-7
I-8
I-9
I-l0
I-l0
I-ll
I-12
I-12
I-13
I-14
I-15
I-15
I-16
I-16
I-18
TABLE ~E CONTENTS (Cont'd)
Chapter
II. PROJECT DESIGN AND OPERATION
Engineering Design
Dam
Spillway
water Conductor
Powerhouse
Reservoir Level
Water supply
Reservoir operation
without Constraints
With Constraints
Power and Energy Generation
without Constraints
with Constraints
III. ELECTRIC POWER MARKET
Introduction
Background and Population
Economics
socioeconomic Conditions
Major Economic Activities
Future Economic Activity
Energy Sector
Energy Consumption
Energy Balance
Electric Power Sector
Existing Systems
Historical Electric Energy Use
Future Electric Demand
Load Characteristics
Sensitivity Analysis
-ii-
Page
11-1
11-1
11-1
11-2
11-2
11-3
II-q
11-5
11-7
11-8
11-8
11-9
11-9
11-9
111-1
111-1
111-1
111-3
111-3
111-3
111-6
111-8
111-8
111-10
111-10
111-10
111-11
111-12
III-1q
111-15
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)
Chapter
IV. ECONOMIC EVALUATION
V.
Methodology
" , ~ j
Alteinative Sources of Power
Hydro
Diesel
Wood
Coal
Wind Generation
Solar
Interconnection
Conservation and Load Management
Alternative Expansion Plans
Base Case Plan
Preferred Plan
Second Most Preferred Plan
Economic Criteria
Economic Comparison
Cost of Energy
Cash Flow Requirements
RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION
Recommendations
Pre-Construction Activities
Implementation
-iii-
Page
IV-1
IV-1
IV-1
IV-1
IV-3
IV-3
IV-5
IV-5
IV-6
IV-6
IV-8
IV-10
IV-10
IV-11
IV-11
IV-11
IV-12
IV-14
IV-15
V-1
V-1
V-1
V-3
T~BLE QE CONTENTS (Cont'd)
Chapter
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS
The Existing Environment
Land Use
Species
Ecosystems
Special Biotic Resources
Climate
Air Quality
Hydrology
Special Features
Environmental Impact During Construction
Terrestrial Species and Habitats
Aquatic Species and Habitats
Major Ecosystem Alteration
Endangered or Threatened Species
Recreational Facilities and Use
Historical, ~rcheological, Cultural sites/Values
Scenic and Esthetic
Socioeconomic Effects
Air Quality
Noise
Water Quantity and Quality
Compliance with Fegulatory standards
Spoil and Waste Disposal
Environmental Impact of Operation and Maintenance
Terrestrial Species and Habitats
~quatic Species and Habitats -Black Bear Lake
Aquatic Species and Habitats -Downstream of
Black Bear Lake
Major Ecosystem Alteration
Cumulative Impacts
Recreational Facilities and Use
Historical, Archeological, Cultural Sites/Values
Scenic and Esthetic
socioeconomic Effects
Air Quality
Noise
Water Quantity and Quality
Compliance with Regulatory Standards
Solid Wastes and Waste Water
Breakdown of the Multilevel Intake
-iv-
Page
VI-1
VI-1
VI-1
VI-1
VI-4
VI-11
VI-13
VI-13
VI-13
VI-13
VI-14
VI-14
VI-15
VI-16
VI-18
VI-19
VI-19
VI-19
VI-19
VI-19
VI-20
VI-20
VI-21
VI-21
VI-22
VI-22
VI-22
VI-23
VI-30
VI-35
VI-38
VI-38
VI-38
VI-38
VI-38
VI-38
VI-39
VI-39
VI-39
VI-39
TABLE Q~ CONTENTS (Cont'd)
Chapter
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL ASP EC TS (C ont ' d )
Environmental Effects of Termination and Abandonment
Land Use and Esthetics
Vegetation
wildlife
Aquatic Ecosystems
Proposed Environmental Monitoring Programs
Fisheries and Hydrological/Limnological studies
Construction Phase Water Quality Monitoring
Dissolved Nitrogen Test
Post-Project Aquatic Resources Monitoring
Vegetation
Wildlife
Preventive Measures
Protection of Environmental Values during
Maintenance and Breakdowns
Protection of Fish and Wildlife Resources
Protection of Historical, Cultural, Archeological
Sites
Protection of Scenic Values
Protection of Water Quality
Mitigation Measures
Terrestrial Habitat and Wildlife Populations
Aquatic Habitat and Fish Populations
Visual Impact Mitigation
Public Access and Recreation
Preparation of Lands
Beneficial Environmental Effects
Potentially Significant Unavoidable Adverse
Environmental Effects
Relocations
cultural, Historic, Archeological Values
Esthetic and Visual Values
Recreational Values
Land Use
wildlife Habitat and Populations
Fish Habitat and Populations
Unique Ecosystems and Endangered or Threatened
species
Air Quality
Noise
Solid Waste and Wastewater Disposal
Water Resources
-v-
Page
VI-40
VI-40
VI-40
VI-41
VI-41
VI-41
VI-42
VI-42
VI-42
VI-42
VI-42
VI-43
VI-43
VI-44
VI-44
VI-45
VI-45
VI-46
VI-47
VI-47
VI-48
VI-48
VI-49
VI-49
VI-49
VI-49
VI-49
VI-49
VI-50
VI-50
VI-50
VI-50
VI-51
VI-52
VI-52
VI-52
VI-53
VI-53
TABg OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)
Chapter
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS (Cont'd)
Alternatives Considered
Alternative Sites
Power Intake
Transmission Line Design
Alternative Transmission Corridor Routes
Criteria for Evaluation of Alternative Corrridors
Evaluation of Alternative Corridors
Refinement of the Preferred Transmission corridor
Access Roads and Paths
Alternative Construction Procedures
Aggregate Sources, and Borrow and Spoil Disposal
Areas
Operations
Permits and Other Authorizations
Permits and Authorizations
Compliance with Health and Safety Regulations
and Codes
Compliance with other Regulations, Codes, Guidelines,
and Reviews
Authorities Consulted
Sources of Information
Public Meetings
Agency Meetings, Correspondence, and Telephone
Conversations
studies Conducted
-vi-
Page
VI-53
VI-53
VI-53
VI-56
VI-56
VI-58
VI-60
VI-61
VI-62
VI-63
VI-64
VI-66
VI-68
VI-68
VI-71
VI-72
VI-73
VI-73
VI-73
VI-74
VI-75
1. General Map
2. General Plan
3. Site Plan
4. General Profile
5. Dam and spillway, Plan and Elevation
6. Dam and Penstock, Sections
7. Powerstation, Plans and Sections
8. Proposed Project Recreation Plan
9. Construction Schedule
10. Construction Site Plan
11. Cost Estimate
12. Reservoir Area-Volume Curves
13. Reservoir Level
14. Synthesized Average Monthly Flow
15. Monthly Flow Duration Curve
16. Reservoir Operation
17. Power and Energy Production
18. Population
19. Socioeconomic Statistics
20. Employment
21. Energy Balance
22. Existing Generating Facilities
23. Electric Energy Consumption Historical Data
24. 1979 Monthly Energy Consumption
25. Residential-Commercial Demand
26. Total Peak and Energy Demand
27. Power Market Forecast
28. Load Characteristics
29. Solar and Wind Data
30. Alternative Expansion Plans
31. Economic Analysis
32. Cost of Energy
33. Implementation Schedule
34. Previous Exhibit Deleted
35. Common Plants of the Project Area
36. Birds of the Project Area
37. Black Bear Creek Valley Forest Types
38. Black Bear Lake vegetation Types
39. ADFG Black Bear Creek Salmon Surveys
40. Timing of Salmon Runs
41. Rare and Sensitive Pants
42. 1991 Reservoir Fluctuations without Flow Constraints
43. 1991 Reservoir Elevation Percent Exceedance without Flow
Constraints
44. 1991 Reservoir Fluctuations with Flow Constraints
45. 1991 Reservoir Elevation Percent Exceedance with Flow Constraints
46. Depths of Withdrawal in January, Three-Port Intake Structure
-vii-
LIS! OF EXHIBITS (Cont'd)
47. Depths of Withdrawal in August, Three-Port Intake Structure
48. Subbasin Drainage Areas
49. Stream Flow at Location I in 1986
50. Stream Flow at Location II in 1986
51. Stream Flow at Location III in 1986
52. Stream Flow at Location IV in 1986
53. Stream Flow at Location V in 1986
54. Stream Flow at Location VI in 1986
55. Stream Flow at Location I in 1991
56. Stream Flow at Location II in 1991
57. Stream Flow at Location III in 1991
58. Stream Flow at Location IV in 1991
59. Stream Flow at Location V in 1991
60. Stream Flow at Location VI in 1991
61. Depths of Withdrawal in January, Two-Port Intake Structure
62. Depths of Withdrawal in August, Two-Port Intake Structure
63. Trasmission Line Corridor Alternatives
64. Elevation Constraints
65. wildlife Constraints
66. Visual Resource Management Classes
67. Land Use Constraints
68. Transmission Corridor comparison
69. Preferred Transmission Line Corridor
71. Land OWnership in the Project Area
-viii-
VOLUME II
LISI OF APPENDICES
A. GEOLOGY REPORT
B. HYDROLOGY REPORT
C. REYNOLDS CREEK ALTERNATIVE
D. THORNE BAY ALTERNATIVE
E. ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME LAKE AND STREAM SURVEY REPORTS
F. AQUATIC FIELD STUDIES
G. ARCHEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL SURVEY
H. PROPOSED PROJECT RECREATION PLAN
I. PROTECTION OF NATURAL, HISTORIC, AND SCENIC FEATURES
J. CORRESPONDENCE
K. ENVIRONMENTAL REFERENCES
L. ACRONYMS
-ix-
FOREWORD
Purp~ ~nd Sco?l of Report
The purpose of this report is to document the results of
feasibility studies of the Black Bear Lake Project located near
Klawock on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska. The
objective of the study is to determine if the Project is
sufficiently attractive to warrant construction.
The scope of the study includes the following work items:
!. Determine the optimal plan for develo~ing
hydroelectric potential of Black Bear Lake.
the
Compare the selected plan for Black Bear Lake
development with all reasonable alternative means of
satisfying market area power needs.
3. Determine with reasonable certainty the cost of the
project and cash flow requirements.
!. Determine the nature and extent of environmental and
social impacts of the project, along with those
mitigating measures that could be taken to minimize
or offset adverse impact.
5. Assess the feasibility and financial considerations
of supplying power to currently isolated industrial
consumers.
&. Determine the estimated annual system power costs
both with and without the Project, and assess power
marketability.
7. Prepare a final report documenting the studies.
8. Fully coordinate project studies with all interested
federal, state and local entities and with the
general public.
F-1
Background and Previous Studies
The Black Bear Lake Project was previously identified in an
inventory study 1/ prepared for the Alaska Power Authority (APA)
in 1977. In 1979, the APA undertook a reconnaissance study l/ of
the Project. That study found that the Project was sufficiently
attractive to warrant a feasibility study and the preparatation of
an FERC license application. The present studies are a direct
result of the reconnaissance study.
authorization
The work was carried out under a contract between the APA and
Harza Engineering Company, effective as of May 15, 1980. Funds for
the study were provided by the state of Alaska. Part of work was
carried out under subcontracts with CH2M-Hill Norhtwest, C.C. Hawley
and Associates, Environaid, and Alaskarctic. A stream gage was
installed at Black Bear Lake by the u.s. Geological Survey under
direct contract with the APA.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge and appreciate the valuable assistance and
advice offered by staffs of the following agencies:
Alaska Power Authority
Alaska Power Administration
Tlingit & Haida Regional Electrical' Authority
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
u.s. Forest Service, Tongass National Forest
u.s. Geological Survey
u.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
1/ Robert R. Retherford Associates, Preliminary Appraisal Report,
1977.
l/ Harza Engineering Company, Reconnaissance Report, 1979.
F-2
Acknowledgements (continued)
National Marine Fisheries Services
u.s. Army-Corps of Engineers
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
',j
"
Alaska Department of Natural Resources
Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development
Office of the Governor
Sealaska Corporation
Haida Corporation
Klawock Heenya corporation
Shaan-Seet, Inc.
City of Craig
City of Hydaburg
City of Klawock
Louisiana Pacific Corporation
F-3
CHAPTER I
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Location and Access
The Black Bear Lake Project is located at latitude 570 33'N and
longitude 132 0 52'W, near the town of Klawock on Prince of Wales
Island in southeast Alaska. See Exhibit 1. The Project develops
the head between Black Bear Lake and the bottom of a falls at the
outlet of the lake. The lake discharges into Black Bear Creek which
flows into 83 acre Black Lake about 1.5 miles downstream from the
powerhouse site. Black Lake is drained by a small stream whch flows
about 3.5 miles to Big salt Lake, an arm of San Alberto Bay.
Both present and proposed access to Black Bear Lake and the
damsite is by float plane. Present access to the powerstation site
at the base of the falls is by logging road to Black Lake and from
there by foot. The logging road will be extended to the
powerstation for construction and operation of the Project.
~roject §~tting:
Prince of Wales Island has rolling, rugged mountainous terrain
rising to 3,800 feet at Pin Peak which is adjacent to Black Bear
Lake. The Black Bear Lake valley was glacier formed, having steep
sides and a broad base.
The climate of the project area is largely maritime with
occasional incursions of continental air masses. The climate is
mild and humid with much precipitation. Average annual temperature
is 40 0-45 0 F with lows ranging from slightly below 00 F in the
winter to highs close to 90 0 F in the summer. Precipitation varies
greatly with location and tends to increase with elevation. In the
coastal towns of the project area, mean annual precipitation is
about 120 inches.
Vegetation in the project area is typical of hemlock-spruce
coastal forest with some muskeg areas. wildlife in the project area
include black bear, deer, beaver, marten, mink, otter and wolf, as
well as many of the 200 bird species common to Southeast Alaska.
Black Bear Creek is catalogued as an anadromous fish stream and
supports spawning runs of pink, chum, coho, and sockeye salmon.
Dolly Varden, cutthroat, and steelhead trout are reported in Black
1-1
Bear Creek. Rainbow trout are reported in Black Bear Lake and in
Black Bear Creek downstream of the project site.
Project Arrangement
A general plan
Bear Lake Project are
and general profile
respecti vely.
Gene~al Description
and proposed project boundaries of the Black
shown on Exhibit 2. A more explicit site plan
of the Project are shown on Exhibits 3 and 4
The Project consists of the following principal elements:
a. A concrete gravity dam across the outlet of Black Bear
Lake, with rock embankment support of the left abutment.
b. An uncontrolled spillway in the center of the dam with a
design discharge capactity of 1680 cfs. The normal
maximum reservoir level established cy the spillway crest
is El. 1715.0.
c. A 3-port intake, with ports at different levels for water
temperature control, and a gated emergency outlet conduit,
located on the upstream face of the dam.
g. A water conduit, 4380 feet long, connecting the intake to
the powerhouse. The water conductor consists of the
following in sequence from the intake:
1) A buried steel penstock, 294 feet in length, with a
diameter of 48 inches.
2) A concrete-lined vertical
diameter and 1296 feet deep.
shaft, 48 inches in
3) An 8' x 8' rock tunnel, 1850 feet long, containing a
30 inch diameter steel penstock.
4) A buried steel penstock, 940 feet in length and
30 inches in diameter.
At the powerhouse a manifold will be provided to
distribute the flow to two generating units. At the dam,
an emergency closure valve for the power conduit will be
provided.
1-2
e. A powerhouse containing the two impulse turbines and
generators, rated at 3.0 MW each, and electrical
switchgear. An adjacent switchyard will contain the
transformers and transmission line pull-off structures.
f. ether facilities include the following:
1) An access road, about two miles in length, from end
t~e existing logging road at the outlet of Black Lake
to the powerhouse site and tunnel portal.
2) Transmission lines, totalling 52.0 miles in length,
connecting the Project with the load centers at
Klawock, Craig and Hydaburg.
3) A new substation near Klawock which will have the
necessary facilities to divide the single incoming
circuit from the Project into two outgoing circuits;
one serving Klawock and Craig and one serving
Hydaburg.
4) Small stepdown transformer stations at both Craig and
Hydaburg.
Project Functional ~esig~
The Project will provide total regulation of the outflow of
Black Bear Lake for the production of power and energy. The Project
will have an installed capacity of 6 MW and produce 23.7 GWh in an
average year. The project reservoir and access road will provide
recreational opportunities. Suitable agreements with private
landholders would be necessary to guarantee public use of some of
the proposed recreation facilities. Release of water from the
Project will be made in such a way so as to ensure minimum
disturbance to downstream resident fisheries and migrant fisheries.
Geology of FoundatiQns and Construction Materials
The project area was heavily glaciated during the Pleistocene
period and is characterized by rugged mountains dissected by
steep-sided broad valleys.
Bedrock consists of the Descon Formation, Ordivician-Silurian
undifferentiated volcanics, and a variety of interbedded
fine-grained metamorphosed sediments. Igneous intrusions of
Jurassic-Cretaceous age include diorite and quartz-diorite as dikes
1-3
and as a plutonic mass exposed in the lower valley. Some uplift,
folding and faulting have occured in the region but have never been
clearly defined or mapped in detail.
Numerous talus deposits from rockfalls and debris avalanches,
and terrace deposits of glacial till are found throughout the area.
These deposits and the lower stream gravel deposits are technically
suitable as sources of construction materials. As discussed
elsewhere in this report, use of the streambed sands and gravels is
rejected on environmental grounds. The selected source is processed
excavated materials.
Soils and terrace deposits of glacial and fluvial origin occur
thoughout the region. Most of the slopes are covered with humus,
residual soil and colluvium. Talus materials are angular, blocky
and generally poorly graded. vegetative growth and the forests
protect the soil cover on the slopes from erosion due tc surface
runoff. Overflow of Black Bear Lake has scoured the outlet stream
channel to fresh rock.
Earthquakes are common in Southeast Alaska. Specifically for
the Black Bear Lake Project, earthquakes appear to be related to the
Fairweather Fault and the Clarence straight Fault which are
approximately 80 miles west of the project. The magnitude of
earthquakes which occur on the Fairweather Fault (some as great as
8.1 on the Richter Scale) indicate that the project could be subject
to severe acceleration and must be designed accordingly.
The dam will be founded on sound bedrock. A small amount of
organic soil and severely weathered and spalled rock covers bedrock
in the dam area. These materials will be stripped from the
abutments and channel section. It is estimated that the thickness
of soil and loose rock ranges from 3 to 7 feet. The left end of the
dam will be socketed into a portion of the talus slope.
The penstock
sound, hard rock.
shaft and tunnel will be excavated in expected
The pressure section will be concrete-lined.
The powerplant will be founded on alluvial gravels and talus
near the base of the slope. Large trees which could blow down on
the plant should be cut and removed. The powerplant is located to
protect it from snow and debris.
Potential sources of concrete aggregates identified were a
quarry near Klawock, where they can also be processed, from stream
gravels in Black Bear creek or from processed excavated materials.
As discussed elsewhere in this report, use of streambed sands and
gravels is rejected on environmental grounds. The selected source
is processed excavated materials.
I-4
DescriptiQn of the Project Facilities
Concrete Dam and Spillway
A concrete gravity dam containing an ungated ogee spillway will
be constructed approximately 80 feet downstream from the outlet of
Black Bear Lake. A plan ar:p elevation of the dam and spillway are
shown on Exhibit 5. sectional views of these structures are shown
on Exhibit 6.
The maximum height of dam will be about 39 feet on the
abutments and about 53 feet through the narrow outlet channel. The
entire foundation of the dam will be stripped to sound rock. The
dam will require about 6,400 cubic yards of concrete. To facilitate
excavation through the deep talus deposit on the left abutment and
construction of the concrete dam, a temporary retaining wall will be
constructed at EI. 1725. After concreting is completed, the
retaining wall and a portion of the dam will be backfilled to a
stable slope with excavated material.
The spillway will be located in the center of the dam. It will
be an uncontrolled crest structure with a width of 30 feet with
critical depth control occuring at the crest for all flows.
The spillway will be designed to pass the outflow corresponding
to the probable maximum flood inflow of 4000 cfs. The spillway,
with crest at EI. 1715, will have a discharge capacity of 1680 cfs
with the reservoir at EI. 1721 or 6 feet above the normal maximum
level. The top of the dam is at EI. 1723.0, providing 2 feet of
freeboard above maximum flood pool.
As shown on Exhibit 5, spilled water will flow over the ogee
and horizontal concrete apron to a short channel in rock and into
the existing gorge.
A grout curtain will be constructed under the dam. This will
serve to negate or reduce the increased seepage and seepage
pressures which will result from the raised lake level. ~he grout
holes of the curtain will be angled to intercept a greater number of
steeply deeping joints.
It is estimated that a seepage control grout curtain averaging
30 feet deep (deeper beneath the channel and gradually shorter up
each abutment) should be adequate. It is also recommended that
spacing should be 20 feet on the abutments and split to 5 feet or
less where required. Two to five rows of consolidation grout holes
may be required in highly fractured areas. These holes would serve
to reduce uplift pressure and also to consolidate the fractured
rock.
1-5
f~ Intake
As shown on Exhibit 6, a multiport intake structure with three
gated orifices will be located on the upstream face of the dam in
the deepest part of the existing outlet channel. The 7' x 7' ports,
with inverts at El. 1672, El. 1683, and El. 1693 will be
automatically operated to provide temperature control for power
discharges throughout the range of headwater fluctuations.
Trashracks will be provided for each port. Water passing the
trashrack will have an average velocity of 1.3 fps through the gross
area at the maximum expected discharge.
The intake will be set low enough to permit drawdown of the
reservoir to El. 1685.0 while maintaining adequate submergence of
the intake.
Water for power production will pass from the appropriate port
through the dam to the 48" m power conduit via the
7'-0" x 7'-0" bell mouth entrance and transition seciton (from
rectangular to 48 inch diameter).
An automatic, motor operated 48 inch diameter butterfly valve
located at the toe of the gravity dam will provide positive shut off
of the power flow, if required.
The greatest quantity of bushes and trees around Black Bear
Lake are located near the dam on natural benches that will be
inundated at the proposed normal reservoir level. Because these
benches will be cleared during construction it is expected that
little trash will reach the intake. Intake velocities will be less
than 2 feet per second so the lowest intake port can be set close to
the bottom of the short approach channel without the danger of rocks
being carried into it.
An emergency outlet conduit with a manually operated gate will
also be incorporated into the intake structure. This conduit will
be 6'-0" in diameter and will serve as the diversion conduit during
construction.
Penstock
The penstock which will convey flow for power generation from
the dam and intake to the powerhouse has four distinct segments; a
48 inch diameter buried steel pipe, a 48 inch finished diameter
vertical concrete lined shaft, a 30 inch diameter steel pipeline on
saddles in an adit and a 30 inch diameter buried steel pipe segment.
A typical section through each of these segments is shown on
Exhibit 6.
The 48 inch buried pipeline will extend about 290 feet from the
butterfly valve at the toe of the gravity dam to the top of the
I-6
concrete shaft. The pipeline will be placed in a trench excavated
in rock on the right abutment. The trench will then be backfilled
with excavated material. This pipeline will terminate in a vertical
bend into the concrete lined shaft.
The vertical shaft will consist of a 6'-0" nominal diameter
circular shaft excavated in rock and a 1 foot thick unreinforced
concrete lining. The shaft will extend from EI. 1666.0 to
EI. 370.0, a distance of 1296 feet. Access to the bottom of the
shaft will be by an 8' x 8' modified horseshoe tunnel, 1850 feet in
length. Steel access hatchways to allow inspection and maintenance
of the shaft, if required, will be provided at both the top and
bottom of the shaft.
At its base, the shaft will be connected to a 30 inch diameter
steel pipeline. This pipe will be supported on concrete saddles
throughout the entire length of the rock tunnel to the portal at
EI. 350. O.
From the tunnel portal to the powerhouse at EI. 255.5 the
30 inch diameter steel pipeline will be buried in a rockfill which
will serve as the permanent access road to the tunnel portal. The
pipe will be surrounded by gravel bedding and cast-in-place concrete
thrust blocks will be provided at bends.
The penstock, which will
substructure concrete, will deliver
units via a welded steel manifold.
be encased
water to
in
the
the
two
powerhouse
generating
The various segments of the penstock were designed for the
gross head at the section plus a 30~ allowance for overstress due to
water hammer. Steel portions of the power conduit will be
fabricated from ASTM A-333 Grade 6 steel which exhibits adequate
notch toughness for low temperature service. The wall thickness of
the steel pipeline including 0.125 inch corrosion allowance is
0.313" in the 48 inch diameter segment and varies from 0.688" to
0.750" in the 30 inch diameter segment.
Powerplant
The powerplant will have a reinforced concrete substructure,
with a superstructure of concrete and concrete block and an
insulated aluminum roof supported by a metal truss system. The
overall dimensions of the powerplant will be 70 feet long by 40 feet
wide by 37 feet high from generator floor to the peak of the roof.
The unit bay width will be 22 feet. A plan and sectional views of
the powerhouse are shown on Exhibit 7.
The two turbines will be single nozzle horizontal impulse type
turbines rated to produce 4419 horsepower at a net head of 1370 feet
1-7
at 600 rpm. At the rated output and head each turtine will
discharge 32 cfs.
The generator and turbine of each unit will be connected by a
horizontal drive shaft. The generators will be rated at 3750 kVa at
60 0 C temperature rise, O.B power factor and 60 Hertz. Each
generator will have a continuous overload rating of 15% at BOo C
temperature rise above ambient.
Circuit breakers will be the air magnetic type. They will be
rated to interrupt the maximum expected fault current and will be
used to put the unit on-line during the normal start sequences.
station service power will be supplied at 4BO-V, by 3-phase
dry-type transformer and 4BO-V circuit breakers.
All protective relays and
manual and automatic operation of
provided.
all
the
control devices for complete
generating units will be
supervisory control equipment will be provided to permit remote
control indication, and communication of powerhouse generating data
to a remote central control room located at Klawock.
The powerhouse will be provided with a single light bridge
crane of 10 ton capacity. The crane, which will be supported by
steel columns and support beams, will serve to unload and erect
equipment during construction and to facilitate servicing.
other mechanical equipment including an air compressor and
emergency diesel generator will be provided in the powerhouse.
Access Road
Access to the powerhouse for construction and project operation
will require extension of the existing logging road at the north end
of Black Lake. The length of the new road is about two miles.
Routing and construction of the portion of the road along the east
shore of Black Lake will require measures to minimize the fotential
for slope failures and mass movement. The road will cross an active
slide zone near the northeast end of the lake. It is proposed that
this zone be crossed by placing a rockfill embankment in the shallow
bay at the toe of the slide with the expectation that this portion
of the access road will require periodic maintenance.
No road would be built to Black Bear Lake, which would would
continue to be accessible only by float plane or helicopter.
I-B
Switchyard ~nd Transmissi~
The generators will be connected to two power transformers
located in a small yard across the access road to the west of the
powerhouse erection bay. The transformers will be rated at 4312 kVa
each. A single circuit 34.S kV transmission lines will connect the
Project with the load centers at Klawock and Hydaburg. A single
circuit 7.2/12.S kV line will connect the distribution system at
Craig to Klawock.
The recommended transmission line routing, beginning at the
powerhouse site, will follow the access road to Black Lake and
continue along the existing logging road to its intersection with
Forest Development Road SOOO, (Klawock-Thorne Bay Road). From
there, the transmission line would follow the road to a substation
constructed just east of Klawock near state Highway 924 to Hollis.
From the proposed substation, one circuit would tie into the
existing Klawock system and continue along the Craig-Klawock Road,
(state Highway 924), to craig.
The second circuit would provide service into Hydaburg. The
routing, from the proposed substation, would be easterly along
Hollis Road to a point approximately four miles past the
southeasterly end of Klawock Lake, where a principal logging road
intersects Hollis Road. The line would then run generally to the
south, following the general route of the logging road. The logging
road terminates near the head of Natzuhini Bay. It has been
proposed that this logging road be extended another six miles to
Hydaburg. The transmission line would follow the final road route
on into Hydaburg.
A single circuit 34.S kV line is proposed. This line would be
of horizontal linepost insulator type construction, such as the
REA Type TP-34. This type of construction, using 336.4 MCM ACSR and
4S-to SO-foot poles, would provide an average span of approximately
600 feet. This type of construction also permits for a very narrow
line path.
The insulators
for an overall width
more environmentally
of construction.
for this construction are 14-1/2 inches long,
of three feet. This narrow profile will be
acceptable in the project area than other types
Besides the substation at the power plant site a substation is
needed along the Hollis Road. This substation will provide the bus
arrangement necessary to split the single incoming 34.S kV circuit
into two outgoing circuits, one to Klawock-Craig at 7.2/12.S kV, the
existing primary voltage in Klawock, and the other to Hydaburg at
34.S kV. The Klawock-Craig line would be built, tapping the Klawock
line via fuses. Small stepdown transformer stations will be used in
I-9
Craig and Hydaburg to convert the incoming voltage to the primary
distribution voltage in each community.
Reservoir
The reservoir created by the dam will cover the present Black
Bear Lake, rising up the surrounding steep slopes, increasing the
depth of the lake by 35 feet.
The volume below the surface of the present lak~' at El. 1680 is
limited by a large rock mass which rises up out of the bottom to
just below the water surface near the center of the lake. For that
reason it was considered more economical and practical to octain the
necessary storage for flow regulation by providing the additional
storage above the present lake level.
At the normal elevation of 1115, the reservoir will have a
surface area of 241 acres and provide a storage volume of 6850 acre
feet between EI. 1115 and EI. 1685.
The reservoir will be surcharged to as high as EI. 1121 when
floods are discharging through the spillway.
Some clearing of the reservoir will be necessary adjacent to
the dam and along the northeast shore of the lake. Approximately
60 acres between EI. 1680 and EI. 1110 will require clearing. About
23 acres of the 60 will be heavy clearing, mostly of mountain
hemlock.
1and OWnershiE
The lands within the project area for the dam, powerhouse, and
portion of the reservoir (Secs. 1, 12, and 13, T.13S., R.82E, Copper
River Meridian) are presently owned by the u.s. Forest Service but
have been withdrawn under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
for selection by Klawock Heenya, the Klawock village corforation.
In addition, Sealaska Corporation, the regional native corporation
has top-filed for selection of lands which include those sections.
Neither corporation has placed these lands as top priority for
conveyance and their ownership may remain with the u.s. Forest
Service if the native corporation entitlements are used elsewhere.
Project lands for a portion of the reservoir pool southeast of
the damsite lies in Secs. 1 and 18, T.13S., R.32E., Copper River
Meridian which is presently unencumbered u.s. Forest Service land.
The transmission line corridor traverses u.s. Forest Service
land, private land held predominately by the sealaska Corporation,
Klawock Heenya, Shaan-Seet, and Haida Corporation, and highway
rights-of-way owned by the State of Alaska. The Power Authority
1-10
proposed to acquire project lands and right-of-way through a variety
of methods as appropriate and necessary including special use
permit. lease. purchase. or eminent domain.
Recreation Facilities
It is anticipated that recreation use of Black Bear Creek
valley will increase somewhat. principally in sport fishing use. To
accommodate this expected increase in use. fishing and boat access
to Black Lake and a fishing access trail upstream of Black Lake are
proposed. A presentation of the recreation facilities is shown on
Exhibit 8.
Boat access to Black Lake will be provided by a gravelled ramp
accessible from the proposed project access road. The access road
will be widened near the boat ramp to provide for vehicle parking.
Two picnic tables and trash cans will be provided for the
convenience of visitors.
A simple woodchip covered foot trail for fishing access to
Black Bear Creek will be provided approximately half a mile
upstream of Black Lake. The head of the trail will be located on
the project access road.
Also. an interpretive display explaining project facilities and
operation will be placed at the powerhouse. Visitors will use the
parking spaces provided at the powerhouse. The powerhouse will be
closed except for occasional tours.
No additional recreation facilities are proposed for Black Bear
Lake. The existing Forest Service cabin will be relocated before
the reservoir is filled.
I-11
Proj~ ~truction
The project construction will be carried out by separate supply
and construction contracts. Separate contracts for supply of
mechanical and electrical equipment, transmission line construction,
access road construction and civil works construction are
anticipated. The civil works contractor will be required to clear
and prepare a staging area near the powerhouse and provide his own
power during construction. It is expected that the civil works
contractor will install the turbines and generators under the
supervision of manufacturer's representatives for those separate
suppliers.
It is possible that the present logging road which terminates
at Black Lake will be extended to near the project site by Sealaska
Corporation in pursuit of their logging interests. otherwise the
contract for access road construction could be performed by a local
contractor or included in the project civil works contract.
Construction Schedule
As shown on Exhibit 9, Construction Schedule, completion of
project construction is expected to take two years. It is assumed
that the access road to the powerhouse site will be completed prior
to the commencement of power project construction and that the
contract for civil works construction is awarded no later than
mid-February of the first year of construction.
Work efforts during the first year of construction will be
split between the upper work site at reservoir level and the lower
site in the vicinity of the powerhouse. Lower site work will
include tunnel construction, stream channelization and powerhouse
construction. Upper site work will include completion of the
excavation for the gravity dam, cofferdamming and diversion of the
creek at the damsite and excavation of the vertical penstock shaft.
The most critical work scheduled for completion during this
initial season is excavation of the tunnel and vertical shaft
portions of the power conduit. Tunnel construction will commence in
March and continue throughout the summer and early fall. Midway
through the summer, shaft excavating machinery will be mobilized and
erected at the upper site. Excavation of the shaft will be
completed by the end of November.
Upper site work will be suspended from early December through
the end of February. Lower site work in sheltered areas will
continue through the winter months. This winter work will involve
installation of the steel penstock on saddles in the tunnel and
interior work on the powerhouse.
1-12
Second year civil work will be concentrated at the upper site.
The work will include foundation grouting, construction of the
concrete gravity dam, intake and spillway, concrete lining of the
penstock shaft and reservoir clearing. civil work at the lower site
will consist mainly of completion of the steel penstock.
Installation of generating equipment, accessary electrical
equipment, and mechanical equipment including the valve and gates
for the power conduit will also be completed in the second year.
The powerhouse crane, which will be installed prior to enclosure of
the structure in the first year, will be used to unload and install
the other electro-mechanical items in the powerhouse.
Since there will not be an access road to Black Bear Lake, the
logistics of construction of the upper site features are of
considerable importance. The required construction equi~ment and
materials that are not available at the site will be transported by
helicopter. Since maximum lifting capacity of the largest
commercially available helicopters are in the range of 15,000 to
20,000 pounds, it is anticipated that much of the construction plant
will have to be disassembled for transporting. Major helicopter
ferrying efforts will occur at mid-year during the first season and
at the beginning and end of second construction season. During the
bulk of the period small tools, supplies, fuel and personnel could
be flown to the lake site by float plane or small helicopter.
Construction of the transmission lines and substations would be
accomplished relatively independently from the rest of the project
facilities. Access for installation of the line would be by
all-terrain vehicle, where necessary, with no access road
construction anticipated.
Detailed scheduling of those construction activities which have
the potential for significant adverse effect on water quality will
be coordinated with ADFG and other appropriate agencies. It is
anticipated that preparation of the construction staging areas,
which includes the water quality protection measures discussed
elsewhere in this report, can be carried out within the May 15 -
August 1 time frame recommended by ADFG.
Construction Plant
The following represents the Engineer's concept of project
construction procedures. However, it is usually advantageous to
request analysis and suggestion from the contractor engaged for
project construction. Any resulting changes in construction
procedures would necessarily be in accordance with the construction
specifications which would contain the general provisions necessary
for the environmental protection indicated herein.
The anticipated construction site plans for both the upper and
lower sites are shown on Exhibit 10. Lower site activities during
1-13
the first year of construction include powerhouse construction,
stream channel improvements and penstock tunnel excavation. Tunnel
excavation will be performed by conventional drill and blast
methods. Crews will work thoughout the first year on a
3 shift-per-day schedule to complete this task. Earth work for the
powerhouse, switchyard, and stream channel improvements will be
performed using appropriate diesel powered equipment. Excavated
material from tunnel construction will be processed to yield
aggregate for lower site concrete. Concrete will be hauled from the
concrete plant to the forms by transit-mix truck and placed by crane
and bucket.
First year upper site work will consist of site preparation and
dam excavation, both of which will be performed by diesel powered
earth moving equipment, and penstock shaft excavation. The power
shaft will be excavated using an elecrically powered raise drilling
machine. This machine will first drill an 11 inch diameter pilot
hole vertically through bedrock to intersect the completed penstock
tunnel. From inside the tunnel the pilot hole drill bit will be
exchanged for a 6'-0" diameter raise bit which will be pulled
upward. As the shaft is enlarged to its final excavated diameter,
the spoil material will fall to the base of the shaft where it will
be removed through the connecting tunnel. This material will be in
the form of small chips which will be suitable for penstock bedding,
switchyard crushed rock fill, or powerhouse backfill. It may also
be stockpiled for future use as material for access road
maintenance. During the second season, the shaft will be concreted
to its final q·-o" diameter using collapsible forms suspended from
the upper level by cables. Concrete will be delivered to the forms
by electric hoist from the top of the shaft.
The crushing and batch plants, used for lower site
construction, will be dismantled and erected at the upper level for
production of concrete for the gravity dam and appurtenances and
penstock shaft lining. The transit mix trucks used in the first
season will be replaced by an electrically powered single drum
mixing plant. The mixer will discharge into a hopper-fed conveyor
belt system which will transport the wet concrete to the forms.
Power for electrically operated construction equipment and
lighting will be supplied by two 1000 KW diesel generators located
on the lower site. Transmission to the upper site will be by the
use of a temporary power cable laid on the ground. This arrangement
will reduce fuel requirements at the upper construction site.
Construction Camps
It is expected that the majority of the labor force required
for project construction will live offsite, probably in Klawock. No
living quarters are expected to be established on the lower site.
An upper site camp during both years of construction probably would
I-14
be required. Such a camp could be established in areas which would
be inundated by the reservoir, thus minimizing its impact on the
surrounding area. ~ll refuse and human wastes would te removed from
the site and disposed through the existing facilities at Klawock.
Major shops and yard areas would be established at the lower
site near the powerhouse as shown on the construction site plan,
Exhibit 10. The batch plant and crushing plants for lower site
construction as well as material stock piles and spoil areas would
also occupy this zone.
At the upper site, areas on the left abutment both u~stream and
downstream of the axis of the dam would be utilized during
construction. Upstream of the dam and extending onto the shallow
talus covered lake bottom, a stockpile for excavated talus material
would be established. Since this material is the same as that which
already is deposited there, no effects detrimental to the lake are
anticipated. This area would be used as a workpad for the second
year crushing operation and concrete plant. A temporary stockpile
would occupy the area downstream of the dam. An equi~ment and
material yard will be established downstream of the dam on the right
bank. These areas are also shown on Exhibit 10.
Sediment control
A system of trenches and settling ponds will be provided around
major construction zones and stockpile areas to intercept natural
runoff and waste water from construction processes which may contain
sediments. Such sediments will be combined with the stockpiled
overburden and distributed over areas disturbed by construction to
encourage revegetation. Water used in aggregate processing will be
discharged into settling tanks and released into the natural
drainage system through filter cloth.
spoil and ~aste Disposal
The products of construction, excavated materials and cleared
timber, will be incorporated into the permanent project features to
the maximum extent possible. Marketable timber from access road
construction and lower site clearing will be sold commercially.
Timber cleared at the upper site will be used to construct the
temporary retaining wall for gravity dam construction. Excavated
rock from tunnel and shaft construction will be used to make
aggregate for lower site concrete, used as pipe bedding, placed in
lower site fills or possibly, stockpiled for future access road
maintenance. In a like manner all of the excavated rock and talus
at the upper construction site will be used to make concrete
aggregate or placed in upper site fills. Exhibit 10 shows the
proposed locations of spoil areas for those excavated materials
which cannot be incorporated into the permanent works. To prevent
I-15
erosion p overburden containing organic matter and decomposed rock
removed from required excavations will be temporarily stockpiled and
redistributed to encourage revegetation of areas disturbed by
construction. The surface will be finished off with stable slopes
and seeded with plants suitable to the local climate. Waste organic
materials will be burned.
Table 1-1 shows the sources and estimated
excavated materials and their probable disposition
project.
TABLE 1-1
DISPOSITION OF EXCAVATED MATERIALS
quantities of
in the final
Final DisEosition in project
§ource Quantity Fills Aggregate StockEile SE2il
cy cy cy cy cy
Lower Construction site
Tunnel 6160 4225 710 1225
Shaft 2025 200 1825
Powerhouse 3340 2100 1240
Channellization 2500 1000 1500
y~ Construction Site
Penstock 1575 1575
Damp Rock 3930 3930
Damp Talus 15350 12055 3295
Borrowed Talus 6040 6040
project Costs
Construction Cost.
The construction cost of the Project is summarized on Table 1-2
and a detailed estimate is shown as Exhibit 11.
1-16
TABLE 1-2
CONSTRUCTION COST OF PROJECT
(In Dollars at January 1981, Price Level)
Land and Land Rights
Powerstation and Improvements
Reservoir, Dams, and waterways
Waterwheels, Turbines, and Generators
Accessory Electrical Equipment
Miscellaneous Powerstation Equipment
Roads and Bridges
Substation and Switching Station Equipment
and Structures
Poles and Fixtures
Overhead Conductors and Devices
SUBTOTAL DIRECT COST
CONTINGENCIES
Civil Works 15~
Generating Equipment 8%
TOTAL DIRECT COST
ENGINEERING AND ADMINISTRATION
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
1-17
COST
399,000
737,000
13,258,000
1,380,000
695,000
48,000
660,000
1,088,000
1,711,000
1,698,000
21,674,000
2,769,000
257,000
24,700,000
3,300,000
28,000,000
The construction cost includes the direct cost of civil works,
contractor's overhead and profit, purchase and installation of
equipment, contingencies, engineering, and owner's administration,
but excludes price escalation beyond January 1981 and interest
during construction.
Detailed estimates of quantities were calculated from the
project plans, and unit prices or lump sum costs were estimated for
each item of work.
The items within each project feature are estimated either as
part of a general construction contract or an equipment purchase
contract. The unit costs of labor and locally available
construction materials were obtained from local sources.
Construction equipment unit costs were developed from lower
u.s. hourly rates adjusted to local conditions. Unit prices were
verified by checking recent bids on the Green Lake Project located
near sitka and by experience of the u.s. Corps of Engineers in
Alaska. Unit costs for the principal items of work are based on a
construction plan designed to implement the Project in accordance
with the schedule as shown on Exhibit 33.
The direct cost estimated for the permanent equipment includes
purchase, delivery and installation. The major equipment items
include the turbines and governors, generators and exciters,
transformers and terminal equipment switchgear, and powerstation
crane. The prices of major equipment items are estimated based on
recent experience with similar equipment and, when possible, on
preliminary quotations from manufacturers.
To allow for unforseen construction problems, changes in
design, and incomplete data or omissions in estimating, a
contingency allowance of 15~ is added to the civil works costs. A
contingency of a~ is added to the cost of major items of generating
equipment.
Based on data obtained from other hydroelectric projects an
allowance of about 14~ for engineering and owner's overhead expenses
has been added to the total of the preceding costs. This consists
of about 12~ for engineering and supervision of construction, and 2%
for owner's overhead costs to be charged against project
construction.
operation ~g Maintenance Cost.
The project would be equipped for remote control operation from
Klawock. Routine operation and maintenance expenses are estimated
at $120,000 per year, including the transmission line, based on FERC
data adjusted for automatic operation and conditions in Alaska.
1-18
CHAPTER II
PROJECT DESIGN AND OPERATION
Engineering Design
The dam is located 80 feet downstream of the existing outlet of
Black Bear Lake. This location is fixed by topographic and geologic
limitations. Shifting of dam axis upstream of the present location
would significantly increase the crest length of the structure.
Downstream of the dam~ the bedrock foundation begins sloping towards
the valley below.
Three types of impoundment structures were studied in the
course of design of the dam. In addition to the recommended
concrete gravity structure~ rock fill dams with two different types
of impervious membranes were considered. A zoned type rockfill
structure was not considered because there is no source of
impervious fill material at the site.
One of the studied alternatives was a rockfill with a one-foot
thick reinforced concrete slab on its upstream face. At the
upstream toe of the dam the slab would be connected to a grout
curtain to complete the impervious membrane. The second alternative
studied would incorporate a steel bin type retaining wall structure
backed by a rockfill. Steel plates would be welded to the upstream
face of the bins to form the positive water cutoff. The bottom bin
would be embedded in the concrete grout curtain cap to complete the
membrane. Both rockfill dams would have a chute type uncontrolled
spillway in an excavated rock trench on the right abutment.
Rockfill for these types of dam would be supplied from required
excavation and borrowing from the talus deposit at the base of the
left abutment.
Comparison of initial cost showed slight differences between
the three alternatives with concrete gravity structure the most
economical. More significant are the probable differences in
maintenance costs between the rockfill alternatives and the gravity
dam. For the concrete faced rockfill~ it is likely that cracks
would form in the thin membrane due to settlement of the supporting
rockfill after reservoir filling. Corrosion protection and possible
cracking at the welds due to settlement would be of ccntinuing
concern for the steel bin type rockfill dam. Repair of such defects
at this remote site would be costly. The concrete dam would not
require maintenance of a comparative magnitude.
11-1
Considerations of performance under earthquake conditions also
support the choice of the concrete gravity dam as the recommended
structure.
Stability of the concrete gravity dam and spillway section was
checked for the following cases: flood stage water surface, normal
maximum water surface plus ice loads, normal maximum water surface
plus earthquake load. Ice loads were taken to be 10,000 lbs. per
linear foot of crest length. The earthquake acceleration was taken
to be 0.15 g. A gront curtain cutoff and drainage will be provided
to reduce uplift pressure. For all cases considered the dam and
spillway have compression over the entire base, indicating that the
proposed section has an excellent degree of stability against
overturning. The shear-friction factor, an indication of the safety
of the structure to resist Sliding is in excess of the required
minimum.
~pillway
The spillway is located in the center of the gravity dam and
founded on the rock knob which forms the left bank of the present
stream channel. Downstream of the dam the stream channel cuts to
the left minimizing the length of the spillway discharge channel.
The uncontrolled ogee type gravity section with a short concrete
apron was designed to discharge 1680 cfs with 6 feet of reservoir
surcharge. With its crest set at EI. 1715, the spillway will pass
the probable maximum flood with the reservoir high water surface
reaching EI. 1721, leaving 2 feet of freeboard.
water Conductor
Water conveyance is by a single conduit which is buried in an
open cut excavation or in a rock shaft and tunnel throughout its
entire length. The conduit diameter is 4.0 feet to the base of the
vertical shaft portion and 2.5 feet in diameter thereafter.
The 2 '-6" diameter of the major portion of the penstock was
selected based on economic studies of conduits ranging in size from
2'-0" to 3'-6". The diameter of the vertical concrete lined shaft
is 4'-0" to facilitate access during construction. In the portion
of the penstock between the dam and the shaft it was decided to
continue the 4'-0 diameter. This decision was based on
consideration of possible expansion of the Project to a 3 unit
peaking plant at some time in the future. Expansion would entail
tapping the 4'-0" shaft at its base and installing a new penstock to
conduct water to the new unit. Providing a 4'-0" diameter from the
dam to the shaft would facilitate such project expansion at a small
additional cost to the presently proposed Project.
1I-2
A surface penstock route was considered as an alternative to
the recommended route. Field investigation and subsequent office
studies reveal several problems which cast doubt on the long term
viability of this alternative. The surface routing investigated
generally parallels the stream alignment down the heavily timbered
slope on the right bank. The large trees along the route have
shallow root systems and pose a threat to a surface pipeline. In
order to lessen this threat, the penstock would be buried to just
below the rock line along most of its length. Clear cutting to
protect a surface pipeline was rejected because of the likelyhood of
the creation of a lansdlide or snowslide channel along the route.
Construction of the surface penstock would require installation
of a high line. This facility would then also be used for
construction of the dam and appurtenances and would be left in place
for future access to the upper site. Anchorage of the pipeline at
major bends would be difficult because of adverse bedding of the
rock.
Although preliminary cost comparisons showed the underground
routing to have a first cost exceeding that of the surface route by
about 15~, the underground route was selected because it is expected
to be a more stable structure, requiring a minimum amount of
maintenance. Additionally, the underground penstock route is
considered to have a significantly lesser environmental impact than
the surface route.
Powerhouse
The powerhouse is located on a deep talus deposit on the right
bank of Black Bear Creek. The concrete raft foundation will provide
economical support for this structure. The powerhouse
superstructure will be of reinforced concrete and reinforced
concrete block construction. These materials were chosen over the
less expensive prefabricated metal alternative for security reasons.
since the plant will be unattended, no windows will be provided,
also as a security measure.
The powerhouse and access
infrequent floods by rock berms and
their proximity. The generating
above flood stage.
road will be protected from
channelization of the creek in
equipment is set at an elevation
As an alternative to the recommended powerhouse location, an
underground powerhouse location was considered. This scheme was
rejected because it was determined to be as costly as the surface
structure while incurring a reduction in net head for power
production of about 60 feet.
11-3
Res~oir Level
The present water surface level of Black Bear Lake is at
El. 1680. The lake has a volume of about 22,000 acre-feet below
that elevation, as estimated by the Alaska Department of Fish and
Game. Area-volume curves for the lake are shown on Exhibit 12.
The minimum allowable lake level was set at El. 1685 to allow
for intake submergence and for construction of most project features
above the existing lake level. A computer program was used to
determine the minimum reservoir elevations to meet incremental firm
capacity and energy demands. That analysis was based on typical
monthly load characteristics discussed in Chapter III, and
thirty years of synthesized monthly flow data presented in
Exhibit 14. A more detailed description of the program is made in
the reservoir operation section. The results, taken for a
95 percent exceedence level, are presented in Exhibit 13.
An incremental benefit-cost analysis was made to determine the
maximum reservoir elevation. Benefits were based on the alternative
cost of diesel power and energy production. Costs included the cost
of dam at various levels plus the incremental cost of the capacity
which would be produced as the reservoir level increased.
In estimating benefits, the value of diesel capacity was taken
as $690 per kilowatt, the value of energy as $0.11 per kilowatt-
hour, and the value of operation and maintenance (O&M) as $0.02 per
kilowatt-hour. These values correspond to the average costs of
providing power and energy at the January 1981 price level. A cost
estimate was made for the dam, spillway and intake structures at
four different elevations between 1100 and 1130. An incremental
cost was added to reflect the increase in installed capacity, as the
reservoir level increased. This cost includes mechanical and
electrical equipment. Benefits and costs were capitalized by the
present worth method over a 50 year period, using a discount rate of
3~. A fuel escalation rate of 3.5% was used for the first
twenty years. A complete description of the methodology used in the
economic analysis is presented in Chapter IV. The results of the
benefit-cost analysis for the reservoir level is shown in
Table 1I-1.
1I-4
§levation
ft
1695
1700
1705
1710
1715
1720
Capacity
kW
5,000
5,580
5,800
5,910
6,000
6,060
TABLE II-l
BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS
Energy
MWh
22,500
22,900
23,250
23,500
23,700
23,750
Incremental
~enefits
$ x 1,000
2,483
1,975
1,378
1,105
302
Incremental
Costs
$ x 1,000
760
690
820
1,080
1,100
B-C
Ratio
3.3
2.9
1. 7
1.0
0.3
The incremental benefit-cost ratio is less than unity for
elevations higher than El. 1715 as can be seen from Ta~le II-l.
Therefore El. 1715 was selected for the project.
A complete description of the hydrology studies is presented in
~ppendix B. Below is a summary of the results.
The total drainage area for Black Bear Lake (including the
lake) is 1.82 square miles. The climate is humid and is typified by
mild temperatures and heavy precipitation. The nearest
climatological station is Ketchikan which has a historical mean
annual precipitation of 156.06 inches, and mean annual temperature
of 45.7 degrees Fahrenheit. Based on other nearby gage records and
elevation of the lake, the average annual runoff, at Black Bear
Lake, is estimated to be 14.3 cfs per square mile. This represents
a total mean annual runoff of 26 cfs. Since the streamflow gage at
the outlet of Black Bear Lake was installed in June 1980, other gage
records were used to synthesize monthly flow data for a ~eriod of
30 years. The results are presented in Exhibit 14. Estimated
average monthly flows are shown in Table II-2
II-5
TABLE II-2
AVERAGE MONTHLY RUNOFF
(cfs)
Month
January 6.5
February 5.4
March 4.7
April 15.8
May 39.0
June 47.1
July 27.4
August 22.9
September 36.6
October 47.7
November 34.0
December 24.8
The predominance of overcast days and relatively cool
temperature precludes major evaporation losses. Evaporation
virtually ceases in mid-winter when Black Bear Lake freezes over.
The nearest Weather Bureau station for which evaporation data are
available is located at the Juneau airport. Average annual
evaporation losses of 15.9 inches were observed at Juneau between
1968 and 1977.
The annual evaporation loss at Black Bear Lake is probably less
than at Juneau because of a higher annual precipitation and lower
average annual temperature. It is estimated that the mean annual
evaporation losses in the project area would be less than
eleven inches. For Black Bear Lake, an annual Class A Pan
coefficient of 0.70 was assumed to be representative of evaporation
II-6
from a large free-water surface. Average monthly evaporation losses
for Black Bear Lake are shown below:
1.60
TABLE 11-3
AVERAGE MONTHLY EVAPORATION LOSSES, BLA£~ ~ LAKE
(inches)
August S~mtember TOTAL
1.82 1.92 1.68 0.68 7.70
Reservoir QEeration
A computer program was used to simulate reservoir operation. The
main inpu~ data used in the operation study are as follows:
1. Thirty years of synthesized monthly flow data, as shown on
Exhibit 14
2. Evaporation losses as discussed previously
3. The reservoir area-volume curves as shown in Exhibit 12
4. The center line of the impulse units set at El. 263
5. A head loss of 70 feet at full capacity
6. Turbine efficiency of 90 percent
7. Generator-transformer efficiency of 96 percent.
8. Monthly power and energy demand to determine monthly
average flow requirements.
The operation study was carried out on a monthly basis by
simulating reservoir operation to meet forecasted monthly peak and
energy demands for the Craig-Klawock-Hydaburg interconnection. For
each month of the 30 years of synthesized flow data, the difference
between monthly inflows minus evaporation and monthly flow
requirements for energy generation was used to set the new reservoir
elevation, at the end of the month, or the amount of spill. The
minimum reservoir elevation was maintained at El. 1685. At that
elevation, if the monthly inflows were less than the flow
requirements, the Project only generated the amount of water which
was available.
11-7
Based on the construction schedule presented earlier, filling
the reservoir could start in October, the year before the Project
starts operating. During the months of October, November, and
December, the minimum releases for fisheries will be kept at 34 cfs,
25 cfs, and 10 cfs, respectively. These releases are the same as
those proposed for project operation with environmental constraints,
as described later in this section. Based on average monthly
inflows, the reservoir would raise from El. 1680 to El. 1690 by the
end of December. In January, the Project will start operating. The
average monthly inflows being less than the average flows required
for energy generation during the first three months of the year, the
reservoir will be drawn down to El. 1685. Based on average inflows,
there would be a shortage of water in March, and only half the
forecasted energy demand would be generated. The other half could
be generated by the standby diesel units. After that, inflows are
high enough to provide both releases for energy generation and
reservoir filling. By the end of the year, the reservoir should be
at El. 1697. The next year, there is enough storage to avoid
shortage of water in March. The reservoir should raise to El. 1707
by the end of the second year, and to the maximum elevation at 1715
by the end of the third year.
The operation program was run under two sets of operating
criteria. First, the program was run to meet the system demand
without any constraints on daily flow fluctuations. 'Then, the
reservoir was operated to min~m~ze environmental impacts from daily
flow fluctuations. These two sets of operation are described in the
following paragraphs.
without Constraints
Based on the analysis of future system load characteristics
discussed in Chapter III, typical daily load curves were derived for
each month, and average monthly load factors were computed for the
period 1986-1991. These daily load curves, for peak day and
weekend, are presented in Exhibit 28. Resulting minimum, maximum,
and average flow releases when the Project would be completely
absorbed are presented on page 1 of Exhibit 16. Using the 30 years
of synthesized monthly flow data and the other input mentioned
earlier, monthly reservoir elevations were computed by the program,
and are presented on pages 2 and 3 of Exhibit 16. The capacities
shown on the exhibit correspond to 24-hour continuous capacities.
With Constraints
In order to reduce the potential environmental impacts, the
release regime was modified by decreasing maximum discharge and/or
increasing minimum discharge during certain months. Those months
are identified as important for salmon spawning (July through
November) and incubation (December through May). A detailed
11-8
description and explanation of these modifications is presented in
Chapter VI. However, after more detailed information on fish
habitat becomes available through the continuing studies, the
modified flow regime may require refinement in order to assure that
downstream fisheries impacts are reduced to a minimum. Under the
present . modifications, the resulting flow releases are also
presented on page 1 of Exhibit 16. Pages 4 and 5 of this exhibit
present the results of the computer program for various exceedence
levels.
Power an~ Energy Generation
Power operation studies were made to demonstrate the ability of
the Project to meet power and environmental requirements. The power
and energy available with and without any constraints are presented
in the following paragraphs. The "with constraints" case is the
selected operation regime. Ongoing monitoring studies may provide
reason to refine this regime. Extent of refinements will be based
upon the amount and quality of spawning and rearing habitat used by
salmon upstream of Black Lake.
without Constraints
Based on the reservoir operation study, the firm annual power
available is equal to 6,000 kW. This result corresponds to an
exceedance level of 28 out of 30 years, which gives an acceptable
level of firm power and energy. When the Project is fully absorbed,
the total average annual energy available is equal to 23,700 MWh.
Exhibit 17 shows the monthly firm capacities, and average monthly
energy generation.
~ith Constraints
The limitations on maximum flow releases, mentioned earlier
will reduce the firm power available from the Project. As shown in
Exhibit 17, the major reduction is in August. Although the firm
annual capacity is reduced to 4,000 kW, a peak demand of 5,000 kW
can be provided during the months of July and september. The
difference between the future load demands and the peaking power
available from the Project will be met by the existing diesel units
which will be kept as standby reserve units. The limitations on
daily flow fluctuations will also reduce the energy available during
some months. But the excess water will provide extra generation for
some other months. As a result, the average energy is also equal to
23,700 MWh, when the Project is fully absorbed.
II-9
CHAPTER III
ELECTRIC POWER MARKET
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to assess the future electric
power and energy demand of the power market area. The market area
includes the villages of Craig, Klawock and Hydaburg, the logging
camp at Thorne Bay, and the ferry terminal of Hollis. All these
communities are within 25 miles of the project boundaries, and are
shown on Exhibit 1.
A general description of the historical background of these
communities and their population, is presented. The major economic
activities and their potential developments are discussed. Total
energy consumption is analized as a basis for determining the demand
for electricity. Electric energy uses are analyzed and projections
are made. Finally, a sensitivity analysis describes the impacts of
major changes in socioeconomic projections and uses of electricity.
Background 2nQ population
Two Indian tribes, the Tlingits and the Haidas, have populated
the project area for many years. The Tlingits dominated the region
of Southeast Alaska, including Prince of Wales Island until the 18th
Century. The Haidas' movement into the area started in the
17th century from their home on the Queen Charlotte Islands to the
abandoned village of Kaigani on Dall Island. Around the middle of
the 18th century, they established villages on the southern shores
of Prince of Wales Island after some conflict with the established
Tlingits. The earliest contact between Indians and European
cultures occured at the end of the 18th century.
During the years following the 1867 transfer of authority from
Russia to the united States, the subsistence economy of the Tlingits
and Haidas came increasingly under the influence of missionary and
trade activity. Since that time, the population on Prince of Wales
Island has increased and decreased over the years in line with
activity in the area's major industries: fishing and forestry.
During the early part of the twentieth century, population generally
increased, and reached a peak before World War II. After that time,
population entered a period during which declining salmon catches
resulted in fewer persons residing in the study area. The decline
continued until the mid-1960's at which time increased activity in
III-l
the forestry and fishing
increase again •
industries caused the population to
On December 18, 1971, the u.s. Congress passed the Alaska
Native Claims settlement Act. This Act provided for creation of
Alaska Native village and regional corporations, and gave the Alaska
Eskimos, Aleuts and Indians nearly one billion dollars, and the
right to select 44 millions acres of land. Each regional
corporation also has title to all assets and resources on lands it
selected plus the subsurface rights to lands selected by village
corporations. On Prince of Wales Island, the regional corporation
(Sealaska) owns about 95,000 acres of land near the villages of
Craig, Klawock and Hydaburg. Each village corporation (Shaan-Seet,
Klawock Heenya, Haida, respectively) has surface rights on
23,000 acres of land it selected. These corporations are developing
the necessary organizations to provide opportunity for economic
growth in the area.
Ethnically, there is a great diversity between the villages.
In 1970, about 90~ of Klawock's residents were reported as Alaskan
Native (mostly Tlingits). This percentage was about the same for
Hydaburg with the Natives being mostly Haidas. In Craig, 58% were
Alaskan Natives (Tlingits and Haidas). Most population gro~th since
then has been mainly the result of immigration so it is likely that
the percentage of native populations has fallen. Thorne Bay is a
logging camp of the Louisiana Pacific Corporation, and as shown on
Exhibit 18, its population has been decreasing. Hollis was also a
logging camp before 1962 but since then, there has been only a ferry
terminal and a u.s. Forest Service Camp, with a maximum of 50 people
at the Young People's Occupational Center. However, the recent sale
of residential land parcels in the area by the state of Alaska will
probably generate new activities in the area.
Total population also tends to vary from season to season. In
the summer, a large number of persons come into the area for
seasonal work in logging camps, fish processing plants and on
fishing boats. Other year-round residents of the area may leave to
go to other locations for employment. Though the number may vary
considerably from year to year, total population has recently often
increased during the summer months by as much as 30% over the
year-round level.
111-2
Economics
Socioeconomic Conditions
Exhibit 19 summarizes the total personal income £y major
industry for the period 1973-1978 on Prince of Wales Island. The
exhibit also presents the per capita personal income for Prince of
Wales, Alaska, and the United states.
Fishing and logging have long been the major income-producing
activities. Reported under manufacturing, they represent a£out 70%
of the total income. This income is subject to the varying
conditions existing in the respective industries. From an income of
about $9,500,000 in 1974, it decreased to about $6,900,000 in 1976,
then increased to $12,600,000 in 1978. Federal, state, and local
governments provide the second source of income which has steadily
increased from about $1,600,000 in 1973 to $3,400,000 in 1978; an
average annual growth rate of 16%. Much of this increase is
believed to have occurred as a result of improvements in community
services. Although retail trade is a minor income-producing sector,
it has increased at an annual average annual rate of about 24~, from
$165,000 in 1973 to $492,000 in 1978.
The per capita personal income in Prince of Wales Island is
severely affected by the fisheries and forest products industries.
As a result, it does not follow the general trend of the state or
national level. In 1973, the per capita income for Prince of Wales
Island was $6,439, or about 6% above the state level and 30% above
the national average. In 1979, the per capita income was only
$7,025, about 35% below the state level and 10% below the national
level.
Monthly employment by industry for 1979, in Prince of Wales
Island is presented in Exhibit 20. The employment rate in the
fishing and logging industries falls off in winter and peaks in
July-August. In 1979, it varied between 121 in 3anuary and 643 in
August. The employment in the other sectors is more stable
throughout the year, and averages 260, including about 180 for the
federal, state and local governments.
Major Economic Activities
Historical and potential developments of the major economic
activities are presented in the following paragraphs.
Fisheries: On Prince of Wales Island,the first cannery started in
Klawock in 1878. A second cannery was started in 1920, and a third
in 1924. These canneries were run by several companies over the
years, and have fallen into ruins. Today, Klawock Heenya Village
corporation has entered into a joint venture contract with Sealaska
111-3
to run the existing cannery. This activity is expected to employ
60 people during the peak season. A new large state-operated
hatchery was completed in 1978, near the site of a former salmon
hatchery that operated from 1887 until 1917. The hatchery is
operating only at about 10% of its full capacity because the salmon
runs, in Klawock River, are poor. Plans for a bottomfish industry
and a specialty processing plant are under study.
In Craig, a cold storage facility began freezing fish in the
spring of 1911. The following year, Craig had the second largest
sia.lmon cannery in Alaska. However, by the mid-1960' s, Craig was a
slowly dying fishing village. Salmon runs were poor and canneries
at Steamboat Bay and waterfall were finally forced to close. A new
cold storage facility opened in 1969 and continued its operation
until it burned in the spring of 1980. Plans are under way to
rebuild the facility which could employ more than 50 people during
the peak season.
Although fishing was the main occupation on the west coast of
Prince of Wales, Hydaburg did not get its first processing plant
until 1927. Recently, Sealaska bought Ocean Beauty Seafoods, which
owned the existing cold storage plant. The Haida Village
Corporation has leased the plant and plans to hire 30 to 40 people
during the peak season. A specialty seafood plant is under
construction and is expected to operate year-round with a labor
force of 50 people during the peak season.
There are no fish processing facilities in either Thorne Bay or
Hollis, and none are under consideration.
Forest Products: Prince of Wales Island is abundantly endowed with
commercially marketable stands of hemlock, spruce and cedar. Close
proximity to major saw and pulp mills in Ketchikan and Annette
Island has led to fairly intensive management and harvesting of
timber in the eastern part of the island near Hollis and Thorne Bay
by the Louisiana Pacific Corporation. On the west coast, sawmills,
an essential part of cannery complexes, supplied salmon packing
boxes and also lumber for local needs. In Craig, a sawmill operated
for many years and during both world wars providing high-grade
spruce for use in airplane construction. But without wartime
contracts, the sawmill was closed. In 1971, construction began in
Klawock, of the Alaska Timber Corporation sawmill which now employs
about 60 people.
With the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, local and
regional corporations are entitled to land ownership and are
planning the development of the forest resources. The regional
corporation (Sealaska) plans to increase its actual annual
harvesting operation of about 33 million board feet (MMBF) to
70 MMBF in the next three years, then to 120-150 MMBF in the
Craig/Klawock area for the next ten years. sealaska is also
111-4
planning a timber harvest of 50 to 70 MMBF for the next ten years
in the Hydaburg area, and as much as 300 MMBF on the nearby Dall
Island. Each village corporation is expected to cut 30 to 40 MMBF
annually.
As a consequence of the timber harvest developments, a
mUlti-purpose dock will be finished by mid-1981 on Klawock Island,
and another dock with an industrial park is planned for Hydaburg.
These projects provide local jobs and eventually employ personnel
on a yearly basis. In addition a chip plant is under consideration
for Hydaburg, and other small forest products industries such as a
cedar mill, a salvage mill, a shingle and shake mill, etc. are
expected to be progressively developed in the area.
Another major development derived from the wood industry -an
ethanol producing plant -is under consideration by Sealaska
corporation, but a detailed feasibility study has not yet been
conducted. That project would be located near one of the villages,
would require a power of 20 to 40 MW, and employ as much as
400 people.
Discussions with the Louisiana Pacific Corporation have
indicated a continuation of their logging activities in Thorne Bay.
In Hollis, the activities are now reduced to the u.s. Forest Service
camp. However, recent sale of land parcels will probably increase
the population, generate housing construction activities, and
revive some logging activities.
other Activities: In general, state and local government have
increased rapidly during the past decade. The rise can be
attributed to several major factors. First is the need to serve a
growing population. Second, the rise is probably part of a larger
nationwide trend of increased responsibilities and financial
resources being returned to state and local government by the
federal government. Finally, increased levels of public services
are being provided beyond those previously supplied. Examples
include parks, playgrounds, better roads, community centers,
libraries, and improved fire and police protection.
The majority of federal employment on Prince of Wales is
provided by the u.s. Forest Service. Forest service employees plan
and implement projects (such as sales of standing timber or road
construction), and maintain the island's forest in a caretaker
status. The development of three ranger districts is planned for
Prince of Wales with Craig as the headquarters, one center in Thorne
Bay and another in the north of the island. Each center would
consist of 15 to 25 persons.
As a result of timber harvest developments, road and dock
construction are already under way in Klawock and Hydaburg. In
addition, a fairly significant amount of new housing construction
III-5
has occured recently, in large part due to a public housing project
of the u.s. Department of Housing and Urban Development, as well as
private housing investment. This trend is expected to continue in
the future to serve the population growth and to provide housing,
offices, storage buidings, workshops, etc. for the various projects.
A potentially important activity on Prince of Wales is mining
of hard rock minerals, such as copper, gold, silver, lead and zinc.
Mining was an important activity at the turn of the century, but the
remaining known deposits are of low grade, and are not financially
attractive. Other activities such as services and trade have grown
rapidly during the last half decade. A portion of the growth can
also be attributed to tourists and visitors. Although, there are no
specific data kept on tourism, it is a fast growing sector in
southeast Alaska. Much has been done recently to increase the
accessibility of Prince of Wales Island to visitors through ferry,
float planes, road and lodging improvements.
Future Economic Activity
To provide a basis for the projections of future electric power
and energy demand, an estimate of future demographic and economic
activities is presented. This estimate is based on the best
available data and assumptions to insure a global development of the
communities.
The regional and village native corporations are expected to be
the major component of the economic development. Assuming the
realization of their timber harvesting objectives, about 300 MMBF
would be harvested during 1985 in the Craig-Klawock-Hydaburg area.
This represents about 60% of the total Alaska timber harvest in
1979, and would require a work force of about 800 persons. It is
not likely that such an objective would be achieved, especially when
another annual harvest of 300 MMBF is under consideration by
sealaska for the nearby Dall Island. This would more than double
the actual harvest in Alaska. And, although a logging training
center is under consideration in Hydaburg, the availability of
qualified personnel might be a major constraint. As a more
realistic approach, an annual harvest of 100 MMBF is expected by
1986, in the Craig -Klawock -Hydaburg area.
The chip plant, which is under consideration for Hydaburg, is
expected to be in operation by 1986 along with some other small
forest products industries mentionned earlier. The realization of
the ethanol plant is beyond the scope of this study. It would
completely change the projections for the area. Furthermore, the
power demand of a minimum of 20 MW is well beyond the capacity of
any hydropower site on Prince of Wales Island, and nothing is yet
known on the possibilities of co-generation or the uses of ethanol.
III-6
Fishing industries require a relatively small number of natural
and man-made resources to fUnction effectively. However, to provide
a favorable environment for continued development, the following
resources are required:
Availability of fishing grounds, adequate abundance of
harvestable fish, shellfish, food sources and spawning and
rearing areas are critical to continued fishing success.
Fishing processing also requires a great deal of fresh
water for icemaking and processing the fish. The existing
water supply and distribution systems in the communities
are generally inadequate and could greatly reduce any
future development if not properly maintained and
expanded.
As fish processing plants consume large amounts of
electricity to operate machinery and refrigeration
equipment, the lower the cost of electricity is, the more
competitive the operation becomes.
Recently imposed state and federal controls on disposal of
sewage will prohibit the practice of dumping fish waste
into bays. Alternative means of disposal will have to be
found, which may impose financial hardship on some plants.
For these reasons a "boom" is not expected in the fishing
industries, but rather a continued and moderate growth is planned.
In addition to the existing facilities, the rebuilding of the cold
storage plant in craig and the specialty seafoods plant in Hydaburg,
a bottomfish industry is expected to be developed in Craig or
Klawock. Moderate annual production increases (3 to 4%) are planned
for the cannery and cold storage operations.
Another major potential activity is the mining sector. Mineral
exploration work has been underway on Prince of Wales Island for
the past five years and is presently continuing. However, decisions
of whether or when to proceed with mineral development have not been
made by the private sector. For the purposes of this study, no
power demand is planned in this sector. other activities such as
housing construction, trade and services are most likely to increase
rapidly due to the industrial developments. Tourism is also
expected to provide additional income and employment. A hotel or a
lodge is under consideration in Hydaburg.
Although the communities now have limited revenues, the
increased industrial and commercial activities are expected to
provide additional income to improve community facilities. with the
rapid population increase during the last few years, a number of
public services such as water supply, sewer systems, road
construction and maintenance, fire protection, etc., are generally
inadequate and require large financial investments. Feasibility
III-7
studies are already under way, but funds available from the
Economic Development Administration (EDA) or other federal agencies
might be greatly reduced in the future. As a result, these
communities are not likely to offer the same standards of living as
Ketchikan or Juneau, and a conservative population growth rate is
projected. Because of the greater concentration of forest products
industries and potential developments on Dall Island, the community
of Hydaburg is expected to increase at a higher populaticn growth
rate than Craig or Klawock. Population forecasts are presented in
Exhibit 18. These forecasts include only the year-round residents.
As mentioned earlier, the summer population can increase by as much
as 30~. However, most of the additional summer residents come into
the area for seasonal work in logging camps or fishing boats, and do
not cause a great increase in electrical demand. For this reason,
the additional summer residents are not included in the population
forecasts. For the period 1979-1986, an average annual rate of 6~
was estimated for the population of Hydaburg and 4% for Craig and
Klawock. For the period 1986-2001, an average annual rate of 4~ was
estimated for Hydaburg, and 2~ for Craig and Klawock.
In Hollis and Thorne Bay, there are no new industries under
consideration, and none are expected in this forecast. Although it
is not feasible, at this time, to project all the definite impacts
of the sale of land parcels in Hollis, it is expected that there
will be a high increase in population and activities during the
summer months when the land owners come for vacation or recreation.
An average annual resident population growth rate of 5~ is expected
in the future. For Thorne Bay, the logging activities are most
likely to continue, and a ranger district is assummed to be
developed by the u.s. Forest Service. An annual population growth
rate of 2~ is forecasted. The results are presented in Exhibit 18.
Energy Sector
Energy Consumption
An energy-use inventory was conducted in order to gain an
understanding of the total energy consumption, and the relative
importance of electricity. Table 1II-1 shows the fuel consumption
by fuel type and end-use for the year 1980. Approximately,
1,600,000 gallons of diesel oil, 850,000 gallons of fuel oil, and
300,000 gallons of gasoline were consumed in the villages of Craig,
Klawock, and Hydaburg. This represents a per capita fuel
consumption of about 2,000 gallons. In addition, about 20,000
gallons of propane were sold in 1980, mainly for cooking and water
heating, and an estimate of 2,500 tons of wood were consumed for
cooking and heating. The winter of 1980-81 was the first large
scale use of wood burning stoves in the Tlingit-Haida Housing
1II-8
Authority villages.
future.
This trend is expected to continue in the
TABLE 111-1
FUEL CONSUMPTION
FOR CR~IG, KLAWOCK AND HYDABURG
Diesel
Electric Utilities
Industries:
Electrical Generation
Other Uses
Transportation
Subtotal
Fuel Oil
Residential
Commercial heating
Schools
Public Buildings & Misc.
Subtotal
Gasoline
Transportation
wood
Residential
Gas
Residential
Total
YEAR 1980
Gallons
450,000
250,000
200,000
700,000
1,600,000
450,000
100,000
100,000
200,000
850,000
300,000
160,0001/
20,000
2,930,000
1/ Fuel Oil Equivalent of 2,500 tons of Wood.
III-9
~ of Total
15.4
8.5
6.8
ll:..2
55.6
15.4
3.4
3.4
...h~
29.0
10.2
5.5
0.7
10 0.0
Energy Balance
Exhibit 21 presents the energy balance. In order to be able to
compare the consumption of different end-uses, the fuels were
reduced to a common denominator, the British thermal unit (Btu).
The total annual energy consumption equals 430 billion Btu,
representing a per capita consumption of 306 million Btu. This
figure is about 15% lower than the average u.s. per capita
consumption. Of these 430 billion Btu, about 60% are lost in
conversion and inefficiency of equipment.
The most important fuel is diesel, accounting for
250 billion Btu, representing nearly 60% of the total consumption.
The end-users for diesel are mainly electrical generation and
transportation. The total fuel consumption for electricity
represents about a fourth of the total consumption. The conversion
and transmission losses cause electricity to represent only 15% of
the "useful" energy. With the recent developments in timber
harvesting, the needs for diesel fuel are increasing rapidly in the
transportation sector.
The next most important fuel is heating oil, accounting for
28%. It is used for space and water heating, and also for cooking
purposes. However, with the increasing price of oil, wood is
becoming more and more attractive. The new wood stoves are very
efficient, and it is likely that wood will become a major energy
source in the residential sector. The other major fuel is gasoline
for local transportation. It accounted for about 10% of the total
consumption.
glectric Powe~ Sector
Existing Systems
All electric power in the project area is generated by small
diesel-electric units. The power is distributed from the
powerstations and there are no transmission lines between the
villages or interconnections with other areas. Klawock is served by
the Tlingit and Haida Regional Electrical Authority (THREA), a rural
electric utility with offices in Juneau, Alaska, which serves five
villages in southeast Alaska. It also serves the Klawock cannery,
but not the Alaska Timber Corporation (ATC) which has its own
generating capabilities. craig and Hydaburg are served by the
Alaska Power and Telephone Company (APT), an investor owned utility
company with offices in Port Townsend, Washington. The company
serves two other towns in Alaska. The cold storage facilities in
Craig and Hydaburg have their own diesel-electric generating units.
Louisiana Pacific Corporation serves its logging camp at Thorne Bay,
III-10
and the u.s. Forest Service has its own small generating units for
Hollis. Exhibit 22 lists the generating units serving each area.
Historical Electric Energy Use
Three years of historical data
provided by THREA for the village of
presented in the Table III-2.
Table III-2
by consumer categories were
Klawock. These data are
HISTORICA.L DA.TA. BY CONSUMER CATEGORY
KLAWOCK
1977 1978 1979
Energy Consumption (kWh)
Residential 221,492 337,417 348,661
Small Commercial 330,758 242,628 198,549
Large Commercial 0 190,080 294,640
Public Buildings 0 0 225,393
Total 552,250 753,395 1,067,243
Number of Customers
Residential 70 72 73
Small Commercial 20 22 12
Large Commercial 0 1 2
Public Buildings 0 0 11
Total 90 95 98
The residential electric energy consumption per customer
increased from about 4,700 kWh in 1978 to 4,800 kWh in 1979
representing a 2% increase. Per capita residential electric energy
consumption was about the same in the other villages of Craig and
Hydaburg. A.s a comparison, the national average residential
consumption per customer was about 8,800 kWh in 1979. Because of
the lack of reliable and detailed data, it was not possible to
derive any other historical trend for other consumer categories.
Historical data on total electric energy sales by the electric
utilities (APT and THREA) are presented in Exhibit 23. These data
correspond to the electric energy consumption in the
residential-commercial sector (the amount of energy provided by
1II-11
THREA to the Klawock cannery was estimated and deducted}. It also
includes the electric energy consumption in the public buildings.
Using the population data presented in Exhibit 18, the per
capita consumption increased at an average annual rate of about 8%
during the period 1973-1979 for the two villages of Craig and
Hydaburg. This high growth rate can be explained by a greater use
of electric appliances in the residential sector, but also by a
greater demand in the public sector.
Exhibit 2q presents the monthly
The maximum electric energy consumption
and Hydaburg, and in February for
either in July or August.
Future Electric Demand
>
energy consumption for 1979.
was in January for Klawock
Craig. The lowest demand is
The projections of electric power and energy demand are based
on the considerations discussed in the socioeconomic section, and
the description of the future economic activities. It reflects a
continued growth in employment, population, and levels of income and
services that will enhance new investment in housing and commercial
enterprise. It includes the effects of conservation measures and
improvements in electric appliances. This forecast is further
discussed in the sensitivity analysis which examines more closely
the possibilities for either a substantial downturn or expansion of
the local economy, and the opportunities for greater conversion to
electric energy.
Because of the limited reliable data on end user categories,
the forecast is based on estimated growth in two sectors: (1) the
residential-commercial sector which is now served by the electric
uti1ities (APT and THREA); and (2) the industrial sector which is
now served by the industries themselves, except for the Klawock
Cannery which is served by the THREA. In that case, the peak and
energy demand for the cannery is estimated and deducted from the
THREA data. The power and energy requirements for the Alaska Timber
Corporation (ATC) are not included in this forecast because it is
assumed that ATC will have its own wood-fired generating capacity.
Residential-Commercial sector: The development of industrial
activities will result in new housing development, commercial
activities and needs of more public services. However, electricity
is now mostly used for lighting, and very seldom for heating or
cooking. This trend is not expected to change in tr.e near future,
because of the increasing installation of efficient wood-stoves and
the availability of wood at very low cost. In addition, the new
housing development will most likely be provided with more
energy-efficient appliances. As a result, the per capita electric
energy consumption is expected to increase at an annual average
111-12
growth rate of 4% during the period 1979-1986, and 3% for 1986-2001
for the villages of Klawock and Hydaburg. In Craig, the 1979 per
capita consumption is about 25~ higher. For that reason, the per
capita consumption for the village of Craig is only expected to
increase at an annual average rate of 3% during the period
1979-1986, then at 2%. The energy consumption is computed using the
per capita consumption and the population forecast presented in
Exhibit 18. The results are presented in Exhibit 25.
To further reflect the effects of load management, peak shaving
and conservation programs, the annual load factor was increased from
45~ in 1979 to 48% for 1986-1991, and 50% for 1996-2001. The peak
demands for each village is computed using these load factors.
Industrial Sector: Based on the previous description of future
industrial developments in the fisheries and forest products
industries, a forecast of power requirements was develo~ed. The
1986 demand was estimated assuming that some projects now under
study will be in operation. Such projects include the chip plant
and the industrial park in Hydaburg as well as the operation of the
specialty seafood plant. In Craig, the reconstruction and the full
operation of the cold storage facilities are assumed. In Klawock,
the cannery and a small bottomfish processing plant are expected to
be in operation. In both craig and Klawock, some related activities
on forest products such as the dock on Klawock Island are likely to
require power. The forecasts are developed separately for the
fisheries industries and the forest products industries, and are
presented in Exhibit 26. After 1986, a continued growth for these
industries are assumed without any new major industries coming into
the area. An annual power demand increase of 4% is expected for the
fisheries industries and 5% for the forest products industries
during the period 1986-1991. For the next decade, a 2% was assumed
for the fisheries, and 3% for the forest product industries.
To reflect the effects of load management and conservation
measures, the annual load factor is expected to increase from 35~ in
1979 to 40% for 1986-1991, and 42% for 1996-2001.
For Thorne Bay and Hollis, no major new industries are expected
in this forecast. As a result, there is no projection for
industrial load. However the demand is expected to increase due to
the projections of population growth. The only existing data
available is the peak demand at Thorne Bay, which was equal to
460 kw in 1980. With a load factor of about 40% and a population of
300, the per capita consumption was equal to about 5,370 kWh in
1980. The same per capita consumption is assumed for both
communities. Because this estimate is relatively high if compared
to the other villages, the per capita consumption is only expected
to increase at an annual average rate of 2% until 1986, then 1%.
The energy demands are computed using these per cap1~a consumption
and the population forecast presented in Exhibit 18. The peak
111-13
demands are computed using
1986-1991, and 45~ for
Exhibits 25 and 26.
an annual
1996-2001.
load factor of 42.5% for
The results are presented in
The power market forecast is shown graphically in Exhicit 27.
Load Characteristics
The purpose of this section is to estimate the future load
characteristics of the Craig-Klawock-Hydaburg interconnection, and
derive typical daily load curves for each month of the year. These
curves are used for the determination of monthly peak and energy
demands and the simulation of reservoir operations described
earlier. These load characteristics are based on the assumptions
and projections made, regarding the future economic activities and
electric power demand for the period 1986-1991. As in the
projections of future electric demand, typical loads were analyzed
for both the residential-commercial sector, and the industrial
sector.
Residential-Commercial Load: Based on an analysis of daily peak
demands obtained for KlaWOCk and other similar villages in Southeast
Alaska, the monthly loads can be grouped into three typical seasons
which are likely to have the following characteristics:
Winter Season: November, December, January, and February.
The peak demand is equal to the annual peak.
Summer Season: May, June, July, and August. The peak
demand is equal to 80% of the annual peak.
Off Season: March, April, September, and Octocer. The
peak demand is equal to 85% of the annual peak.
Page 1 of Exhibit 28 presents typical daily curves in the
residential-commercial sector. Both peak day and typical weekend
day are presented for each season.
Industrial Load: With the introduction of new industries such as
the specialty seafood plant, the bottomfish industry, and some
forest products activities which are expected to operate nearly year
around, the monthly loads can be grouped into four typical seasons
which have the following characteristics:
Season I: December and January. The peak demand is equal to
25% of the annual peak.
111-14
Season II: February, March and April. The forest products
industries are operating at 50% of their capacity, and the fisheries
industries at 25~.
Season III: May, June, October, and November. The forest
products industries are operating at 100% of their capacity, and the
fisheries industries at about 50% (there are no cold storage
operations during this season).
Season IV: July, August, and September. It is the pea~J season
for both industries.
Page 2 of Exhibit 28 presents typical daily
industrial sector. Both weekday and weekend day are
each season.
curves in the
presented for
§ystem Load: By combining the daily load curves of the
residential-commercial sector and the industrial sector, typical
daily load curves for the entire system were derived. For each
month, typical peak day and weekend day load curves are presented on
pages 3 and 4 of Exhibit 28. From these load curves, average
monthly load factors were computed. These monthly load factors were
used in the monthly reservoir operation studies, and are equal to an
average of 30% of the months of December, January, February, March,
and April; an average of 45~ for the months of May, June, October,
and November, and an average of 60% for the months of July, August,
and september.
~sitivity Analysis
The projections of future electric demand presented in this
chapter are based on numerous factors, each of which is sensitive to
public preference, economics of energy use, and changes in domestic
and international policies. Many variations could be analyzed.
However, of particular importance are the variations in projected
population growth rates, per capita consumption, and some major
industrial loads. For reasons stated earlier, the effects of major
developments in the mining sector or construction of an ethanol
plant have not been included in this analysis.
Residential-Commercial ~~: A change in population growth would
definitely affect the residential-commercial projections. Table
III-3 indicates what effects selected changes in population growth
rates would have on the projection of electric energy consumption
for the villages of Craig, Klawock, and Hydaburg. A change of 50%
in the annual population growth rate, during the period 1979-2001,
would create a 44~ change for the electric energy demand in year
2001. Similarly a change of 15i in population growth rates would
affect the energy demand by 12% in year 2001.
III-15
Table III-3
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
POPULATION
Percent Change
in Population Population Energy Demand Peak Demand
G rowt~ Rate s in Y~2001 !~ar 2001 in Year 2001
% MWh kW
-50 1,573 7,705 1,760
-15 2,474 12,100 2,760
0 2,820 13,780 3,140
+15 3,166 15,460 3,530
+50 4,067 19,855 4,530
Energy conservation is one of the predominant factors affecting
future electricity demand. For the most part, the conservation
measures, based on the application of existing technology and
practices, which are described in the section of alternative
sources, have been incorporated in the forecast. It is reflected by
the relatively low per capita electric energy consumption, the low
annual growth rate (between 2 and 4%), and an increase in annual
load factors which further reduces the peak demand. However, the
continued increase in energy prices will most likely accelerate new
technologies and new systems using less energy. On the other hand,
the energy may be in different forms: for example, heat pumps
versus wood stoves. The introduction of a large number of heat
pumps would affect the residential consumption. The typical per
capita electricity consumption for an all-electric housing unit of
4 persons would most likely increase to about 6,000 kWh per year.
Table 111-4 indicates what effects selected changes in per capita
electricity consumption growth rates would have on the prOjection of
electric energy consumption for the villages of Craig, Klawock, and
Hydaburg. A change of 50% in the annual growth rate, during the
period 1979-2001, would create a 36% change for the electric energy
demand in year 2001. Similarly a change of 15% would affect the
energy demand by 10% in year 2001.
111-16
Table 111-4
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION
Percent Change
in Per Capita Per Capita
Consumption Consumption Energy Demand Peak Demand
Growth Rates in Year 2001 in Year 2001 in Year 2001
~ kwh MWh kW
-50 3,115 8,770 2,000
-15 4,420 12,440 2,840
0 4,890 13,780 3,140
+15 5,360 15,120 3,450
+50 6,665 18,790 4,290
With the implementation of load management techniques, and a
shift of some electric loads from peak to off-peak periods, the
annual load factor is expected to increase from 45% to 50%. For
each increment of 1% below or above the planned annual load factor
of 50%, the peak demand would increase or decrease by about 2%.
Industrial Sector: The major change in the industrial load is due
to the chip plant in Hydaburg, and other related forest products
industries. In 1986, the forecasted peak demand, for the forest
products industries, is expected to represent a third of the total
demand. Since there are no definite commitments, for these
projects, it is difficult, at this time, to assess the sensitivity
of these loads. However, a downturn of world markets would most
certainly reduce or delay the implementation of these projects.
For the fisheries industries, most of the future demand is
derived from a continued growth of the existing plants. Unless a
new industry is implemented or the fish catches are very ~oor, the
forecasted peak demand is not expected to vary greatly.
To conclude, if economic activities were to exceed the
assumptions made in this chapter, the industrial load would increase
and create a greater ~opulation growth rate, and most likely a
greater per capita electric power consumption. Assuming a 15
percent change in population and per capita electric energy
consumption growth rates, the residential-commercial demand would
111-17
increase by about 23 percent. Conversely, if there is a major
downturn in the local economy due to a recession in forest products
markets, the forecasted peak and energy demand could decrease as
much as 30 percent.
Assuming that the Black Bear Lake Project will start operation
in early 1986, the installed capacity would be absorbed within
3 years if the economic activities were to exceed the assumptions,
and about 12 years if the local economy shows a downturn.
I11-18
CHAPTER IV
ECONOMIC EVALUATION
MethodolQ9Y
A description of the alternative sources of power is presented
in this chapter, followed by the economic evaluation of the Black
Bear Lake Project. From these alternatives, three expansion plans
were selected according to the guidelines of the Alaska Power
Authority (APA). The "base case" would meet the forecasted
requirements of the area from a continuation of present practices of
diesel generation. The "preferred plan" would consist of, first,
the development of the Black Bear Lake, then the Lake Mellen
hydropower projects. The "second most preferred plan" would consist
of, first, the development of Lake Mellen, then Black Eear Lake.
After a presentation of the economic criteria selected by the APA, a
detailed benefit-cost analysis and a life-cycle cost of energy study
are presented for each expansion plan. Cash flow requirements are
then presented for the construction of Black Eear Lake.
Hydro
Two other hydropower potential sites were identified on Prince
of Wales Island. They are Reynolds Creek and Thorne Bay.
Reconnaissance level studies were undertaken for these sites as part
of the investigation of alternatives. A detailed presentation of
each project with its description, environmental impacts, geologic
and hydrologic data, and its costs are shown in Appendices C and D.
Below is a summary of these two hydropower sites.
Reynolds Creek. Reynolds Creek is located about 9 miles east of the
town of Hydaburg. The creek drains into Copper Harbor, a bay on
Hetta Inlet. The creek drains three lakes: Lake Mellen, summit
Lake and Lake Marge. Hydroelectric projects could be developed on
each of the lakes as well as by a transbasin diversion from Lake
Josephine which is located on Portage Creek, the watershed just to
the north of Reynolds Creek.
Reconnaissance visits were made to the Reynolds Creek area in
July 1980 and June 1981. Appendix C documents the results of those
visits and subsequent office studies. The reconnaissance level
IV-1
studies show each of the four projects in the Reynolds Creek
development to be less economical than the Black Bear Lake Project.
The most attractive project in the Reynolds Creek development was
shown to be Lake Mellen, which had a unit cost about twenty-two
percent greater than Black Bear Lake.
The Lake Mellen Project would have a concrete gravity dam with
an uncontrolled spillway section. The spillway crest and maximum
normal reservoir elevation would be El. 930. A buried steel
penstock, 2500 feet in length, would conduct water to the powerhouse
at El. 200. The powerhouse would have two single nozzle impulse
turbines totaling 6,000 kW installed capacity. The average annual
energy production is estimated to be 26,100 Mwh and the construction
cost of the Project is estimated to be $34.2 million at January 1981
price level.
The concept and cost of Lake Mellen Project were based on the
results of the Black Bear Lake Project feasibility study.
Alternative locations for the powerhouse were investigated. To
avoid dewatering of the lower reach of Reynolds Creek which supports
substantial salmonid spawning and rearing habitat, the powerhouse
would be located at El. 200 rather than at tidewater. Reservoir
operation studies and a preliminary optimisation of Lake Mellen
showed that the maximum normal reservoir elevation should be at
El. 930. The Project would consequently have an installed capacity
of 6,000 kW, equal to Black Bear Lake. with that level of installed
capacity, the Lake Mellen Project would produce 26,100 MWh (vs.
23,700 MWh at Black Bear Lake) in an average year and require a
drawdown of 60 feet (vs. 30 feet at Black Bear Lake).
For reasons discussed in Chapter II, an underground water
conductor is proposed for the Black Bear Lake Project. A surface
water conductor was retained at Lake Mellen, however, because the
slope along the conductor route is flatter at Lake Mellen than at
Black Bear Lake. If feasibility level studies of Lake Mellen show
an underground water conductor would be required, that would
increase the cost of the Lake Mellen Project.
A cost estimate was developed for the Lake Mellen Project based
on feasibility level unit prices developed for the Black Bear Lake
Project. The Lake Mellen Project is estimated to cost $34.2 million
at January 1981 price level including transmission to Craig, Klawock
and Hydaburg, contingencies, engineering and administration.
A comparison of the Lake Mellen Project with Black Bear Lake is
presented later in this chapter.
Thorne Bay. The Thorne Bay Project is located at the head of thorne
Bay on the Thorne River which flows into Clarence Strait. The
project would have an installed capacity of 17,300 kW and produce
75,800 MWh in an average year. A memorandum dated March 25, 1981,
IV-2
shown in Appendix D documents the results of
assessment which was made of the Thorne Bay Project.
that assessment show the Thorne Bay Project to be
than the Black Bear Lake Project.
Diesel
a preliminary
The results of
less attractive
At present the entire load in the project area is met by diesel
generating units. Diesel units have low construction costs, short
lead time, and minimal siting problems. They have reliable and
rapid starting characteristics. They can be brought to full load
rapidly, or follow the load demand. However, diesel engines have a
relatively high forced outage rate (typically 29%) compared to the
rate for hydroelectric units (2%). Diesel engines also require more
routine maintenance than hydroelectric turbines. Typically, diesel
engines are normally dismantled for inspection and overhauled after
8,000 hours of operation.
A detailed
presented later
expansion plans.
description of construction and operating costs is
in the "base case" section of the alternative
The Alaska Timber Corporatiog Project: Because of the abundant
supply of wood-waste from its sawmill operation, the Alaska Timber
Corporation (ATe) has purchased in 1977 four 40,000 lb/hr boilers,
two 2,000 kw and one 2,500 kw steam-turbine electric generating
units from the u.s. Army. The units were originally built in the
mid-1950's, were oil-fired, and equipped for salt water cooling.
ATC has contracted with a construction engineering company to assist
them in putting the units on line. At present, ATe has entered a
contract with THREA to sell secondary energy to Klawock at 10t per
kwh for six months after the first 2.0 MW unit comes on line then
readjusted based on ATC's real cost. The mill will use 1,500 kW of
capacity leaving 500 kw of capacity available to serve Klawock. The
following analysis was made to estimate the cost of energy from the
ATC project.
Wood-waste fuel for the plant would be obtained from the
existing stockpile of sawdust and the new wastes generated by the
sawmill's operation. The sawmill generates about 200 tons per day
of sawdust and bark, and an additional 200 tons per day of chips
when the mill is in full operation. The chips presently are being
sold for pulp, however they could be diverted to power generation if
economical and if required.
IV-3
The steam plant would require about three pounds of wood waste
for each kilowatt-hour generated, assuming an average heat content
for the wood of about Q,500 Btu/lb. About 53,000 tons of wood waste
would be required annually, if the plant (q,OOO kW) were to operate
at a capacity factor of 50 percent. Assuming that the mill operates
at a plant factor of 30 ~ercent, the mill could generate about
22,000 tons of wood waste annually. The remaining 31,000 tons would
have to come from the stockplile or the chips.
As discussed in the reconnaissance report the total estimated
cost for the stage I which included two boilers and one 2,500 kW
turbine generator was $2,6 million, at september 1, 1979 price
level. Peplacing one 2,500 kW unit with two 2,000 kW units, and
updating the cost to January 1, 1981, the total estimated
construction cost of the ATe plant would be about $3,7 million. The
annual operation and maintenance costs for the ATe plant have been
estimated by K & S. The annual cost updated to January 1, 1981
price level and covering the two 2,000 kw units would be about
$400,000 per year. The operation and maintenance costs include all
labor and materials for routine operation, maintenance, repairs,
fuel handling, and general and administrative costs, but do not
include any fuel cost. Based on a selling price of woodchips for
about $65 per 2400-lb unit, the fuel cost would be about 8 cents per
kilowatt hour when woodchips are used.
K & S estimated that the project has a service life of
15 years. Based on carrying charges of 20.85~ (assumed cost of
money at 15%, amortization at 2.1~, insurance at 0.25~ and taxes at
3.5%), the annual charges for construction would be $771,450.
~dding the operation and maintenance costs, and assuming that half
the energy (8,760 MWh) would be produced by wood chips, the average
cost of energy, at the plant, would be 10.7 cents per kilowatt-hour,
at January 1, 1981 price level.
However, the cost of energy from the ATe project will increase
rapidly due to the impact of inflation on operating and fuel costs.
Assuming an inflation rate of 7%, the energy cost would be equal to
17.6 cents by 1991. With 10% inflation, the energy cost would be
22.3 cents by 1991. These costs are based on the assumptions that
only half the energy would be produced by wood chips. However, when
the wood-waste from the existing stockpile is used, more wood chips
will be required, driving the cost of energy up. other limitations
such as environmental issues, reliability of equipment and adequacy
of fuel supply have not been established. For these reasons, the
ATC project is not expected to provid~ long term reliable low cost
energy.
IV-4
Although there is no known deposit of coal on Prince of Wales
Island, coal could be shipped from Anchorage or seattle. The future
dock facilities on Klawock Island or near Hydaburg could be used for
unloading. However, because a coal-fired plant cannot follow
rapidly the fluctuation of peak demand, diesel units would have to
be used for peaking demand. In addition, environmental constraints,
for cooling water and coal storage, could limit any development.
The construction cost for a 6-MW plant are estimated at $3,330
per kilowatt for Prince of Wales area. Based on $80 per ton
delivered at Klawock or Hydaburg and assuming a heat content of
12,000 Btu per pound and a heat rate of 12,000 Btu/KWh, the fuel
cost would be about 4 cents per kilowatt-hour. The operation and
maintenance costs are estimated at 1.6 cents per kilowatt-hour. All
these costs are at January 1, 1981 price level. This would result
in a 1981 cost of "base" load energy at about 11.4 cents per
kilowatt-hour assuming a load factor of 0.70, a 20-year service life
for the plant and carrying charges of 10.75~ (assumed cost of money
at 8.5~, amortization at 2.0~, insurance at 0.25~, and no taxes).
With a diesel peaking energy cost of about 14 cents, per
kilowatt-hour, the "average" energy cost would be about 12 cents per
kilowatt-hour for 1981. Assuming a 7~ inflation rate and a 3.5~
fuel escalation rate, that average cost of energy would nearly
double within 10 years. For these economic reasons, and for
potential adverse environmental impacts, the coal alternative is not
a viable solution in the long run.
Wind Generation
Windmills have been used for centuries for pumping water and
other purposes. Within the past century, small-scale units have
been used in remote areas to generate electricity. More recently,
large scale wind generators have been installed in various ~arts of
the United states. Several studies and demonstrations projects are
under investigation or operation in Alaska, but no definite or
transferable results are available at this time. Furthermore, for
wind technology to be considered for the area, reliable
site-specific wind data are necessary to evaluate any large-scale
wind generation potential. NOW, there are no stations on Prince of
Wales Island to provide detailed data on wind characteristics. The
nearest station where historical data are available, is on Annette
Island. A summary of the climatological data, for Annette Island,
are presented in Exhibit 29.
The average annual wind speed is about 10.7 m.p.h. which is
just above the minimum speed required for existing large-scale units
to produce power. During the summer months (May to September) which
are the peaking months for power demand, the average speed is below
10 m.p.h. In addition, other issues such as reliability, power and
IV-5
energy storage, operation and maintenance costs, and other problems
related with new technology are difficult to project and require
years of operation to be fully assessed.
Even for small-scale developments (1 to 5 kW), detailed wind
data for specific sites, is required before any decision can be made
on the technical feasibility of such projects. However, because of
the federal energy credit (40% tax reduction up to a maximum of
$4,000), and the possibilities of state incentives {loans up to a
maximum of $10,000 at 5% interest payable in 20 years" these
developments could be financially competitive with other sources of
generation. In addition, a battery system or an interconnection
with the local utility WOuld also be necessary to provide power when
there is no wind.
Solar
solar energy possibilities for Alaska include water and space
heating, and the use of passive solar heating in residential or
commercial buildings. Direct use of solar energy to produce
electricity has not yet found any application in Southeast Alaska.
However, the use of solar energy for water and space heating might
further reduce the overall needs of electricity.
On Prince of Wales Island, there are no historical solar data
available. Data recorded on Annette Island are presented on
Exhibit 29.
Detailed data on solar radiation for Prince of wales would be
necessary to assess more accurately the solar energy potential.
However, based on existing data, the solar energy available is at
its lowest when the demand for space heating would be at its peak,
during the winter months. with an average heating design load of 40
to 60,000 BTU per hour for a typical house in the area, the average
solar radiation of 200 BTU per square feet, during the winter months
cannot provide the necessary heating requirements. Solar energy
could be used as a secondary energy source.
Interconnection
A potential intertie with Ketchikan, using surplus power from
the Swan Lake Hydroelectric Project, has been mentioned as a
possible alternate to development of the Black Bear Lake Project.
Any intertie would involve substantial installations of submarine
cable, with additional requirements for above ground transmission
lines. The line voltages required would be either 69 or 115 kV.
For purposes of analysis, two routes were examined. There are
numerous variations of these schemes possible, but overall costs and
impacts would not be significantly different. The alternate
IV-6
routings are between Ketchikan and Hollis. The routes from Hollis
to Klawock, Craig, and Hydaburg are similar to the line routing
developed for the Black Bear Lake Project.
Alternate 1, from Ketchikan to Hollis, is the most direct
route, and includes two submarine segments (18 miles and one mile).
Alternate 2 is less direct, but would be able to provide
service to Kasaan and could be extended to Thorne Bay. This route
has submarine cable segments of;'; 16 miles and 4 miles.
The costs presented in Table IV-1 include the overhead line and
substations costs to Craig, Klawock, and Hydaburg. The total cost
of Alternate 1 is $22,895,000, and ~23,825,000 for Alternate 2. The
power and energy available from Ketchikan would come from the Swan
Lake Project. As reported in the FERC License Application, the
estimated construction costs of the project is ~76,426,000, or
$4,245 per kilowatt. Assuming the same firm power as Black Bear
Lake which is 4,000 kW, the capacity cost would be $16,980,000.
Adding this cost to the Alternate I gives a total cost of
$39,875,000 which is about 42% greater than the cost of the Black
Bear Lake development. For these reasons, a intertie with Ketchikan
is not economically justified.
TABLE IV-1
INTERCONNECTION COSTS
Alternative 1
Submarine Cable
25~ Construction Contingency
subtotal
Overhead Lines
10% Construction contigency
subtotal
Estimated Total Construction Cost
IV-7
$ 10,000,000
2,500,000
9,450,000
945,000
$ 12,500,000
101.395 ,000
$ 22,895,000
Alternate 1
Submarine Cable
25% Construction Contingency
Subtotal
OVerhead Lines
10% Construction Contigency
Subtotal
Estimated Total Construction Cost
Thorne Bay Extention (Alternate 1 Only)
Estimated Total Construction
Conservation and Load Management
$ 8,500,000
2,125,000
12,000,000
1~200,000
13,200,000
$ 10,625,000
$ 23,825,000
$ 1,350,000
The main areas covered by conservation measures are space
conditioning and water heating, control of lighting, use of energy
efficient equipment, and control of energy wastes. Although space
and water heating contribute, now for less than 10~ of the
electricity demand, this percentage could change in the future due
to the increasing cost of fuel and gas. If so, significant energy
savings can result from the use of heat pumps instead of electric
resistance heaters. Heat pumps are about twice as efficient as
electric resistance heaters. Conservation can also be enhanced by
improved insulation. Various means such as insulating ceilings and
roofs, weatherproofing doors and windows, and caulking cracks can
improve the insulation of existing buildings. For new homes, it is
possible, in addition to these measures, to choose an optimal site
orientation as well as a geometry designed to reduce the adverse
influences of wind.
Different methods suggested to reduce lighting consumption
include design of more efficient light sources, optimization of
window design for daylight, and use of high reflective finishes. In
addition, avoiding the lighting of unoccupied rooms, reducing lamp
intensity levels to an acceptable minimum, and decreasing lighted
advertising are other methods that can cut the use of electricity
for lighting purposes.
Better design of electric appliances will also improve energy
conservation. For industrial operations such as the cold storage
IV-8
facilities, the introduction of an "energy audit" as an explicit and
standard element of cost accounting could result in the reduction of
energy consumption.
All conservation measures are now available. Weatherization
programs for low income housing have been very active in Prince of
Wales Island. During 1980, 26 houses in Hydaburg and 15 houses in
Klawock were weatherized. In addition, tax incentives and favorable
financing conditions from the state legislation should encourage
capital investments to conserve energy.
Conservation can also be done by shifting electrical loads from
peak to off-peak periods. By doing so, it is then possible to use
more energy efficient generating units, and reduce fuel consumption.
The main techniques to obtain this result include the following:
Control of peak demand through voluntary or mandatory
rescheduling of electricity consuming activities
Use of technical device such as thermal energy storage
systems.
Implementation of time dependent, cost-based electric
rates.
Voluntary rescheduling of activities may involve, for example,
turning on an electric clothes dryer at mid-day or late at night
rather than during the hours of intensive demand. However, most of
the activities during peak hours appear difficult to postpone or
advance (e.g. TV shows, cooking, dishwashing ••• ). Mandatory
curtailments are acceptable only under emergency conditions.
Technical devices have been developed, in which residential
loads can be controlled and deferred by a radio signal from a
control center during peak periods or emergency power supply
conditions (ripple control).
Thermal energy storage (TES) systems provide space conditioning
and hot water on demand using off-peak electricity. One type of
TES system consists of two units. A conventional electric furnace
and a heat storage furnace with a refractory core inside an
insulated cabinet are positioned side by side. For eight hours at
night the conventional furnace heats the home while the storage
furnace is charging and storing heat for use the other 16 hours.
Similar hot water storage systems have also been developed. These
sytems are becoming economically attractive in many areas, where
rate differential are available. However, this requires a
differential cost of energy between base and peaking generation,
which is not the case with a hydropower system.
A shift towards a time-of-day (TOO) pricing system would be an
effective method of inducing consumers to direct some usage from
IV-9
peak to off-peak time of the day and would be the necessary
complement to most of the other load management techniques.
Load management techniques and rate revision are under test by
different utilities in the u.s. It is expected that the effects on
total electric energy consumption would be small. However, the
potential effects in the reduction of peak load demand could be
high. For the communities of Prince of wales Island, the ~otential
for peak reduction remains small because two possible peak loads
space conditioning and hot water -constitute less than 10~ of the
electric power demand.
As mentionned in the analysis of the electric power forecast,
conservation measures have been incorporated. Although new
technologies and new systems might further reduce the energy demand,
other alternatives are required to meet the expected demand.
Alternative Expansion Pla~2
Base Case PI2!!
The base case results from a continuation of present practices,
using diesel units. As described in Chapter III, and presented in
Exhibit 22, the total installed capacity is equal to 5,115 kW for
the Craig-Klawock-Hydaburg area. This includes the units from the
electric utilities and the local industries except for the Alaska
Timber Corporation (ATC) which is expected to continue generating
its own electric demand by waste-wood generation. There are no
interconnections between the communities. In addition, four units
totalling 1,040 kW are installed in Thorne Bay, and three units
totalling 300 kw are installed at the U.S.F.S. camp in Hollis.
For purpose of the study and based on estimated remaining life,
the THREA units in Klawock and APT units in Craig are retired in
1986. All the other units are retired in 1996. The new units will
have a service life of 20 years, and will be added when necessary to
maintain a reserve margin at about 20~ of the total estimated peak
demand. Because the construction time is very short, each new unit
can be installed within a few months before its capacity is
required.
Recent offers received by THREA for 400 kW units averaged $235
per kilowat, FOB Seattle, at September 1979 price levels.
Transportation erection, contingencies and engineering would
increase the cost of a unit installed in the project area to about
$690 per kilowatt, at January 1, 1981 price level. Based on a
weighted average energy production of about 9 kWh per gallon, the
fuel cost is equal at SO.11 per kilowatt-hour. The operation and
maintenance (O&M) costs are estimated at $0.02 ~er kilowatt-hour.
IV-10
Preferred PI£m
The preferred plan would consist of the construction of the
Black Bear Lake Project followed by the Lake Mellen Project. The
existing diesel units would serve as standby units. The Elack Bear
Lake Project is expected to start operating in 1986. Based on the
projections of peak demand, the Lake Mellen Project would start
operation in 1993. Both hydropower projects could be designed and
built in 5 years.
The detailed construction costs of Black Bear Lake are
presented in Exhibit 11. The total cost is estimated at
$28,000,000. For Lake Mellen, the total cost is estimated at
$34,200,000. These costs include the Craig-Klawock-Hydaburg
interconnection, which is estimated at about $5,000,000.
The annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs are estimated
at $60,000 for the Black Bear Lake Project and $100,000 for the Lake
Mellen Project. The annual O&M costs for the interconnection
between Craig-Klawock-Hydaburg are estimated at $60,000.
The installed capacity at Black Bear Lake is 6,000 kW. The
total average annual energy available is 23,700 MWh. For the Lake
Mellen Project, the installed capacity is estimated at 6,000 kW, and
the average annual energy at 26,100 MWh.
Second Most Preferred Pl~
The second most preferred plan would consist of the
construction of Lake Mellen Project, followed by Black Bear Lake
Project. The Lake Mellen Project would start operation in 1987.
Based on the projections of peak demand, Black Bear Lake Project
would start operation in 1996. The construction and operating costs
are the same as those mentionned in the "Preferred Plan" section.
The three expansion plans are shown graphically on Exhibit 30.
Economic Criteria
The economic evaluation is basically a comparison of the
alternative and costs over the project life, using a set of economic
parameters. The Alaska Power Authority (APA) has established the
following standard parameters for the economic evaluation. A
discount rate of 3 percent was selected by APA to place benefits and
costs occuring in different years on a equivalent basis. The cost
of diesel oil, fuel oil and other petroleum fuel is assumed to
escalate at a rate of 3.5 percent for the next twenty years then
held constant. The escalation rate for non-fuel cost items is
IV-11
assumed to be zero. For the economic comparison, the inflation rate
is assumed to be zero. The economic life is assumed to be 50 years
for hydropower plants and 20 years for the diesel units.
For the cost of energy analysis, a long term general inflation
rate is assumed to determine the future cost of energy. An
inflation rate of 7% has been selected by APA. The cost of debt is
assumed to be 8.5~ per year and the term for debt is assumed to be
20 years for diesel and 35 years for hydroelectric plants.
§£Qgomic ~parison
The economic analysis was done over the period starting in 1981
and ending the last year of the 50-year economic life of the Black
Bear Lake Project, which is 2035. The analysis assumes an installed
capacity of 6,000 kW for Black Bear Lake, and 6,000 kW for Lake
Mellen. The average annual energy generation is 23,700 MWh for
Black Bear Lake, and 26,100 MWh for Lake Mellen. The total average
annual energy for both projects is 49,800 MWh. Pages 1, 2, and 3 of
Exhibit 31 present the present worth computations for the three
expansion plans.
In the Base Case, the fixed costs were computed based on the
annual costs of new units installed to meet the peak demand and the
reserve margin, the 0 & M and fuel costs were comFuted by
multiplying the cost per kilowatt-hour defined earlier by the energy
generated.
In the preferred Plan, until 1986, the costs are the same as
those in the Base Case. In 1986, Black Bear Lake project starts
operating and its 50-year life will end in 2035. The Lake Mellen
project starts in 1993. The fixed costs are based on annual costs
computed from construction costs plus interest during construction.
Including an annual interest of 3% during construction, total cost
for Black Bear Lake with the interconnection between Craig, Klawock,
and Hydaburg is $29,005,000 representing an annual cost of
$1,130,000. For Lake Mellen, the total cost is $30,330,000,
representing an annual cost of $1,180,000. The 0 & M costs are
based on those discussed previously.
In the Second Most Preferred Plan, until 1987, the costs are
the same as those in the Base Case. In 1987, Lake Mellen Project
starts operating. The total cost for Lake Mellen is $35,530,000,
representing an annual cost of $1,380,000. The total cost for Black
Bear Lake is $23,854,000, representing an annual cost of $930,000.
The Black Bear Lake Project starts in 1996.
In both hydropower plans, environmental limitations on maximum
flow releases in some months will limit peaking capacilities.
IV-12
Diesel generation will provide the peak capacity during periods when
powerplant discharge is limited by environmental constraints.
With an average energy of 23,700 MWh, the Black Bear Project
would be absorbed by 1993 in the Preferred Plan. In the Second Most
Preferred Plan, the Lake Mellen Project has an average energy
available of 26,100 MWh, which would be absorbed by 1996. Both
projects are completely absorbed by 2014. After tr.at, the energy
generated was kept constant, for the three expansion plans, at the
maximum average energy available from both hydropower projects
(49,800 MWh).
The 50-year economic life of Black Bear Lake will end in 2035.
In that year, the present worth is $191,402,000 for the Base Case,
$57,664,000 for the Preferred Plan and $58,606,000 for the Second
Most Preferred Plan. The Preferred Plan has a B-C ratio of 3.32
when compared to the Base Case, and 1.02 when compared to the Second
Most Preferred Plan.
The Black Bear Lake Project
Mellen Project without combining them
results are presented in pages 4 and
the Black Bear Lake Project has a B/C
the Lake Mellen Project.
was also compared to the Lake
in.a development plan. The
5 of Exhibit 31~ In that case
ratio of 1.21 when compared to
An economic comparison was also performed for the
interconnection with Hollis and Thorne Bay, based on the development
of Black Bear Lake, only. The construction cost of the
interconnection with Hollis is estimated at $875,000, and the 0 & M
costs at $10,000 per year. The construction of the interconnection
with Thorne Bay is estimated at $2,375,000, and the 0 & M costs at
$30,000 per year. When Black Bear Lake is completely absorbed
in 1992, the present worth of the Craig-Klawock-Hydaburg-Hollis
System is $15,737,000 with the interconnection, and $15,812,000
without the interconnection. This small marginal difference does
not make the interconnection justified at this time. Similar
results are found for the Craig-~lawock-Hydaburg-Thorne Bay
interconnection. When Black Bear Lake is completely absorbed in
1990 the present worth is $15,104,000 with the interconnection and
$15,846,000 without. The interconnection with Hollis or Thorne Bay
would be economically justified with the develo~ment of Lake Mellen.
IV-13
£Qst of Energy
A cost of energy analysis was performed based on the economic
criteria defined earlier. The life of hydroelectric projects being
35 years, the analysis was done over the period starting in 1981 and
ending the last year of the 35-year life of the Black Bear Lake
project, which is year 2020. The life of the diesel units is
20 years.
The annual interest rate during construction is equal to 8.5%.
The inflation rate is 7~. As a result, the total cost of Black Bear
Lake is $39,924,000 for the Preferred Plan and $64,549,000 for the
Second Most Preferred Plan. The annual cost are $3,640,000 and
$5,887,000, respectively.
The total cost of Lake Mellen is $66,942,000 for the Preferred
Plan and $52,248,000 for the second Most Preferred Plan. The annual
costs are !6,105,000 and $4,765,000, respectively.
The annual fixed costs of the hydropower projects are based on
carrying charges equal to 9.12' (cost of money at 8.5%, amortization
at 0.52~ and insurance at 0.10%). The annual costs for new diesel
units are based on carrying charges equal to 10.81% (cost of money
at 8.5%, amortization at 2.06%, and insurance at 0.25%). Taxes were
not included.
The average cost of energy over the first twenty years of each
plan, would be 31.3 cents/kWh for the preferred plan, 79.3 cents/kWh
for the base case plan, and 32.1 cents/kWh for the second most
preferred plan. The average cost of energy from the Black Eear Lake
Project alone is 17.9 cents/kWh, and that of Lake Mellen Project
alone is 21.8 cents/kWh.
The results are shown graphically and in tabular form in
Exhibit 32. As can be seen from the exhibit, the cost of energy
from the Preferred Plan is less than that from the other two
expansion plans.
£ash Flow Requirements
A cash flow requirements for the Black Bear Lake development
was estimated, and is presented in Table IV-2. An interest of 8.5~
during construction and a 7% inflation has been included. The
financial requirements are based on the construction schedule
presented in Exhibit 9, and the implementation schedule presented in
Exhibit 33.
IV-14
Table IV-2
CASH FLOW REQUIREMENTS
Fiscal Year $
July 1981 -June 1982 2,000,000
July 1982 -June 1983 2,150,000
July 1983 -June 1984 10,500,000
July 1984 -June 1985 18,800,000
July 1985 -June 1986 6,500,000
IV-15
CHAPTER V
RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION
Recommendations
The Black Bear Lake Project is technically, environmentally,
economically and financially feasible. The FERC license application
being prepared concurrently with this feasibility report should be
submitted to the FERC as soon as possible. The environmental
baseline studies outlined in Chapter III should proceed concurrently
with the processing of the license application as should the design
of the Project and the preparation of contract documents.
Applications for the permits necessary to construct and operate the
Project should be prepared. Land rights for the Project should be
secured and project financing should be arranged.
Preconstruction Activities
The preconstruction activities required for the Project consist
of implementing the above recommendations as follows:
License Application. The license application should be submitted to
FERC upon completion of the state mandated review process for this
feasibility report. The application can be finalized and submitted
incorporating the comments of the reviewing parties, as appropriate
in order to expedite the licensing process. The license application
will be submitted to the FERC in draft form to allow the FERC to
identify any deficiencies that would need to be corrected before the
application would be accepted for processing. The required copies
of the application will be sumbitted once the application is
accepted for processing.
V-1
Environmental Studies. A consultant should be engaged to carry out
the studies described in detail in Chapter VI. The studies would be
designed to collect at least one year of data starting in late
spring 1981 and would consist of the following study items:
1. Fisheries Studies
A. Identification and Quantification of Fish Habitat in Black
Bear Creek Upstream of Black Lake
B. Escapement Studies in Black Bear Creek Upstream of Black Lake
C. Salmon Fry/Smolt outmigration
D. Fish Habitat Identification in Black Bear Lake
2. Hydrological and Limnological Investigations
A. Stream Temperature Monitoring
B. Lake and Stream Limnological Studies
C. Stream Discharge
3. Construction Phase Water Quality Monitoring
q. Dissolved Nitrogen Test
5. Post-Project Aquatic Resources Monitoring
6. Transmission Corridor Wetland Survey
7. Transmission Corridor Eagle Survey and Beaver Reconnaissance
Site Investigations. Geotechnical investigations are required at
the site in addition to those conducted during the feasibility
study. A deep core drill hole is required at the site of the power
shaft to confirm rock conditions. In addition several shallow holes
are required at the dam, powerhouse, and tunnel portal. Some
additional topographic mapping is required in area of the tunnel
portal. These investigations should be completed early in the 1982
field season.
Engineering
Project and
Services.
prepare
A consultant should be engaged to design the
contract documents concurrently with the
V-2
processing of the license application. ~wo sets of contract
documents should be prepared: one for the supply of equipment,
turbines, generators, transformers, switchgear, etc; the ether for
the construction of the Project and the installation of the
equipment. The drawings which are prepared for the construction and
installation contract would be of sufficient detail to serve as
construction drawings.
Permitting and Ownersh~E. Applications for the stat~ and federal
permits required to construct the Project should be prepared and
submitted for processing. The permits which will be required depend
on the ownership of the Project and its lands. The APA should
resol ve the ownership issue as soon as possible so that the
necessary permits can be prepared, submitted and processed.
Implementation
The implementation schedule, Exhibit 34, shows that the Project
could enter commercial operation in January 1986. The critical path
element in the implementation of the Project is the manufacture and
delivery of the hydraulic turbines. An estimated 28 months are
required from the award of the supply contract to the delivery of
the equipment on site. The implementation schedule assumes that
about 13 months are required to process the FERC license
application. Once the FERC license is received the equipment supply
contract and the construction contract would be awarded.
Manufacture, delivery and erection of equipment and project
construction would be complete in three years from the granting of
the FERC license. Funds would be committed to only preconstruction
activities before the FERC license is received, scheduled for
January, 1983.
V-3
CHAPTER VI
ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS
The Ex!stinq Environment
Forestry. The forested areas of Southeast Alaska are estimated
to comprise about 11,201,000 acres, about 46 percent of the total
land area. About 4,844,000 acres are considered to have timber of
commercial quality; of this, 87 percent is classified as old growth
saw timber, 150 years old or more. Prior to the state and native
land claims, 92 percent of the commercial forest land of Southeast
Alaska was within the Tongass National Forest. As much as
400,000 acres of National Forest land will change ownership upon
ultimate settlement of these claims (Harris et ale 1974) J/.
The
spruce,
logged
Pacific
locally
major commercial tree species are western hemlock, Sitka
western redcedar, and Alaska cedar. Mountain hemlock is
with western hemlock when the two are found in mixed stands.
silver fir, subalpine fir, and lodgepole pine are sought
(Harris et al.1974).
The timber resources of Southeast Alaska support an
that provides over 3,000 jobs for Alaska residents, with an
payroll of about $70 million. The principal wood products
by sawmills and pulp mills are exported (FERC 1980).
industry
average
produced
Potential and planned logging areas in the vicinity of the
Project site and transmission facilities are shown on Exhibit 67.
The closest planned logging activities to the Project site are four
sections along Black Bear Creek between Big Salt Lake and Black
Lake. Loqging is scheduled for 1981 by the Sealaska Corporation.
Recreation. Existing recreational facilities, resources, and
use are described in Appendix H.
Species
Plants. The Project Area contains old growth forests, muskeg
forest and bogs, and subalpine vegetation. Exhibit 35 lists the
plant species common to the major vegetation types of the Project
Area.
1/ References cited in this chapter are listed in Appendix R.
VI-1
Mammals. The larger mammals of Prince of Wales Island are
basically those of comparable habitat on the mainland, except that
brown bear, mountain goat, and moose do not occur on the island.
The species present on the island are of interest to man as game
animals, as furbearers, or as food species for other mammals and
birds.
The black bear (Qrsu~ americ~nus) is abundant throughout the
island, including the Project Area. It utilizes a variety of
habitats, depending on its need for food or cover. Vegetable matter
forms the mainstay of its diet, supplemented with fish and carrion,
asa~i~b~. ~
The timber wolf (Ca~is bupuS) is the only other large carnivore
on the island. It is associated with all types of natural habitat
where it can find its principal prey, deer. The latter, Sitka
black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus sitkensis) is not atundant in
the Project Area, although good habitat is availatle. ~hus, the
potential for growth of the herd is present (ADFG, Appendix J).
The smaller mammals apparently are present in the Elack Bear
Creek basin in good numbers, but quantitative field data are
lacking. Smith (Appendix F) confirmed the conclusion reached during
APA's consultant's 1980 field reconnaissance, that teaver (Castor
canadensis), mink (Mustgla viso~) and marten (~artes americana) are
abundant along the creek. His opinions are based on the presence of
fresh sign and, in the case of beaver, dams and lodges. ~ink and
beaver are strongly water-oriented; marten is associated closely
with mature coniferous forest. All three species are intensively
sought by fur trappers. The general inaccessibility of the Project
Area probably has provided some protection. other small mammals
which occur on Prince of Wales Island include shrews, bats, red and
flying squirrels, mice, voles, weasels and land otter (ADFG,
Appendix J) •
Birds. with greater motility than mammals, bird species tend
to be more uniformly distributed among islands in island groups.
Many of the 212 species listed by the USFS 1/ as "common" in
southeast Alaska (USFS 1978b) can be expected in suitable hatitat on
Prince of Wales Island. A few of the 56 species listed as "casual,
accidental, uncommon, or rare" in the region also may be eXFected on
the island. Gibson (1976) found about 50 species of land birds
breeding on the Alexander Archipelago, as compared with atout 75 or
more on the mainland. Exhibit 36 lists birds known to be present in
the Project Area.
Only a few of the 268 species occur as breeding birds in the
Black Bear Creek drainage or elsewhere in the Project Area. Black
Lake and Black Bear Lake support a few pairs of diving ducks, common
goldeneye (Bucephala clangul~) and red-breasted merganser (Mergus
1/ Acronyms used in this chapter are listed in Appendix L.
VI-2
serratQ~) in midsummer; both species probably breed near these lakes
or near the muskeg lakes along the proposed transmission corridor
route. Common loons nested and hatched a chick on Black Lake in
1981. The streams provide habitat for spotted sandpiper (Actitis
macularia) , belted kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon) and dip~er
(Cinclus mexicanus). The old-qrowth forest is the preferred habitat
for some forty-odd species of hawks and owls, thrushes, flycatchers,
sparrows, chickadees, and, especially, wood warblers. Forest
openings, whether natural or manmade, are inhabited by sparrows,
finches and some warblers and visited by some forest birds, such as
robins, seeking berries or other special foods.
The northern bald eagle (Haliaetus leucocephalus alascensis) is
an abundant year-round resident of Prince of Wales Island. It is
seen frequently along Black Bear Creek, especially when spawning
salmon are present. Most eagle nests in Southeast Alaska are within
100 meters of salt water so nests would not be expected near the
inland lakes of the island. In 1980, the area near the dam site and
reservoir was searched for a nest and none was found. This is not
surprising, since there are no large trees along the edge of Black
Bear Lake, and it is not accessible to spawning salmon.
Reptiles anQ AmEh~bian~. The only member of these groups on
Prince of Wales Island are the western toad (Bufo bore~~) and
possibly one or more salamanders (Wood 1980).
Fish. Dominant fish species in the Black Bear Creek drainage
system are members of the salmonid family. The drainage system can
conveniently be divided into two distinct aquatic ecosystems
inhabited by different species assemblages.
Black Bear Lake, perched in the upper portion of the drainage
basin, is inhabited by rainbow trout (SalmQ gairdneri). Prior to
stocking of rainbow trout in 1956, no fish were known to occur in
Black Bear Lake. Since the initital stocking, the rainbow
population has sustained itself with no further stocking necessary
(Appendix E).
Dominant fish species reported in the valley stream below Black
Bear Lake include pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gQrbuscha), chum salmon
(Oncorhynch~~ ketal, sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka), and coho
salmon (Oncorhynchus kis~tch) all of which are anadromous and use
the system at somewhat different times (see Appendices E and F).
In addition to the anadromous species, resident fish include
cutthroat trout (Salmo clarki), rainbow trout or steelhead (Salmo
gairdneri), Dolly varden--csalvelinus malma), sculpin (Cottus sp.)
and threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). Scul~ins and
sticklebacks occur in fresh water near the mouth of Black Bear Creek
and in the brackish waters of the small estuary in Big Salt Lake
(Appendix E, Scott and Crossman 1973). Populations of both resident
and anadromous cutthroat and Dolly Varden are thought to be present,
VI-3
and the anadromous form of the rainbow trout (steelhead) may also
occur in addition to resident rainbow.
Ecosystems
vegetation -~ner~!. The forest of Prince of Wales Island is
a segment of the temperate rain forest which extends along the
Pacific coast from northern California to Cook Inletr Alaska.
Nearly all of the Project Area is covered by this forest. The Black
Bear Creek valley mostly is covered by old-growth climax forest
while the slopes around Black Bear Lake support a more open
subalpine type of vegetation. Exhibit 37 is a map of the forest
types found in the Black Bear Creek valley and on the adjacent
mountain slopes. Exhibit 38 is a map of the vegetation on the
mountain slopes around Black Bear Lake.
SCientific names for most of the plants referred te in this
document are given in Exhibit 35. Scientific names for plants not
included on Exhibit 35 are given in the text following the common
name.
Veqeta~ion -Valley SIQ~. As shown on Exhibit 37 old-growth
hemlock r hemlock-sprucer and spruce forest stands cover nearly all
of the mountain slopes forming the Black Bear Creek valley. In
general r hemlock forest stands r containing both western and mountain
hemlock r occur on the lower half of the western slopes {eastern
aspect} and on the upper half of the eastern slopes {western
aspect}. The cedar composition (western red cedar r Alaska cedar) of
these stands varies from zero to 50 percentr with highest
concentrations of cedar occurring on the western slopes. Cld-growth
hemlock-spruce and spruce forest stands occur primarily on the lower
half of tte eastern slopes and on the southwestern and southeastern
valley slopes between Black Bear Lake and Black Lake. TypicallYr
the understory in these forest is relatively dense with both shrubs
and small individuals of canopy species. A very lush groundcover is
present and consists of assorted herbs r grasses r sedges and
cryptogams. Frequent dead-falls r rocks r and steep slopes make
travel difficult.
Plant species common to the old growth climax forest stands are
given in Exhibit 35.
Recurrent snow slide zones and rock slide areas en valley
slopes r as well as other disturbed areas r typically are dominated by
salmonberry and alder thickets. Common associated species include
Devil's club r Pacific red elder r early blueberrYr rusty menziesia r
beechfernr and sedges.
VI-4
Vegetation Black Bear Creek. Black Bear Creek flows out of
Black Bear Lake down-a steep;-canyon-like precipice. The u~per and
lower sections are cascades and there is a waterfall in tee center
section. Sparsely vegetated sheer cliffs on both sides of the falls
support clumps of sedges (probably ~~~ex spp) in wet crevices and on
rock shelves. Old-growth hemlock forest covers the steep mountain
slopes on both sides of the falls area. Less steep areas and snow
slide zones to the left (looking downstream) of the falls typically
contain dense salmonberry and Sitka alder thickets. Similar but
taller (eight to ten feet in height), and almost impenetrable
thickets grow along the rocky streambank, on rocky bars, and on
small islands in the stream section immediately below the falls.
Scattered throughout these thickets are some spruce (six to ten feet
in height), western hemlock (two to four feet in height), red alder,
Pacific red elder, and Devil club. This streamside thicket merges
into the alders growing at the base of the slide areas to the right
and left of the stream (see Exhibit 37).
Between Black Bear Lake and Big Salt Lake, Black Eear Creek
flows for nearly half of its length through old-growth hemlock,
hemlock-spruce, and spruce forest stands (see Exhibit 37). These
forest stands are extensions of the lower valley slope stands.
Streamside vegetation within the old-growth stands is neither very
distinct nor extensive. For the most part, large Sitka spruce,
western hemlock, and cedar grow along the edge of the stream, the
tree species present varying with the particular forest stand.
Although most abundant along the stream section below the falls,
alders (both sitka and red) and salmonberry with Devilsclub also
grow as scattered individuals and in small dense clumps immediately
along the streambank, particularly in small open areas. other
common plants of open streamside areas within the old-growth forest
stand include wastern thimbleberry, Pacific red elder, fireweed,
skunk ca~bage, and cow parsnip along with grasses and sedges.
In addition to old-growth forest stands, Black Bear Creek flows
through several wet areas. These areas are located mainly between
Black Lake and Big Salt Lake, and also immediately above Elack Lake.
They occur in flood-prone areas along the stream having either water
table levels at or near the surface and/or poor drainage conditions.
They also occur in the alluvial fans of Black Eear Creek
tributaries. As shown on Exhibit 37, the vegetation consists of wet
meadows, low woodland sites, and muskeg forest.
/
The wet meadow (see Exhibit 37) is formed primarily by surface
and subsurface drainage from the surrounding slopes collecting in a
low area of poor drainage along the stream. It supports a natural
grassland dominated by cottongrass and sedges (mainly Car~~ spp and
Scirpus spp). Bog candle, along with other common wetland eerbs, is
relatively abundant. Aquatic plants, namely yellow ~ond lily,
buckbean, and pondweed grow in the open water of two shallow ponds
and in the numerous small drainage channels that drain towards the
ponds and stream. Horsetails are found both in a periodically
flooded zone around the ponds and along the margins of the drainage
VI-5
channels. Small Sitka spruce and red alder grow in the ecotonal
zone between the wet meadow and surrounding forest.
~he wet areas designated by the USFS as low sites (see
Exhibit 37) are boggy, poorly drained open woodlands. The
vegetation consists of small Sitka spruce and red alder with a
groundcover mostly of mosses (sphagnum and club) and various grasses
and sedges. The tallest trees, Sitka spruce and western hemlock,
qrow on apparently better drained raised hummocks which are
scattered throughout the area and along the term-like streambank.
There is only a sparse understory shrub layer. Interspersed with
the woodland are muskeg bogs or meadows. These muskeg areas,
covered almost exclusively with sphagnum moss, are treeless.
Stunted shorepine and western hemlock occur along their periphery.
The muskeg forest stand above Black I.ake (see Exl:ibit 37)
occurs in an overflow area below an area where the stream cbannel is
ill-defined and consists of a braided network of subchannels. It
appears as if the muskeg forest has developed on a filled in portion
of Black Lake similar in structure to the low site woodland. It
does, however, contain a greater diversity of trees and shrubs. The
predominant canopy trees are western hemlock, sitka spruce, and
cedar (both eastern redcedar and Alaska-cedar). Common understory
shrubs are swamp laurel, bog rosemary, rusty menziesia, and bog
blueberry. The groundcover is almost exclusively sphagnum moss. An
open, almost treeless muskeg bog or meadow is also present with the
muskeg forest stand.
Exhibit 35 contains a listing of common plant species found in
muskeg forest, wet meadows, and along streambanks.
vegetation Bla£~ L~~. Old-growth hemlock, hemlock-spruce,
and spruce forest stands grow up to the rocky shoreline of Black
Lake (see Exhibit 37). Muskeg forest borders the lake at its inlet.
Also at the inlet is the only area along the shoreline that contains
aquatic plants. Yellow water lilies grow in a small seasonally
flooded bay to the riqht (looking downstream) of the inlet while
semi-emergent and emergent grasses and sedges grow in shallow water
on both sides of the inlet.
vegetation -Black Bear bake. The vegetation around Elack Bear
Lake is typical for steep-sided mountain slopes surrounding high
altitude cirque lakes in southeast Alaska. In contrast to the
mature forests on the slopes along the Black Bear Creek valley, the
slopes surrounding Black Bear Lake support relatively open subalpine
vegetation. Exhibit 38 is a map of the vegetation types on the
lower portion of the slopes which form the rocky lake shoreline.
For purposes of this discussion, general shoreline areas around the
lake are designated on Exhibit 38 as Areas A through E, depending on
topography and vegetation characteristics.
VI-6
The northern end of the lake (see Exhibit 38, Area A) supports
subalpine vegetation consisting of a mosaic of small open areas and
copses of trees and shrubs. The trees are low growing and stunted
mountain hemlock, Alaska-cedar, Sitka spruce, alder, and
occasionally, western hemlock. The larger size tress tend to be
mountain hemlock and Alaska-cedar. Shrubs are densest along the
edges of the copses and tend to be less abundant within the
understory. However, dense shrub understories are also encountered.
Common shrubs include rusty menziesia, copperbush, early ~lueberry,
dwarf blueberry, and, in places, mountain ash. Vegetation in the
frequent open areas is variable. Small wet depressions and wet
bench areas with poor drainage are dominated by sedges, mertens
cassiope, and leutkea. Other more exposed and drier o~en areas
contain heath species and scattered shru~s. Numerous s~ecies of
wildflowers are present but no one species dominates.
The lower slopes forming the eastern lake shoreline
(Exhibit 38, Area B) are covered primarily by small forest stands.
Mountain hemlock is the dominant canopy tree although Sitka spruce,
cedar, and western hemlock also are found in these closed forest
stands. Commonly encountered shrubs in addition to mountain ash and
copperbush are those typically found in c·limax old-growth forests
(Exhibit 35). Alders (mainly Sitka) with salmonberry and Devilsclu~
grow along the rocky shoreline. In places, alders form a dense band
along the water's edge while in other places they are intermixed
with the forest tree species. Open areas among the forested areas
consist of old slides and small wet depressions or flat benches with
poor drainage. Slide areas are almost exclusively covered with
salmonberry. The wet areas contain sedges, mertens cassiopes,
leutkea, otr.er small herbs, and mosses.
The southeastern lake shoreline (Exhibit 38, Area C) contains
several active slide areas. Growths of salmonberry with scme alders
and scattered mountain hemlock copses grow in places among the bare
rocks. Leutkea and copperbush are prevalent between large rocks
along the water's edge.
The active slide area (Area C) merges into the more gradual
lower slopes forming the southeastern end of Black Eear Lake
(Exhibit 38, Area D). The entire slope is classified as a recurrent
snow slide zone. The lower slope is a gradually-sloped rock field
containing vegetation which is somewhat distinct from that
surrounding the rest of the lake. The rock field contains an o~en
stand of stunted and scrub mountain hemlock. Although several
species of shrubs and herbs are represented in the hemlock stand,
copperbush is the most abundant shrub while leutkea is the
predominant groundcover species. A surrounding meadow-like area and
small open areas within the scrub hemlock are covered by dense
mat-like growths of leutkea and mertens cassiope. wildflowers are
abundant among the hemlocks, in the meadow areas, and, in
particular, along the numerous snow melt channels draining down into
the lake.
VI-7
Forested areas occur along the western lake shoreline
(Exhibit 38, Area E) although they are not as extensive in size and
abundance as those along the eastern shoreline. Most of the
forested areas consist of small copses and semi-open parkland stands
of hemlock (mountain and western) and some Sitka spruce.
Salmonberry and alder thickets occupy most of the lower portions of
the less steep slopes while copperbush forms most of the thickets on
the upper portions. Cliffs and very steep slopes are sparsely
vegetated with shrubs, grasses, and sedges.
Wildlife Populations. ADFG black bear harvest figures for
Prince of Wales Island indicate that about 70 bears are taken by
hunters each year. Only one of 249 tears listed by ADFG for
the years 1976-79 was taken at Black Bear Lake. Another was taken
from Black Bear Creek and 11 from the area around Big Salt Lake.
The scarcity of kills from Black Bear Lake probatly is due more to
the area's inaccessibility tt~n to a lack of bears. Bear sign is
abundant in the Project Area and bears have come into the Project
camp on several occasions.
The timber wolf population is currently at a reduced level
compared to the past, as is the deer population. However, neither
species is particularly scarce in the Project Area (ADFG,
Appendix J) •
The population of black-tailed deer fluctuates widely in
response to predation, heavy snows, disease, and hunting ~ressure.
Hunting ~ressure does not appear to be a major factor on Prince of
Wales Island. Continued timber cutting, by removing the old-growth
forest that provides winter cover, is expected to reduce deer number
(Meehan 1974).
The remaining land vertebrates of
essentially unstudied. Quantitative data
indicate the sources of skins. Field
consultants indicate that most of the small
along Black Bear Creek.
the Project Area are
on furtearers do not
observations ty APA's
mammals are abundant
Aguatic Habitat !ypes. Black Bear Lake is a deep cirque
mountain lake which collects runoff from the surrounding mountain
walls. The outlet stream, Black Bear Creek on the north end of the
lake, falls approximately 1500 ft in 0.5 mi to the valley floor, and
is impassable to fish. From this point to the stream's mouth the
gradient is moderate. Two miles downstream of Black Bear lake the
stream enters Black Lake, then flows for three miles to Eig Salt
Lake.
Black Bear Lake is 1.4 mi long, varies in
to 0.4 mi, and has a surface area of 240 acres
approximately 22,000 acre feet (Appendix E) •
basin is shallower (maximum depth 100 ft) than
VI-8
width from about 0.1
and a volume of
The lake's northern
the southern basin
(maximum depth greater than 200 ft). Black Bear Lake becomes
thermally stratified during the summer months.
The stream between Black Bear Lake and Black Lake has three
zones: (1) the steep drop from Black Bear Lake; (2) a reach with
braided stream channel and gravel-rubtle substrate; and (3) the
last mile above Black Lake where the creek is sluggish, and up to
four ft. deep with undercut banks. The banks are covered with
grasses, sedges, and shrubs. The stream channel has fine sand-silt
substrate and extensive backwater sloughs.
Black Lake is approximately one mi long and is shallow at the
upstream (south) end and deeper at the downstream (north) end.
From Black Lake the stream flows north for three miles to enter
Big Salt Lake, a saltwater embayment. Pools and riffles alternate
in this reach, with some large sloughs along the bank in certain
areas.
More detailed descriptions of aquatic habitat are given in
Appendices E and F.
Fish P02ulations -Black Bear 1~ke. The only fish kncwn to be
present-rn the lake are rainbow trout, derived from stocking in 1956
of 5,000 eyed eggs supplied by USFWS (Baade 1960). Before
stocking, the lake was barren (Kelly 1979). These fish spawn in the
spring from April to June, probably in shallower areas of the lake
with gravel or rubble substrate (Kelly 1980). Likely spawning areas
include the shallower areas described in Appendix E and A~~endix F,
as well as areas near the lake outlet in the shallower northern
basin. Two or three nine-inch fish were observed in this latter
area during reconnaissance studies in summer of 1979.
The lake's trout population is reported to te self-maintaining
(Kelly 1979). Black Bear Lake was assigned a sport fishery rating
of 1 (lowest on a scale from one to five) in the TLMP Fisheries Task
Force Working Report (USFS 1978). Recreational fishing in the lake
is reported as "not very good" (Elliott 1979), "slow at times"
(Appendix E), and "good" (Kelly 1979).
Fish Populations -Downstream of Black Bear Lake. Elack Bear
Creek is catalogued as an anadromous -fish--Stream (NO. 103-60-031)
and supports spawning runs of pink, chum, coho, and sockeye salmon
(Appendices E and F) • Pink salmon is the principal anadromous
species using the stream, with a peak escapement during the last
ten years of 42,300 in 1975 (Appendix E). Exhibit 39 summarizes
ADFG escapement records for Black Bear Creek. ADFG has identified
spawning areas from the upper intertidal zone to Black Lake and
rearing areas suitable for coho upstream and downstream of Black
Lake (Appendix E). APA's 1980 aquatic studies identified other
salmon spawning areas upstream of Black Lake, and reported other
observations on salmon use of the stream (see A~pendix F, p~ 8-9).
VI-9
Sport fish species occurring in Black Bear Creek are Dolly
Varden char, cutthroat trout, and reportedly steelhead trout
(Appendix E). ADFG classifies Black Bear Creek as a "quality
class 2" steelhead stream and "quality class 2" cutthroat stream
(Jones 1978) 1/. other fish species reported include sculpin and
three-spined-stickleback (Appendix E).
The peak of the pink salmon run in Black Bear Creek usually
occurs in late August (De Jong 1979). Except for APA's aquatic
studies, there are few data on the timing of runs· of other salmon
species into Black Bear Creek. In the absence of more detailed data
on Black Bear Creek, ADFG weir counts of pink, chum, coho, and
sockeye salmon ascending the Klawock River (seven mi southwest of
Black Bear Creek) in 1977-1980 were examined (Bates 1979, 1980;
Hansen 1980). ADFG has advised that Klawock River weir counts can
be used as an approximate indicator of run timing in Elack Bear
Creek, except that pink and chum salmon run about two weeks earlier
in Black Bear Creek than at Klawock River (Kelly 1980;
Hansen 1979, 1980). Exhibit 40 summarizes these data, and shows
that peak escapement periods in Black Bear Creek are probably as
follows:
Pink mid-August to late september
Chum late August to late September
Coho late August to early November
Sockeye early July to early September
Bishop, based on Klawock weir counts, other ADFG infcrmation,
and his field observations, constructed Table VI-1, a summary of
salmonid use of Black Bear Creek acording to species, activity,
timinq, and reach of the stream (see also Appendix F). Both salmon
and potentially important sport fish species are included.
1/ Class rating are "1" (highest), "2", and "other".
VI-10
Table VI-1
BLACK BEAR CREEK
SAI.MONID USE
Location
Species Above Eelow Above
and Activity Black La~~ Black Lake Black Lake HWy· Bridge
Pink -spawning Aug.-Sept. Aug. -sept.
Chum -spawning Sept. Sept.
coho -spawning Sept.-Nov. Sept.-Nov. SeI=t.-Nov.
rearing continuous continuous continuous continuous
Sockeye-spawning August August (1)
rearing continuous continuous
Dolly V-spawning possible over-spawn spawn
rearing-residence possible winter reside reside
Steel head-spawning possible (1) possible possible
rearing-residence possible (1) possible possible
Cutthroat-spawning possible resident possible possible
rearing-residence possible over-possible I=ossible
winter
Eased on the above and on life history information in Scott and
Crossman (1973), the important months are August through November
for spawning (coho=September through November, sockeye=August), and
the winter and early spring months, probably through May, for egg
incubation and intragravel larval fish above Black Lake. 'Ihis time
range also covers these activities for pink and chUm salmon, which
use the stream below Black Lake.
Unique Ecosystems or communities. NO unique plant communities
are found in the project-Area. All plant communities present are
well-represented throughout Southeast Alaska. There are no unique
terrestrial wildlife or aquatic communities or ecosystems in the
immediate area of the Project.
VI-11
Endangered or Threateneg Species. No plants species officially
classified as either endangered or threatened for Alaska
(Murray 1980) are known to occur in the Tongass National Forest
(Muller 1980).
Muller (1980), in a survey of the threatened and endangered
plants in the Tongass National Forest, lists eleven species
considered "sensitive" for this area. These species are listed in
Exhibit 41. Six of the eleven species are officially classified as
rare, status undetermined, for Alaska (Murray 1980). These species,
indicated on Exhibit 41, are known only from ty~e specimens or from
~) one or more collections at the type locality. Additional
information is required, therefore, to evaluate their taxonomic or
geographic status. They would appear to be rare but this is subject
to change after further studies. In addition to the six rare
species, five other species are listed as being "sensitive" for the
Tongass National Forest (Muller 1980).
None of the eleven species listed on Exhibit 41 are known to
occur in the Project Area although suitable habitat may exist for
some of them.
No animal species listed by USFWS as "endangered or threatened"
breeds in the Project Area or visits it regularly. The ~eregrine
falcon (Falco peregrinus) is the only species likely to occur on the
island at all. This worldwide bird probably is a casual migrant and
winter visitor to the island. Migratory and wintering peregrines
usually frequent salt marshes and estuaries, where they can secure
the waterfowl and shorebirds that are their main food. Should a
peregrine falcon visit the Project Area or the transmission line (a
remote possibility), the bird would encounter only minimal hazard.
No endangered or threatened aquatic species occur in or near
the Project Area. .
wetland§. A preliminary wetlands inventory was perfcrmed for
the Project Area using aerial photographs and USFS forest inventory
maps. Wetland type vegetation in the Project Area is represented by
wet meadows, low wet sites, and muskeg forest and bog. All these
types occur along Black Bear Creek. Aquatic macrophytes grow in the
vicinity of Black Lake inlet and small drainage channels and ponds
in the wet meadows. These vegetation types were described above and
are shown on Exhibit 37. Of the inventoried wetlands, those
identified as having the greatest potential for transmission line-
related impacts on waterfowl are mapped on Figures V-S, 6 and 7 of
Appendix I. These principal wetland areas are generally associated
with water bodies and/or have predominantly emergent vegetation.
VI-12
Estuaries. A small estuary exists at the mouth of Elack Bear
creekin"Bigsalt Lake. The brackish water habitat consists of a
large rocky mud flat which extends approximately one quarter mile
into Big Salt Lake (Appendix E) • The estuary is inhabited by
euphasid and crangonid shrimp, sand dabs, starry flounder
(Platichthy§ ~tellatus) and sculpin (Cottu§ sp).
The climate of the Project Area is described in Appendix B.
Air quality in the Project Area is excellent. The only sources
of discharges to the atmosphere are vehicle exhaust, occasional wood
waste burning associated with the timber industry, and diesel engine
exhaust from existing generating plants.
Hydrology
Drainag~ Basin. The drainage basin is described in Appendix B.
Streamflow Characteristics. Stream flows in the Elack Bear
Creek basin ere synthesized using data from a USGS gage installed at
Black Bear Lake outlet in 1980 and from gage records for other
streams in the area (see Appendix B). Thirty years of
synthesized monthly flow data resulted. Flow regimes at different
locations on Black Bear Creek (see Exhibit 48) are shown on
Exhibits 49 through 60 and in Appendix B.
The Black Bear Lake unit hydrograph, peak flood frequency
curves, and Black Bear Lake outlet 7-, 14-, and 30-day low flows are
given in Appendix B.
wateE QEality. Data on water quality of the Black Eear Creek
drainage system are limited to those periodically collected by ADFG
during routine fishery surveys (Appendix E) and those collected
during the feasibility studies for the proposed Project
(Appendix F). These data show that the quality of water in Black
Bear Lake and Black Bear Creek is excellent.
Historical, Archeoloqic~l, Cult~ral. Historical archeological,
and cultural resources in the vicinity of the proposed Project are
described in Appendix G.
VI-13
Scenic and Esthetic. Scenic and esthetic resources are
discussed in Appendices H and I.
Environmental Impact During Construction
Project construction will remove a maximum of 220 acres of
spruce-hemlock forest from the total available on Prince cf Wales
Island. This amount is minor compared with the amount being removed
annually by logging. This old-growth forest is critical winter
habitat for deer in Southeast Alaska (ADFG, Appendix J).
Species of birds and mammals inhabiting the Project Area will
move into adjacent habitat, where they will interact with members of
their respective species, causing some emigration, lowered breeding
success and possibly reduced survival. The end result will be a
return of these adjacent areas to about the same pcpulation
densities as before the Project was constructed.
Construction of the transmission line will exert somewhat
different effects, in some areas changing a strip of forest habitat
to meadow and brush. The ecotone thus created ~ill favor birds that
utilize both forest and meadow: flycatchers, some owls and hawks,
robin and some sparrows. Where the transmission line crosses muskeg
the poles and wires will provide new perches for eagles, hawks,
flycatchers and kingfishers.
Transmission lines across wetlands offer special hazards to
waterfowl, especially the larger species (geese and swans). The
transmission line routing has been carefully selected to avoid
flight corridors of waterfowl. James and Haak (1979) found that
birds in tight flocks were most susceptible to collisions and that
the majority of collisions were with the ground wire, which was at
the top of the line assembly. Even in areas rather heavily used by
waterfowl the incidence of collisions with 500-kV lines ~as low.
There were so many variables that affect the rates of collision and
mortality that extrapolation from one situation to ancther is
unwise. The transmission line for the Black Bear Lake Project will
avoid bird collision problems by 1) avoiding wetland crossings and
edges where waterfowl are abundant, and 2) placing the line at
minimum height. The Project is not within any major waterfowl
migration route (King 1961).
VI-14
Aquatic Species and Habitats
Temporary Stream Diversion. Black Bear Lake outflow will be
diverted through a cofferdam and culvert in the streambed at the
damsite. This will allow construction in the dry of the dam and
intake structure. The diversion will not have significant impact on
fish populations or habitat either in Black Bear Lake or in the
stream. This section of the stream is not critical fishery habitat.
Black Bear Lake Damsite Construction Staging Area. Talus
material from excavation at the damsite will be placed in-BIack Bear
Lake to form a temporary construction staging area. This material,
consisting of talus material of the same type which forms the
natural lake bottom, will later be removed and used for fill for the
left dam abutment. Placement and removal of talus material will
temporarily increase suspended sediments in the immediate vicinity
of the construction area. No significant adverse effect on total
fish habitat or populations in the lake is anticipated, however.
Soil overburden will be stockpiled on land for landscaping use after
construction and will not be placed in the lake.
The intake for the temporary diversion culvert will be extended
out into the lake to avoid entrainment of sediment from the
construction area. This will avoid discharge of sediments into
Black Bear Creek downstream of Black Bear Lake.
Powerhouse and Tailrace Construction Staging Area and Access
Road. As discussed in detaIl under constructIon effects on water
quality, initial construction activities in the powerhouse area will
temporarily increase sediment loads in Black Bear Creek above Black
Lake. After erosion and runoff control features have been
completed, introduction of sediments into the stream will be minor.
An existing logging road extends to near the outlet of Black
Lake. This road will be extended to the powerhouse site to provide
Project access. To avoid cutting into a naturally unstable slope,
rockfill will be placed along the east shore of Black Lake for about
200 feet. The fill will eliminate some aquatic plants and fish
habitat.
Upstream of Black Lake, the access road will be constructed
with sufficient drainage culverts to permit water to flow unimpeded
from the valley wall and intermittent streams to the valley floor
and Black Bear Creek.
VI-IS
Transmission bine. The potential for disturbance of aquatic
habitat at transmission line stream crossings will be reduced to a
minimum by following USFS policies on protection of fisheries
habitat during clearing-type operations (Southeast Alaska Area
Guide, USFS 1977). The number of stream crossings at potentially
sensitive points in streams has been held to a minimum for the
proposed route, as discussed in the section on alternatives
considered.
Major Eco~~em Alteration
Veqeta~ion. The major construction impact on vegetation will
be clearing for the access to and construction of Project
structures. The overall effect will be a reduction in woodland
productivity where structures replace forest trees, and in
revegetated disturbed areas, the replacement of woodland with early
secondary successional plant communities. If feasible, merchantable
trees in all areas to be cleared will be salvaged and sold.
Construction activities at the damsite will require the
clearing and disposal of four acres of vegetation. This vegetation
(see Exhibit 38, Area A) consists of subalpine copses (mainly
mountain hemlocks) interspersed with semi-open shrub growths and
both wet and dry open areas dominated by sedges and heath species,
respectively. Also, in the area of the left abutment, salmonberry
thicket will be cleared. Since all trees are of small size, no
merchantable trees will be cleared.
Old qrowth spruce forest will be cleared for construction of
the powerstation and associated facilities. Construction of the
steel penstock section from the penstock portal to the powerstation
will require the removal of salmonberry and alder thicket along the
stream as well as oldgrowth hemlock forest. The construction area
comprises both sides of the stream near the powerstation and will
require the clearing of oldgrowth spruce forest as well as
salmonberry and alder along and within the stream channel. Total
clearinq requirements from the powerhouse to the portal will be
three acres.
The clearing of the powerstation and construction area will
necessitate the removal of mature timber trees, mainly western
hemlock and Sitka spruce, as well as some mountain hemlock, western
redcedar, and Alaska-cedar.
The access road ROW from the end of the existing logging access
road at the outlet of Black Lake to the powerstation will require
the clearing of approximately five acres of oldgrowth spruce forest
and oldgrowth hemlock, and a small amount of muskeg area and alder
thicket. The placement of fill along the short section of Black
Lake will not eliminate any semi-aquatic or aquatic plant
communities.
VI-16
Clearing for the access road will require the removal of mature
timber trees, mainly western hemlock and sitka spruce, and some
mountain hemlock, western redcedar, and Alaska-cedar.
The transmission line will be routed along the access road
between the powerstation/switchyard and the Black Lake outlet. This
section of the route will not require any significant removal of
trees beyond what was removed for the access road Few. The
remainder of the route will, for most of its length, parallel road
ROWs as described in Chapter I. Extensive clearing of trees in most
of these areas will also be avoided since much of the area has been
or will have been logged. Effects of transmission line construction
are discussed in Appendix I.
Wildlife. Only minor wildlife population reductions are
anticipated with the Project (ADFG, Appendix J).
Aquatic. Alterations of existing aquatic ecosystems during the
construction phase will occur during reservoir filling. Existing
rainbow trout spawning areas in Black Bear Lake will be inundated
and will probably no longer be suitable. It is unlikely that new
spawning areas will become available unless reservoir fluctuations
are controlled during the spring spawning season. Flows will be
greatly reduced in the existing stream ted between the dam and
powerhouse, and will be nearly eliminated just below the dam.
However, this reach of the stream is not critical fishery habitat.
stream flows downstream of the powerhouse will also te affected
during fillinq of the reservoir. The most pronounced effect will
occur between the powerhouse and the major southwest tributary above
Black Lake. Below the confluence of this tributary, Elack Bear
Creek flows would be much closer to natural conditions durinq
reservoir filling. To fill the reservoir from EI. 1680 (present
lake level) to EI. 1715 (normal maximum pool elevation) will require
8,000 acre-feet, or about 228 acre-feet for each 1 ft. rise in
reservoir elevation. If the reservoir were filled during a short
period upon completion of construction, maintenance of adequate
downstream flows would be very difficult. Therefore, it is proposed
that reservoir filling begin during the final construction ~hase and
continue through the first three years of Project operation (see the
section on reservoir filling in Chapter II). Table VI-2 summarizes
the proposed minimum releases for downstream flow maintenance during
reservoir filling. Minimum downstream releases are generally the
same as those proposed for Project operation in 1986 (compare
Exhibit 49), and the same considerations were used as for the
analysis of operations flows as described later in this document.
VI-17
Table VI-2
MINIMUM RELEASE DURING RESERVOIR FILLING
Total Minimum
water Downstream
Month Available 1/ Release -----(cfs) (cfs)
Jan 6.5 6.5
Feb 5.4 5.4
Mar 4.7 4.7
Apr 15.8 7.0
May 39.0 17.0
June 47.1 34.0
July 27.4 27.4
Aug 22.9 22.0
Sep 36.6 34.0
Oct 47.7 34.0
Nov 34.0 25.0
Dec 24.8 10.0
1/ Mean of average monthly flows for 30 yr of synthesized data.
ADFG has requested that the April minimum release be increased
from 7.0 cfs to 15.8 cfs to assure adequate flows for pink and chum
salmon fry outmigration (Appendix J). ADFG suggests that the water
lost for reservoir filling during April could be reccuped by
reductions in the minimum flows of Table VI-2 for the months June
through November. While increasing the April m~n~mum flow may
benefit pink/chum outmigration, reductions in the minima for the
other months may increase the potential for adverse impact on the
fishery resource upstream of Black Lake during reservoir filling.
The continuing studies discussed elsewhere in this document will
provide more detailed information on fish habitat and use in this
reach, which will allow refinement of the proposed reservoir filling
release regime.
Endangered or Threatened Species
The only endangered species that might occur in the area, the
peregrine falcon, is too uncommon a visitor to be directly affected
by the Project. Peregrines may use the transmission line poles for
perching, but the spacing of wires will be such that chances of
birds being electrocuted will be minimized.
VI-18
Recreational Facilities and Use
The USFS cabin on Black Bear Lake will have to be relocated to
avoid inundation (see Appendix I). Effects of construction on
recreational facilities and use and on public access in the Project
Area are discussed in Appendix I.
Historical, Archeological, Cultural Sites/Values
No known historical, archeological, or cultural sites will be
adversely affected by construction of the proposed Project
(see Appendix G).
Scenic and Esthetic
Effects of construction on Project Area scenic sites and values
are discussed in Appendix I.
Socioeconomic Effects
The Black Bear Lake Project's impacts on employment,
population, housing and revenues would be concentrated within the
villages of Klawock and Craig. Construction activities will last
approximately two years and employ about 175 different workers.
During that time, the maximum number of employees at the
construction site would be 110, of which approximately 45
(40 percent of the total) could be local workers. It is expected
that the work force required will live in Klawock and Craig. Due to
the fluctuations in the size of the construction force and the
transient nature of employment on many construction activities, it
is unlikely that a significant portion of the imported work force
would choose to relocate their families in Klawock or Craig. As a
result, the imported work force is expected to live in trailers or
mobile homes once the housing available in Klawock and Craig is
fully utilized. The contractor will be expected to supply any
support services for construction personnel that are not available
locally. The impacts on public services will be limited. No
effects are expected on police, fire, solid waste, transportation or
health services. However, water supply might be a problem if
Klawock does not improve its existing system.
Since Project features would not occupy any lands now used for
houses or business, there would be no need to relocate any
residential or commercial areas. While local business may benefit
from occasional sales of construction material and foodstuffs, it is
expected that the bulk of construction supplies would be shipped
directly to the Project site from points outside Prince of Wales
Island. As a result, air services and other transportation means
are expected to increase during the construction period.
Air Quality
During construciion, dust will be produced by vehicular traffic
on the Project access road and by excavations for civil works.
Combustion products will be released to the atmosphere by
construction vehicles, and the concentration of particulates will
VI-19
increase due to burning of cleared vegetation and solid wastes. All
of these effects will be local and short-term. No significant
deterioration of air quality is expected.
Noise
Construction noise will keep birds and mammals away from the
project Area during working hours. The effect will not extend much
beyond the Project boundaries and will not last longer than the
construction period. Although noise-related impacts will be minimal
and temporary, reductions in such disturbances can be accomplished
by proper timing of construction activities.
Water Quantity and Quality
During most of the construction period flows in Black Bear
Creek will be unimpeded downstream of the powerhouse site, since the
stream will be diverted around the work area. However, flows in
Black Bear Creek between the powerhouse and the dam will be
eliminated during construction, except for local inflow. Flows
downstream of the powerhouse will also be affected during filling of
the reservoir, as discussed previously.
During most of the construction period water quality changes in
Black Bear Lake and Black Bear Creek above Black Lake will be
restricted to minor increases in the sediment load, due to limited
runoff from the construction areas. As discussed below, the
potential for runoff will be minor since appropriate precautions
will be incorporated in the preparation of the construction areas.
Appropriate erosion control features will be an integral part
of the main construction staging area near the powerhouse site. The
control features will be placed before disturbance of the staging
area in order to hold erosion runoff to the stream to a minimum.
However, preparation of the control measures will in itself cause
some temporary runoff of sediments to the stream.
Increased suspension of sediments will also occur in Black Bear
Lake with the construction and removal of the dam staging area and
the cofferdam across the lake's outlet channel. The staging area
and cofferdam will be constructed with talus and rock debris
excavated from the dam foundation area on the left side of the
outlet channel. Because of the grain size distribution of these
materials, the amount of sediments introduced to the lake will be
relatively small. Because of the limited circulation of water in
the lake, the suspended sediments will be localized and will settle
in the immediate area of the cofferdam and staging area.
Prior to initiating construction of the staging area and
cofferdam, flow in the outlet channel will be diverted through a
4-ft. diameter culvert to allow construction of the dam. The
culvert will extend into the lake 50 to 75 ft. along the north
shore. By extending the culvert, water containing suspended
VI-20
sediments generated from construction of the cofferdam and staging
area will not be carried downstream to Black Bear Creek.
Detailed scheduling of those construction activities wbich have
the potential for significant adverse effect on water quality will
be coordinated with ADFG and other appropriate agencies. It is
anticipated that preparation of the construction staging areas,
which includes the water quality protection measures discussed
above, can be carried out within the May 15 -August 1 time frame
recommended by ADFG (Appendix J).
At the end of the construction period short-term increases in
suspended sediments in Black Bear Creek upstream of Black lake will
likely occur as a result of removal and regrading of the ~owerhouse
construction staging area, covering and grading of the lower section
of penstock and opening of the tailrace channel downstream of the
powerhouse. However, the total amount of sediments generated at the
end of the construction period is expected to be small.
Adverse effects on water quality resulting from spillage of
petroleum fuels or lubricants from construction equipment are
expected to be minimal. Any spills of fuel, oil or grease will be
contained within the construction staging areas and are not expected
to be transported into the lake or stream systems. Any bulk fuels
would be stored within an impermeable berm or other device which
could contain the total volume if a leak should occur.
For the most part, clearing and construction of the
transmission line corridor will not affect water quality. The
potential exceptions to this will be at stream crossings. Where
crossings are necessary, clearing of the ROW will be conducted in
full compliance with USFS policy (Southeast Alaska Area Guide, USFS
1977). Hence, degradation of water quality is expected to be
minimal.
Compliance ~ith RegulatoEY Standards
Air quality standards will be met during Project construction.
Water quality standards will be complied with during
construction, with the possible exception of short-term elevation of
turbidity and sediment levels above those stated in Alaska water
Quality Standards (ADEC 1979) for the category "GrOwth and
Propagation of Fish, Shellfish and Other Aquatic life • • .". These
increases would occur at the beginning and the end of the
construction period, as described above.
Spoil and ~~ste Disposal
Spoil and waste disposal were discussed in Chapter I.
VI-21
Environmental !m~t of operation and Maintenance
Terrestrial Specie§ and Habitat§
Operation of the Project will cause no significant changes in
wildlife habitat beyond those introduced by Project construction.
Revegetation of the construction work areas will result in gradual
habitat recovery for songbirds and small mammals. Most of the
larger birds and mammals will continue to avoid the main part of the
Project, but with noise at lower levels, will reoccupy peripheral
habitat.
Beaver dams under Project conditions will receive more
frequent but less extreme high flows than at present. If a beaver
dam is maintained in the usual manner, the likelihood that it will
breach is reduced.
Maintenance of the transmission line ROW will sustain a
relatively uniform strip of open habitat as long as the Project is
in operation. Broadleaved shrubs will be suppressed by manual means
where necessary. ADFG has recommended against the use of herbicides
(Appendix J) •
Management of the transmission line ROW for low vegetation will
aid grouse and edge-dependent birds (flycatchers, waxwings, some
warblers) by providing berry-and seed-bearing plants. The poles
and wires lIWill be used for resting and perch-hunting by some birds.
Transmission poles will provide potentially attractive nest sites
for some large birds such as the red-tailed hawk. With adequate
wire spacing to prevent electrocutions this is not likely to cause
bird mortality. There is danger of the nest sticks shorting across
wires however and nesting must be prevented. ~ethods available and
tested include altering poles and crossties to render them
inbospitable and erecting a separate nest platform near the pole
selected by birds.
Aquatic species and Habitat§ -Black Bear Lake
Reservoir Level Fluctuation. Normal maximum daily reservoir
fluctuation will~ approximately one foot. During the spawning
period of Black Bear Lake rainbow trout, such fluctuations could
cause the loss of eggs deposited in very shallow areas. Eggs
deposited in slightly deeper water would be unaffected.
Seasonal reservoir level fluctuations are summarized on
Exhibits 42 through 45. Fluctuations with and without downstream
environmental flow constraints were examined. These downstream flow
constraints are discussed later in this section. For purposes of
the present discussion, it should be noted that the reservcir level
increases a few feet from April to June, then decreases from June to
August. This could result in the loss by desiccation of rainbow
trout eggs (or alevins) deposited in very shallow water areas during
VI-22
the period of highest reservoir level. Eggs and alevins in somewhat
deeper water would not be affected.
Year-to-year fluctuations in reservoir levels might also affect
rainbow trout spawning, depending on the amount of suitable spawning
habitat available each year under different water level conditions.
Fish Entrainment. The proposed intake structure is designed to
minimize fish entrainment. Each flared intake ~ort ~ill be
approximately 7 ft. by 7 ft., for a cross sectional area of about
49 sq. ft J2 The maximum discharge capacity of the Project will be
approximately 64 cfs, so that the maximum approach velocity at each
intake opening will be about 1.31 ft/s, with lower velocity at the
trashrack. At lower Project discharges, water velocities at the
intake and trashrack will be correspondingly lower.
Eell (1973) has reported the following swimming s~eeds for
average-sized to large adult rainbow trout:
Cruisi!!9~ed
(ft/s)
4.5
Sustained Speed
(ft/s)
13.5
where cruising speed is defined as that maintainable for long
periods (hours) and sustained speed that maintainable for a period
of minutes. Smaller rainbow trout have lower swimming speeds.
Most adult rainbow trout should be able to avoid entrainment
into the power intake rather easily. Smaller adults and juveniles
may be entrained at higher Project discharges, however. Any fish
entrained would pass through the Project water conductors and
turbines and would probably be killed. Although the mortality rate
of fish entrained would approach 100 percent, entrainment is not
expected to have significant impact on the Black Bear Lake trout
population, since only a small percentage of the total number of
fish would be subject to entrainment.
Aguatic ~£ies and Habitats -Downstream of Black Bear Lake
water Tem~rature. Water temperature, in addition to affecting
the timing of stream entrance and spawning by adult fish, determines
the rate of development from egg through alevin to free-swimming
fry. The rate of this development can be critical to the survival
of juvenile fish.
water temperatures in the stream below Black Bear Lake are in
part determined by temperature of lake outflows. This effect is
most important for the reach of Black Bear Creek upstream of Black
VI-23
Lake, and becomes less so the further downstream one ~roceeds.
Under existing conditions, outflows are from the surface of Black
Bear Lake.
Thermograph records of mid-August through october 1980 water
temperatures at four stream locations are given in Ta~le 1 and
Figures 2 and 3 of Appendix F.
As shown on Figures Sa and 5b of Appendix F, Black Bear Lake is
strongly thermally stratified in August, less so in Septem~er, and
has uniform temperature by late october. The lake's thermocline
descends from a depth of 30 to 40 feet in August to a depth of 50 to
70 feet in late september. During the winter, an inverse thermal
stratification would be expected, with a layer of water colder than
4 degrees C at shallow depths below the ice.
In order to minimize changes in the natural downstream water
temperature regime with the Project, the three-port power intake is
designed to withdraw water from as near the surface of the reservoir
as possible as much of the time as possible. This will result in
withdrawal of warmer water from above the thermocline during
summer months and the coldest possible water from near the reservoir
surface in the winter. Exhibits 42 and 44 show intake port
elevations in relation to reservoir surface elevations.
Each of the three 7 ft. by 7 ft. intake ports leads to a water
conductor 4 ft. by 4 ft. In order to avoid vortex entrainment of
air when pool elevation decreases, the port in use will ~e closed
and the next lower port will be opened when submergence of the first
port falls below eight ft. (measured from the surface of the
reservoir to the top of the 4 ft. x 4 ft. water conductor). This
leads to the operation regime shown in Table VI-3.
Table VI-3
INTAKE OPERATION
Port Invert Operable Range of Port
~ort_ ~l. (f!:L __ ~eservoir EI • . in ft)
Upper 1693 maximum 1715 (normal max. pool)
minimum 1705
'tl
Middle 1683 maximum 1705
minimum 1695
Lower 1673 maximum 1695
minimum 1685 (min. pool)
Depths of water withdrawal and percent of time of withdrawal
at given depths are shown on Exhibit 46 for January and Exhibit 47
for August. In both January and August, water would be ~ithdrawn
from depths of 12 -20 feet about 80 percent of the time, and from
depths of 20 -22 feet the rest of the time (20 percent). These
results are based on analysis of the reservoir levels which will
occur with downstream environmental flow constraints (see
Exhibits 44 and 45). These flow constraints are discussed later in
this section.
since withdrawals during the summer and fall will be from above
Black Bear Lake thermocline, stream water temperatures downstream of
the powerhouse will change little, if at all, from existing
conditions during this time of year under normal flow conditions.
Fish activity during this period, including salmonid migration into
Black Bear Creek and spawning, should not be adversely affected.
stream winter water temperatures will be increased somewhat by the
Project r perhaps by as much as 1.5 - 2 degrees C in t~e stream reach
upstream of Black Lake under extreme low flow conditions r ~hich can
occur in January and February. The increase would be smaller under
more normal flow conditions. AS shown in Table 6 of Appendix F the
magnitude of winter water temperature increase with the Project
would become progressively smaller as one proceeds downstream.
Pink and chum salmon juveniles do not remain for long in fresh
water, but either swim or are carried downstream to brackish or salt
water upon reaching the free-swimming fry stage after emergence from
streambed gravels. If warmer than normal winter water temperatures
have accelerated the intragravel stages of development, this
downstream movement may occur before sufficient numbers of food
organisms are available in the marine coastal feeding areas, and the
young fish may suffer high mortality from starvation. Differences
from natural stream temperatures of as little as 2 or 3 degrees F
during the egg-alevin development period can result in significant
VI-25
losses (Meehan 1974). Pink salmon incubation areas are in the lower
reaches of Black Bear Creek, below Black Lake. Chum salmen spawn
both up-and downstream of the lake. The part of the stream below
Black Lake would be the least susceptible to any Project-caused
winter temperature increases. Under winter extreme low flow
conditions, intragravel development of pink and chum may be
accelerated sufficiently to cause early outmigration, with the
consequences mentioned above. Under more usual (higher) winter flow
conditions, however, pink and chum intragravel development will
probably not be significantly affected.
Sockeye and coho salmon incubation areas occur both up-and
downstream of Black Lake, with the principal sockeye incubation area
being in and above Black Lake. Sockeye and coho salmon fry
generally remain in fresh water after emergence from the streambed
gravels, rearing in suitable areas of the stream or associated lakes
and feeding on plankton and insects (Scott and Crossman 1973). If
warmer winter water temperatures accelerate the rate of development
of invertebrates and plankton in Black Bear Creek and Black Lake as
well as that of sockeye and coho in the gravels, early emergence of
sockeye and coho probably would not be as potentially serious as it
would be for pink and chum. In any event, since the Project will
elevate winter water temperatures more upstream of Black Lake than
it will downstream, the potential for adverse impact on coho and
sockeye will be greater for the incubation areas above Elack Lake
than for those downstream.
other salmonids inhabiting the stream include Dolly Varden
(fall spawning), steelhead-rainbow trout (spring spawning), and
cutthroat trout (spring spawning). Rainbow and cutthroat spawning
and incu~ation will not be affected temperature-wise, since the
Project will have little, if any, effect on spring and summer
natural water temperature regimes. Dolly Varden spawning in the
fall will not be affected, but winter incubation and emergence could
be accelerated, as discussed above for salmon.
ADFG considers the Black Bear Creek system as
"temperature-sensitive", meaning that under natural summer low-flow
conditions, water temperatures can become high enough to adversely
affect fish and other stream organisms. Temperature-sensitive
streams in Southeast Alaska typically are lake system streams, are
oriented north-south, and have slow moving, organically-stained dark
water (Kelly 1979, 1980). The Project may have a beneficial effect
on water temperatures during summer low flow periods, since as
explained later in this section, flows with the Project will be
higher than natural flows for a significant part of the day during
sumrrer months and higher flows can reduce water temperatures.
Discharge Regime. From 1986
cascades reach of the stream between
eliminated except for local inflow
events. After 1991, there will be
therefore no flow in the natural
VI-26
to 1991, flows in the falls and
the dam and powerhouse would be
and Project spills during flood
essentially no spilling and
streambed between the dam and
powerhouse except for local inflow. This reach of the stream is not
critical fishery habitat.
Modification of the natural stream discharge regime dcwnstream
of the powerhouse by the proposed Project could affect fish habitat.
migration. and development of eggs and juveniles. The further
downstream one proceeds from the Project tailrace. the smaller these
flow modifications as a percent of total flow will te. since a
progressively greater percentage of stream flow derives from
unregulated runoff as one moves downstream, as illustrated on
Exhitit 48 and in Table VI-4.
Ii)
Table VI-4
DRAINAGE AREAS AND PROJECT REGULATION
Location Percent of Cumulative Drainage Area
(See Exhibit 48) Regulated Unregulated
Project tailrace (I) 100 0
Upstream of major upper
basin tritutary (II) 58.7 41.3
Downstream of major upper
tasin tritutary (III) 34.5 65.5
Black Lake inlet (IV) 28.9 71.1
Black Lake outlet (V) 24.6 75.4
Mouth of stream (VI) 10.4 89.6
Early in Project planning. a discharge regime to follow system
load demand was developed. This regime would cause daily flow
fluctuations which are large compared to minimum releases for the
reach of the stream above Black Lake. and would greatly modify
natural seasonal discharge patterns in the upper reaches of the
stream. Such a regime would almost certainly have significant
adverse effect on fish spawning and egg and intragravel larval fish
survival upstream of Black Lake. Therefore, in order to reduce the
potential for significant adverse impact, the release regime was
modified ty decreasing daily maximum discharge and/or increasing
daily minimum discharge during those months identified as important
for salmon spawning (July through November) and incubation (December
through May). The result is a discharge regime which would have
smaller daily fluctuations and would more closely follow seasonal
changes in natural discharge than would be the case for the original
VI-27
regime. The modifications analysis was performed for two cases:
1) 1986, when Project generation capacity would not yet te fully
absorbed and Project discLarges would therefore include spills from
the reservoir, and 2) 1991, when essentially no spilling would
occur. Exhibits 49 through 60 present existing average monthly
flows and ranges (based on 30-year period), the original optimum
peaking power discharge regime, and the proposed modified regime
incorporating flow constraints for fishery impact reduction.
Exhibits 49 through 54 give this information for the year 1986 for
the six stream locations shown on Exhibit 48, and the situation for
1991 at the same six locations is presented in Exhibits 55
through 60.
It is important to note that the with-Project stream flows
depicted in Exhibits 49 through 60 for each of the six locations
analyzed were obtained by adding Project discharges to the average
unregulated monthly discharge at that point in the stream.
Therefore, the curves shown for locations downstream of the
powerhouse are for ~grag~ contributions from the unregulated
drainage area to streamflow at that point. Whenever the
contribution of the unregulated part of the cumulative drainage area
to the streamflow at the location being analyzed is greater than
average, tte entire set of with-Project curves (min-max 1-max 2)
will be shifted upward. Likewise, when unregulated drainage
contributions are below average, the min-max 1-max 2 curve set will
shift downward.
For 1986, the proposed modified flow regime gives higher winter
flows (January-March), lower May flows, higher summer flows
(July-September), lower October flows, and lower Decemter flows
compared to existing conditions. April, June, and Novemter flows
would be essentially unct-anged (Exhibits 49 through 54). ~he range
of daily fluctuations will fall within the range of natural
fluctuations except during the period January-March. The magnitude
of daily fluctuations will probably be approximately equal to or
less than that under natural conditions except in January-March and
perhaps June and July, but fluctuations will te more frequent on a
daily basis with the Project than under existing conditions.
For 1991, the proposed modified flow regime gives higher winter
flows (January-March), lower late spring flows (May-June), higher
summer flows (July-August), and lower Octoter and December flow
compared to existing conditions. April, September, and November
flows would be essentially unchanged (Exhibits 55 through 60). The
range of daily fluctuations will fall within the range of natural
fluctuations except during the period January-March. The magnitude
of daily fluctuations will probably be approximately equal to or
less than that under natural conditions except in January-March and
perhaps June and July, but fluctuations will te more frequent on a
daily basis with the Project than under existing conditions.
In summary, the principal flow regime changes downstream of the
powerhouse for both 1986 and 1991 will be higher winter and summer
flows, less frequent flood and low flow events, and more frequent
VI-28
flow fluctuations on a daily basis. Higher winter flows may well
increase survival of salmonid eggs and alevins by decreasing the
frequency of ice formation in the incubating gravels, especially
upstream of Black Lake. Higher summer flows may decrease the
frequency of occurrence of high water temperatures which almost
certainly occur during dry summers under natural conditions. This
would tend to increase survival of rearing salmonids, but higher
water velocities associated with the higher summer flows may reduce
rearing habitat in certain reaches of the stream. Effects of
reduction of frequency of high and low flow events are discussed in
Appendix F, pp. 17-20. Increasing flow fluctuations on a daily
basis will probably not significantly affect fish populations or
habitat downstream of Black Lake. Daily fluctuations in the stream
reach bet~een Black Lake and the major upstream left bank tributary
in the upper drainage could have significant adverse effect, but
further information on fish use and habitat will be required to
quantify fishery impacts in this part of the stream. Upstream of
this reach, the stream bed is braided and may smooth out daily flow
fluctuations through a trickle-filter type of influence. Further
data are needed on stream morphology in this reach to determine its
potential for amelioration of daily flow variation.
After more detailed information on fish hatitat and use becomes
available through the continuing studies discussed elsewhere in this
document, the modified flow regime described above may require
refinement in order to assure that downstream fisheries impacts are
reduced to a minimum.
The ATC wood waste fired generation project might come on line
in 1981 or 1982 and would provide two to four MW for 15 years. It
might be possible to use the ATC project for peaking power in the
system so that the Black Bear Lake Project could be operated more
frequently on a base load mode during that period. The proposed
Project could also be shifted to operation principally for baseload
power after about 1992, when Project generating capacity is fully
absorbed by power system demand. Baseload operation would allow
greater flexibility in the discharge regime of the proposed Project
so that discharges could be made to follow natural patterns more
closely. Daily flow fluctuations and rate of change would also be
less with base load operation than under a peaking mode. Such
modifications in the Project discharge regime would further reduce
the potential for downstream fisheries impacts.
Dissolved Oxygen
withdraw water from no
surface, so that no
powerhouse at any time
and Nitrogen. The Project power intake will
deeper than 22 feet below the reservoir
oxygen-poor water will be discharged from the
during the year.
The multilevel intake is designed and will be operated so that
no air is entrained through vortex action under normal operating
conditions. The Project thus will not increase dissolved nitrogen
concentrations downstream of the powerhouse.
VI-29
Majo~ Ecosystem Alteration
Vegetation Re~~vo!~ operations. The amount of vegetation
biomass on the slopes abutting Black Bear Lake is not sufficient to
cause water quality problems if not cleared before dam closure.
Nevertheless, in order to avoid unsightly dead snags and potential
debris problems at the intake and spillway, vegetation between
EI. 1680 (present lake level) and EI. 1710 will be cleared before
the reservoir is filled. Vegetation between EI. 1710 and 1715
(maximum normal operating pool) will not be cleared, since most
vegetation in this zone will survive, as indicated in the following
discussion.
The present lake level is EI. 1680 and the normal maximum
reservoir level will be EI. 1715. Exhibit 38 shows the vegetation
between these two elevations. The vegetation in this zone was
described earlier. In general the vegetation consists of hemlock
and hemlock-spruce forest stands, salmonberry and alder thickets,
mountain hemlock scrub stand, rock field sutalpine meadow, and
subalpine hemlock copses intermixed with open areas.
Black Bear Lake will not be maintained at a constant pool level
but will fluctuate over time. The effects on vegetation of periodic
pool level fluctuations would be most severe if the inundation
occurs during the growing season (June to September). Most trees
and shrubs are able to survive prolonged inundation during their
dormant season but species' response to inundation during the
growing season is variable. Flood frequency, duration, and depth
are the major factors determining a species' response to inundation
during the growing season. During the growing season the highest
pool levels will be reached in average and wet years. Durinq
dry years, highest pool levels will be reached in the fall and early
winter. Table VI-5, based on proposed Black Bear Lake pool
operation levels with downstream flow constraints, gives the percent
exceedance of reservoir levels during the growing season.
VI-30
Table VI-5
PERCENT EXCEEDANCE OF POOL LEVELS
DURING THE GROWING SEASON (JUNE TO SEPTEMBER)
Number of
Years of
Range of Occurrence
Pool Level Average Percent Out of
Fluctuations _Lev~L Exceedance ·30 Years
1680 1680 (present level)
1685-1692 1688 100 30
1689-1696 1692 95 28
1691-1698 1694 90 27
1694-1699 1697 80 24
1699-1705 1702 70 21
1703-1708 1705 60 18
1703-1712 1707 50 15
1708-1714 1711 40 12
1710-1715 1712 30 9
1712-1715 1713 20 6
1713-1715 1714 10 3
1715 1715 5 1
The vegetation (see Exhibit 38) presently ~etween El. 1680 and
approximately El. 1688 ~ould be permanently inundated and, thus,
lost (see Table VI-5). There would be a gradation of vegetation
damage between EI. 1688 and El. 1715 ~ith the most severe damage
occurring at the lower elevations.
The zone bet~een El. 1688 and El. 1707 would ~e severely
stressed. Allor a portion of this zone will ~e inundated durinq
the gro~inq season for at least 50 percent of the time (see Table
VI-5). Nearly all of the woody vegetation in the areas to be
inundated 90 to 70 percent of the time would, in all pro~ability,
die within three to five years. Herbaceous vegetation ~ould be
eliminated within two to three years. In the area to be inundated
from 60 to 50 percent of the time, only the most flood tolerant
trees and shrubs would survive, probably at a reduced gro~th rate.
Herbaceous vegetation would be sparse and probably be represented by
annuals and flood tolerant grasses and sedges.
Unfortunately, very little is known concerning the flood
tolerance of plants common to the Black Bear Lake storeline.
Walters et ale (1980) classify the flood tolerance of red alder and
sitka alder as very tolerant (~ithstand flooding for periods of two
or more growing seasons): Sitka spruce, ~estern redcedar, and
western hemlock as tolerant (withstand flooding for most of one
VI-31
growing season); and Alaska-cedar as intermediately tolerant (able
to survive flooding for one to three months during the growing
season). Minore and Smith (1971), based on flood tolerance studies,
ranks red alder, Sitka spruce, and western hemlock as interffediately
tolerant. In a review of the literature, Whitlow and Harris (1979)
rank western redcedar as tolerant (able to survive flooding for one
growing season, with significant mortality occurring if flooding is
repeated the following years) and Sitka spruce and western hemlock
as slightly tolerant (able to survive flooding or saturated soils
for 30 consecutive days during the growing season). It is assumed
that inundation for all or a significant portion of two or more
consecutive growing seasonswould kill most of the woody vegetation
between El. 1688 and El. 1707. An increase in alders could occur at
the less frequently inundated upper elevations.
The zone from El. 1707 to El. 1715 will be inundated less
frequently (see Table VI-5) and vegetational changes would be less
severe than for the zone just described. The vegetation between
El. 1707 and El. 1712 would be sparse with only flood tolerant
shrubs able to survive. Between El. 1712 and El. 1715, the maximum
level, most of the original woody vegetation would remain, provided
that flooding does not occur for two or more consecutive growing
seasons. However, even if this does occur, sufficient time could be
expected between subsequent high flooding events that the vegetation
would have time to recover. One flooding event of one week or more
would be sufficient to kill most of the herbaceous vegetation.
Causes would be anaerobic soil conditions, mechanical damage from
floating debris, and siltation from receding water covering growing
tips.
Winter pool levels above El. 1688 should not, by themselves,
significantly affect the dormant vegetation. However, they may
exacerbate the stress on vegetation already impacted from inundation
during the ~receding growing season.
Water table levels will rise in direct response to the rise in
reservoir water levels. However, since most of the shoreline is
steep, the rise in water table level will not be greater than the
reservoir surface level. This may cause some localized wetter than
normal conditions on slope areas immediately above the reservoir
water level. In these wet areas, quite common at present, sedges
may replace trees and shrubs. According to studies by Minore and
Smith (1971) on the effect of raised winter water table depths on
plant growth, red alder, western redcedar and Sitka spruce will grow
where the winter water table is less than 15 cm deep. Red alder and
western redcedar are able to grow with the water being stagnant
while Sitka spruce requires a flowing water table. Western hemlock
is intolerant of water tables less than 15 cm deep. It would
appear, therefore, that any raised water tables along the shoreline
would result in the death of western hemlock and, in all
probability, mountain hemlock. Sitka spruce and alder, however, may
survive raised water tables immediately above the new shoreline.
VI-32
Vegetation -Downstream Flows. Project downstream releases are
not expected to cause any significant alterations of the vegetation
along the Black Bear Creek stream corridor. The reasons are 1) the
total annual streamflow and its monthly distribution will remain the
same, 2) the regulated area of the watershed is small, approximately
ten percent, compared to the total drainage area (see Exhibit 48),
and 3) a major source of water maintaining the streamside wet areas
appears to be surface and subsurface flows from adjacent slopes.
Nevertheless, overbank flooding may also be important for
maintaining the vegetation in these poorly drained areas. Project
releases will, however, be well within the range of natural
fluctuations. The overall effect of the Project will ~e a reduction
in the frequency and magnitude of flood flows and a decrease in
frequency and increase in maqnitude of low flows. This influence of
the regulated flow on the natural flow from the unregulated drainage
area will decrease progressively downstream. The large natural
fluctuations will still occur downstream, particularly downstream of
Black Lake ..
The most pronounced effects on downstream flows from Project
releases will occur between locations I and II (see Exhi~it 48).
The upper reaches of this stream section are bordered by bands of
alders and salmonberry as well as canopy-sized hemlock and spruce
trees. The lower half of the section contains braided su~channels
and alluvial fans of tributaries. Vegetation is mostly cancpy-sized
hemlock and spruce with scattered alders. These trees are not
dependent on stream flows for their survival or maintenance. The
project effects of reducing high flows and increasing low flows
should not have any appreciable effect on this vegetation. There
may, however, be a change in the groundcover flora or an increase in
shrubs.
A muskeg forest and meadow occurs along Black Eear Creek
between locations III and IV (see Exhibit 48). Less than cne-third
of the water passing through these wet areas will be regulated flow
from Black Bear Lake. The major project effect will be a reduction
(by less than one-third) in overbank flooding. If overbank flooding
from large storm events is important in maintaining the muskeg area,
then the Project may cause some vegetational chanqes there. The
reduction in flooding could be sufficient to cause a shift from
hydric to more mesic conditions. In the extreme case, the open
muskeg area could become colonized by additional shrubs, and
eventually develop into semi-open successional woodland stages
dominated in turn by alder, sitka spruce, and western hemlock.
However, it does not seem likely that any changes would go beyond an
increase in shrubs and small trees.
Project releases would
water levels. Therefore, no
either along the shoreline
contain aquatic macrophytes.
not cause any changes in Elack Lake
vegetational changes are expected
or in those few shoreline areas which
Downstream of Black Lake, Project releases are expected to have
only minimal, if any, effect on the vegetation. In this area of
VI-33
poor drainage and a naturally high water table, much of the water
maintaining the vegetation in the wet meadows and wet low sites is
surface and subsurface drainage from the adjacent slopes as well as
unregulated streamflow (specifically, overbank flooding). Large
natural streamflow fluctuations and drainage from adjacent slopes
will be unaffected. Their contribution to maintaining the present
wetland type vegetation will remain unchanged by the Project. The
Project-regulated flow will be such a small component of tt.e total
water flow through this area that its effects on vegetation will be
insignificant.
Wildlife. Reservoir surface fluctuation will not significantly
affect wildlife use of the lake, since such use at present is
primarily for drinking. Most of the strongly water-oriented mammals
and birds of the area occur downstream of the proposed reservoir.
The maintenance of the transmission line in a perpetually
low-growth condition will provide a stable edge-oriented tird and
mammal community, with the food-chain relationships those cf forest
species feeding in the open. This will be a linear interruption in
the otherwise continuous coniferous forest ecosystem.
Aguatic Reservoir ~evel Fluctuation. Normal maximum daily
reservoir fluctuation will be about one foot. Seasonal fluctuations
are summarized on Exhibits 42 through 45. These fluctuations could
affect rainbow trout spawning in Black Bear Lake as discussed
previously.
b~~!i£ stream Wat~~ Temperature. Summer and fall water
temperatures downstream of the powerhouse will change little, if at
all, with the Project, except as noted below.
Winter water temperatures will be increased by as much as 1.5-2
degrees C in the stream above Black Lake under extreme low flow
conditions, which can occur in January and Fetruary. The increase
would be smaller under more normal winter flow conditions. The
magnitude of winter water temperature increase would become
progressively smaller as one proceeds downstream.
The Project will have a beneficial effect on stream water
temperatures during summer low flow periods, since with-Project
flows will be higher than natural flows during summer and higher
flows would reduce water temperatures. Effects of these temperature
modifications on stream fishery resources are discussed in the
section on operation effects on aquatic resources.
VI-34
Aquatic Discha~~ Regime. Flows between the
powerhouse would be eliminated except for local inflow,
reach of the stream is not critical fishery habitat.
dam
tut
and
this
Downstream of the powerhouse, the principal flow regime changes
will be higher winter and summer flows, less frequent flood and low
flow events, and more frequent flow fluctuations on a daily basis.
Effects on fishery resources in different reaches of the stream are
discussed above under aquatic impacts of operation, and in
Appendix F.
Cumulative !m~ct~
other Hydroelectric Proiects. There are no other existing or
proposed hydroelectric projects in the Black Bear Creek basin.
Logging ~ations and Aquatic Eco~stem~. Gibtons and Salo
(1973) reviewed recent literature on logging effects on fish and
aquatic habitat in the western u.s. and Canada, and summarized
research findings on sedimentation, water temperature, and stream
flow as follows.
Analysis of the effects of logging and logging roads on
sediment production indicates that:
1. Logging roads are the greatest source of man-caused stream
sediments,
~. Sediments from clearcuts occur infrequently
primarily a result of bared mineral soils and
surface soil permeability due to compaction, and
and are
reduced
~. Severe burning of logging slash is often followed by
increased rates of surface soil erosion, due primarily to
the removal of stabilizing vegetation and litter.
Direct adverse effects of suspended sediment or turtidity on
fish include:
1. Adhesion of silt particles to the chorion of salmonid ova,
and
2. Abrasion, thickening, and fusion of gills as a result of
increased silt concentration.
Suspended sediment may also block or decrease light penetration
and limit production of phytoplankton and aquatic plants, may cause
alterations in stream temperature change rates and precipitation of
organic particles which produce higher biological oxygen demand, and
may reduce sport fishing success.
VI-35
Of all the factors affecting aquatic life, bedload sediments
cause the most damage by reducing invertetrate diversity and
populations, reducing available living space for fish, and reducing
early survival of fish. Direct effects include:
1. Fillinq of gravel interstices, therety reducing intragravel
water flow, which reduces dissolved oxygen available to
incubating salmonid eggs,
2. Prevention of fry emergence, and
3. Reduction of
and promoting
periphyton.
food resources by filling gravel interstices
unstable substrates for invertetrates and
Damaging effects of sediment are most pronounced during fish
intragravel development stages. Once emergence occurs, food
availability becomes more important.
Organic fines introduced by logging decrease dissolved oxygen
concentrations and intragravel flows, and increase salmonid egg and
alevin mortality by promoting bacterial infection.
water temperature is a major determinant
production, with small forested streams being the most
to temperature change. Recent research shows that:
in salmonid
susceptible
1. Removal of streamside vegetation increases maximum water
temperatures by exposing streams to increased direct solar
radiation,
2. stream temperature is directly proportional to water surface
area exposed and solar energy input, and inversely
proportional to stream flow,
3. Previously warmed water which reaches shade does not
normally cool unless there is cool water inflow, and
4. Winter minimum water temperatures can be lowered ty removing
streamside vegetation.
stream flows in coastal areas of the western u.s. and Canada
are primarily affected by precipitation patterns and somewhat less
by evapotranspiration losses. Removal of vegetation ty timber
harvesting increases stream flows, since reduction in
evapotranspiration losses is much greater than the possible
evaporation from increased soil exposure.
Recent research shows that:
1. Streamflows increase after clearcut logging, especially if
followed by slash burning,
VI-36
1. For each one percent of watershed cut, an average increase
of 0.2 inches in water runoff can be expected the first year
after cutting,
]. Minimum flows are increased, although major flood flows are
not increased significantly, and
4. Changes in streamflow resulting from vegetation removal are
usually less than natural climatic-caused variations.
Effects of altered streamflows can be either detrimental or
beneficial to aquatic organisms. Increased flows can cause egg and
alevin displacement and mortality as a result of gravel shifting,
and reduction of benthic algae and insects by gravel grinding action
and displacement. USFWS has also pointed out that higher flows can
have detrimental effects on juvenile fish, which generally prefer
lower water velocities (Appendix J). However, increased flows can
also increase available living space and carrying capacity for fish
and benthic insects. Increased summer flows also lessen adverse
effects of increased solar radiation on stream temperatures
resulting from vegetation removal.
CUmulative Effects of the ~ropo~Q Project and Logging
Operations 2rr the Agu~~!£ Ecosystem. Stream suspended sediment
loads will be temporarily increased by the Project only during
initial and final construction phases, and then probably only above
Black Lake. No cumulative effects with logging are expected, since
timber is being harvested downstream of Black Lake.
Higher summer flows with the Project may reduce summer water
temperature increases that might occur due to logging in the lower
basin. Higher winter flows with the Project would tend to
ameliorate lowering of winter minimum water temperatures that might
take place as a result of streamside vegetation removal during
timber harvest in the lower basin.
Stream flows in the lower basin will probably increase for the
first few years after logging operations, but as mentioned above,
such changes are usually less than climate-caused variations.
Cumulative effects of the proposed Project and logging operations on
stream flow in the lower basin therefore would generally ce expected
to fall within the range of conditions examined in the analysis
presented earlier, except that minimum flows for the cumulative
case may be slightly higher than for the with-Project analysis.
Other Cumulative ~ffe£ts with Logging 0Eerations. ~he total
amount of-wildlife habitat that will be removed or disturced by the
proposed Project, including the transmission line ROW, is at most
one-third the area presently being logged in the lower Elack Bear
Creek valley alone.
VI-37
Cumulative effects on scenic and esthetic resources are
discussed in Appendix I.
Recreational Facilities ~nd yse
Operation and maintenance effects on existing recreation are
discussed in Appendix I.
Historical, Archeological, cultural Sites/Values
Project operation and maintenance will not affect any known
sites (see Appendix G).
Scenic and Esthetic ---------
Operation and maintenance effects on scenic sites and values
are discussed in Appendix I.
Socioeconomic Effect~
Operation of the Black Bear Lake powerplant will be automatic
and so will require only occasional visits for maintenance. There
will be no socioeconomic impact because of the small work force
involved.
Project effects on economic development of the area are
discussed elsewhere in this report.
Air Quality
Diesel emissions will be reduced, since the Project will reduce
the need to operate exsitinq diesel generating plants. Otherwise,
air quality will not be affected by Project operation or
maintenance.
Noise
Operating noise from the Project will be perceptible only a
short distance away, perhaps a kilometer for the sensitive person.
The noise will consist of low frequency generator hum and
intermittent sounds of vehicles. Such sounds are not heard now in
the immediate neighborhood of the powerhouse site, but the road to
Black Lake, now in construction, will provide substantial ncise when
vehicles are passing.
VI-38
Water Quanti!y and Quali!y
The major effects of the proposed Project will ~e modification
of flows in Black Bear Creek and fluctuation of tbe surface
elevation of Black Bear Lake.
Effects of Project operation on water quality in Elack Bear
Lake will be minor. Similarly, witb the exception of temperature as
discussed earlier, no significant changes in the major water quality
parameters in Black Bear Creek are anticipated.
Compliance ~ith Regulato~ §tandards
Air and water quality standards will ~e met during Project
operation and maintenance.
Solid wastes accumulated in trash receptacles will ~e
and deposited in existing sanitary landfill sites for
communities. Human wastes from the powerhouse toilet
disposed of at appropriate collecting sites in tbe
communities.
Breakdown of ~h~ Multilevel !ntakg
removed
nearby
will ~e
nearby
If the automatic gate controls for the intake structure fail,
water will be withdrawn from the low level port. This will avoid
entrainment of air, wtich otherwise could cause increase of
dissolved nitrogen in downstream discharges. Even if tbe reservoir
is at full pool level and stratified, water witbdrawn from the low
level port and discharged from the powerbouse will have higb
dissolved oxygen levels (see lake profiles in Appendix F). If
intake controls were to fail during winter, low level withdrawals
would cause only a very minor increase in downstream water
temperature. However, if breakdown occurred during the summer when
the reservoir is thermally stratified, emergency low level
withdrawal would result in discharge of significantly colder water
to the stream. The intake structure and controls will be inspected
regularly to minimize the chance of breakdown. If the control does
fail, it will be returned to normal operation as soon as possible.
VI-39
Environmental Effect~ of Termination and Abandonment
Land Usg ~nd Esthetics
Abandonment of the Project would generally result in returning
land use and esthetic character to more natural pre-Project
conditions.
Breaching the dam would return the reservoir to its
preimpoundment level. This would result in tem~orary visual impact
from exposure of the previously inundated shoreline. This condition
would exist until natural vegetation reestablished itself.
Breaching the dam would again allow water to flow over the
downstream falls.
Removal of the powerhouse and related facilities would cause
temporary visual impact until natural vegetation reestablished
itself. Natural reestablishment of the original braided stream
channel in the vicinity of the powerhouse is unlikely. The access
road would not be removed, since even if it were, it is unlikely
that the road ROW would return to pre-Project conditions.
Removal of the
maintenance would allow
by native vegetation.
pre-Project conditions.
transmission line and cessaticn of ROW
recolonization of the transmission corridor
The corridor would eventually return to
Blac~ ~ea~ Lake. Removal of the dam would cause the lake level
to return to EI. 1680. This would expose the unvegetated inundated
zone ranging from El. 1680 to El. 1715. The higher elevaticns would
have only a sparse cover of flood tolerant shrubs and herbaceous
vegetation. Primary succession would begin in the bare areas. The
time lag between exposure of the area and the establishment of
vegetation would vary, as would the species composition of the
pioneers, depending on the nature of the surface exposed, the
available seed source, and other factors. Along most of the exposed
shoreline of Black Bear Lake, mosses and perennial herbs probably
would become established in the available soil. Small shrubs such
as salmonberry and Devilsclub, followed by alder and hemlock, would
eventually colonize the area. In the vicinity of the rock field at
the southeastern end of the lake, the colonizing vegetation would be
similar to that presently existing.
Other Area~. If Project structures such as the powerstation
and associated facilities and roads were removed, the areas would
have to be regraded to limit erosion. The disturbed soil would be
naturally colonized by dense alder growths. Regeneration of
vegetation would be similar to that in slide areas, former logging
roads and highly degraded logged areas. Eventually (50 years or
VI-40
more), spruce would begin to replace the alders. However, to ensure
that a more desirable vegetation cover is established as ra~idly as
possible in these areas, it would be necessary to artificially
reforest the regraded areas. Decisions concerning the need for any
reforestation program would have to be made at the appropriate time.
Wildlife
Following the removal of Project facilities and cessation of
maintenance activities for roads r trails and the transmission line
ROW, natural succession will result in gradual restoration of the
pre-Project vegetation communities and the animal and bird
populations supported by them. Bird populations will respond in
much the same manner as they do to clearcutting (Kessler 1979).
Mammals will use the project clearings, as they do other clearings,
for feeding or movements.
Aquatic Ecosystems
Breaching or removal of the dam would return the lake to its
pre impoundment level. Original rainbow trout spawning areas would
again become available.
Streamflow regime would return to pre-Project conditions r as
would stream temperatures. The modified channel reach in the
vicinity of the powerhouse would probably not return to natural
conditions. Fishery productivity of Black Bear Creek atove Black
Lake would probably return to pre-Project levels. Breaching the dam
would probably cause a temporary increase in suspended sediments in
the creek downstream of the Project site.
Proposed Environmental Monitoring Programs
Proposed monitorinq programs are described in the following
sections. The proposed aquatic r vegetation, and wildlife mcnitoring
programs are based on recommendations from APA's consultants and
from state and federal agencies (see correspondence in A~~endix J).
These monitoring programs are designed to provide additional
detailed information which may be required to further refine
proposed Project operations to insure that adverse im~acts are
avoided or reduced to a minimum. It is our opinion that no changes
will be required in design or location of Project civil works as
described in this report.
VI-41
Fisheries ~nQ Hydrological/Limnological Studies
The scope of work for these studies is presented in A~~endix F.
The studies began in July 1981.
Construction Phase Water Quality Monitoring
It is proposed that dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and oils and
grease be monitored frequently during construction at a suitable
site in Black Bear Creek between the powerhouse construction area
and the confluence of the major southwest tributary above Black
Lake. This monitoring would serve a quality control function during
construction to insure that runoff control measures and procedures
are functioning as intended •
Dissolved Nitrogen Test
The proposed intake structure is designed and will be operated
to avoid air entrainment which could cause elevation of downstream
dissolved nitrogen levels. Nevertheless, it is proposed that a
one-time test be conducted of the potential for increased dissolved
nitrogen with intentional vortex entrainment of air. Such a test
would permit determination of the potential severity of such an
event and allow formulation of precautions which could be taken in
Project operations to preclude its occurrence. The test would be
conducted once the Project is operational, but at a time of year
when any increase in nitrogen concentrations would not be
detrimental to downstream fishery resources. Timinq ~ould be
established in consultation with ADFG and other a~~ropriate
agencies. The test protocol would include measurement of dissolved
nitrogen in Black Bear Lake and in Black Bear Creek downstream of
the powerhouse discharge both with and without vortex entrainment of
air at the intake.
~ost -PrQject Aguatic E~sources Monitoring
MOnitoring of salmon escapement, stream temperature, and
discharge would be continued upstream of Black Lake after the
Project begins operation. Frequency of data collection and duration
of these continuing studies would be discussed with state and
federal fisheries agencies at a later date.
Vegetation
A single ground survey of the proposed transmission line
corridor will be conducted during the final design stage tc verify
the preliminary wetlands inventory. This information will be used
along with the guidelines in Appendix I to establish tr.e final
alignment of the transmission line.
VI-42
Areas disturbed by construction activities will te regraded and
planted in appropriate natural vegetation. Specific vegetation
requirements such as suitable plant species, soil treatment, seedbed
preparation, seeding rates or seedling densities, and follow-up
maintenance procedures will be formulated after discussions with
USFS. The revegetated areas will be periodically monitored to
identify any problems that may arise, such as eroded areas and poor
plant growth. Appropriate measures will be taken to correct such
problems as soon as possible.
After vegetation is cleared from the reservoir area and the
reservoir is filled, the shoreline vegetation and that in the zone
of fluctuating pool levels will be monitored for any debris control
or erosion problems and unsightly snags. Debris and snags will be
removed, and any erosion problems dealt with by appropriate means.
Wildlife
Before final alignment of the transmission line within the
proposed transmission corridor is determined during final design of
the Project, additional eagle surveys will be conducted as necessary
to complement USFWS data. USFWS performed some eagle survey work in
the vicinity of the Project in 1970. The agency plans to resurvey
likely eagle use areas along the proposed Project transmission
corridor in September 1981. The final alignment of the transmission
line will comply with USFWS Eagle Protection Guidelines.
The Project maintenance staff will be briefed by local game
personnel on the handling of wildlife problems (e.g., bear
encounters) on Project lands. Transmission line maintenance and
surveillance personnel will be alerted to potential wildlife
problems, including electrocutions of large birds, which they will
be required to report.
A pre-construction reconnaissance inventory of beaver and other
species using existing beaver impoundments upstream of Elack Lake
will be conducted. USFS and ADFG biologists will be asked to assist
the Project maintenance staff in monitoring the possible effects of
flow changes on beavers in Black Bear Creek.
Prev~ntive Measures
Measures which were
avoid or reduce adverse
following subsections.
included in Project planning in order to
Project effects are discussed in the
VI-43
Protection 2± Environmental Values During Maintenance and Ereakdowns
The intake structure and automatic controls will be inspected
regularly to minimize the chance of breakdown.
The automatic alarm system will signal any failure of intake
structure controls. This will allow immediate dispatch of
maintenance crews and prompt return of the intake to normal
operation.
Transmission Line Corridor Selection. Fish and wildlife values
were fully considered-in-evaluation of alternative transmission line
corridors and selection of the proposed corridor. See the
alternatives section.
Construction. The final ROW alignment will be placed within
the proposed transmission corridor with great care. Within areas
of homogeneous woodland or clearcut areas the placement of the ROW
will be based on engineering and economic criteria, with suitable
attention to esthetic guidelines of the FERC (FPC 1970). In areas
of muskeg or other wetlands, the ROW will be sited to avoid flight
paths of waterfowl. The line will not cross over water or be close
enough to the edge of a water body to block flight pathways.
Transmission pole and line placement will also comply ~ith USFWS
guidelines regarding distance from eagle nest trees and distance
from the mouths of salmon spawning streams.
The transmission line poles have been designed in accordance
with recent publications on avoiding bird electrocutions (especially
REA 1979). There will be no crossbars to invite ~erching or
nesting, and the uppermost wire will be three feet below the top of
the pole. Most raptors will use the top of the pole for ~erching.
The alternative placement of wires and their four-foot vertical
separation will render simultaneous contact unlikely.
Clearing of forest for the transmission line will be
accomplished by mechanical removal of the trees. Where the
transmission corridor crosses water courses, trees will te felled
and equipment operated in accordance with USFS policy. For example,
trees within crownheight distance from a stream will ce felled away
from the stream, logs and debris which accidentally fall into the
stream will be removed within 48 hours of the incident, and
equipment will not be operated in streambeds (USFS 1977).
Measures to prevent or reduce construction related sediment
damage to aquatic habitat in Black Bear Lake and to salmon spawning
areas in Black Bear Creek upstream of Black Lake are discussed
below.
Any blasting operations required during Project construction
which would occur close enough to the stream to damage or kill
VI-44
salmonid eggs or intragravel alevins will be properly scheduled to
avoid serious effects on fish resources. Blasting will net occur
within a half mile of an active eagle nest during the period March 1
-August 31.
As discussed previously, a reservoir filling schedule is
proposed which would provide adequate flows in Black Bear Creek.
operation. The power intake in Black Bear Lake is designed to
provide relatively low water approach velocities for the purpose of
reducing the potential for fish entrainment.
A three-level intake is proposed to
natural downstream water temperature regime
populations. The planning process leading
concept and the operational criteria for the
discussed elsewhere in this report.
minimize changes in the
and effects on fish
to the proposed intake
proposed intake are
The original discharge regime was modified during Project
planning to reduce the potential for significant adverse impact on
downstream fishery resources. The planning process is summarized in
the section on alternatives considered.
Protection Qf Historical, Cultural, Archeological Sites
A survey of cultural/historical/archeological sites in the
Project Area was carried out by APA's consultants during the early
stages of Project planning (see Appendix G). The information
gathered was incorporated into the selection of Project civil works
sites and routing of the transmission corridor (see alternatives
section). As a result, no known historical, archeologial, or
cultural sites will be adversely affected by construction,
operation, or maintenance of the proposed Project.
If any artifacts or features of archeological interest are
encountered during Project construction, the Alaska state Historic
Preservation Officer will be notified immediately.
Protection Qf Scenic Valyes
Proposed measures to protect scenic values are discussed in
Appendix I.
VI-45
Protection of wate~ Qual!!y
Construction. During the construction period a major ~otential
effect to water quality is the possible increased concentrations of
suspended sediments in Black Bear Lake and Black Eear Creek
resulting from construction activities. The potential sources of
the sediments are:
a. Erosion of excavated areas in the immediate area of the
damsite,
b. Operation of a sump pump to maintain the dewatered area
downstream of the cofferdam at the dam site,
c. Waste wate~ from the washing process required for aggregate
preparation,
d. Erosion of excavated areas in the area of the powerhouse,
e. Stream channel modification and access road construction
retween the powerhouse and penstock tunnel portal,
f. Construction and burial of the penstock between the
powerhouse and tunnel portal, and
g. Excavation of the tailrace channel.
Contribution
excavated for the
below. Generally
outlet from Black
into the area
water containing
Bear Lake.
of sediments resulting from erosion of the area
dam will be minimized through methods described
the area to be excavated will be downstream of the
Bear Lake. Most of the drainage will be channeled
immediately downstream of the cofferdam from which
the suspended sediments will be pumped to Black
As a source of suspended sediments in Black Eear Lake,
discharge from the sump pump will be filtered through a small pool
in the dam construction staging area. Because the staging area will
be constructed of talus excavated from the dam foundation area, it
will be quite porous. It is anticipated that sediments contained in
the discharge will settle within the staging area and water that
relatively free of sediments will filter into Black Bear Lake.
As a further precaution to prevent sediments from being
transported to Black Bear Creek, the intake to the diversion culvert
will be extended 50 to 75 ft. into Black Bear Lake. This will avoid
transportation of sediments suspended during construction of the
cofferdam, staging area, and dam to Black Bear Creek.
Potential increases in the sediment load in
resulting from erosion of the excavated area around
will be minimized by constructing a low berm
construction staging area and Black Bear Creek.
VI-46
Black Eear Creek
the pcwerhouse
between the main
Waste water from washing of the concrete agqregate will be
discharged through a series of settling tanks prior to release to
the drainage system.
Potential erosion of excavated areas of the buried ~enstockr
modification of the stream bed and excavation of the tailrace will
be minimized by revegetating areas along the banks as soon as
possible after disturbance.
A potential source of suspended sediments resulting from
construction activities is the excavation of the tailrace channel
and modification of the stream channel upstream of the po~erhouse.
However r the streambed materials in this reach range from cobble and
gravel at the powerhouse site to boulder/bedrock at the upstream
end r so that only small amounts of suspended fines would te expected
to be released by these construction activities. There may be some
minor deposition of fines in Black Bear Creek upstream of Black
Laker but these deposits would be washed from the streambed by
freshets and floods.
Any spills of fuel r oil or grease will be contained within the
construction staging areas. Bulk fuels would be stored so that no
leaks to the lakes or stream occur.
operat~Q~. Measures to reduce
discharge regime during operation of
discussed above.
effects on water quality and
the proposed Project were
Mitigation Measures
Proposed mitigation measures are discussed in the followinq
subsections.
Terrestrial Habitat ang ~ildlife Populations
Areas cleared for construction (equipment storage
temporary roads r parking areas r etc.) but not needed for
operation will be revegetated with native plants or
soil-holding ground cover r or allowed to succeed naturally
climax vegetation.
areas r
Project
with a
to the
The transmission line ROW will be seeded only in areas where
slope or disturbance are likely to cause severe erosion. Elsewhere
a low cover of native shrubs and grasses will be allowed to form.
VI-47
Aquatic Hatl~at ang Fish Populations
It may be possible to place substrate suitatle for rainbow
trout spawning in selected areas of Black Bear Lake to replace
spawning habitat inundated when the reservoir is filled. ADFG has
suggested that the inlet stream(s) to Black Bear Lake might be
suitable for such purpose (Appendix J). A limited stocking program
is another potential mitigation measure. ADFG policy does not allow
stocking of non-native rainbow strains in Alaska waters. ADFG has
advised that no source of native Alaska rainbow strains is ~resently
available, but that hatcheries are planned which probably would be
able to provide fish for stocking by the time the proposed Project
is scheduled to be constructed. Mitigation measures ~ill te planned
in cooperation with USFS and ADFG.
With-Project modifications in the existing discharge and
temperature regimes in Black Bear Creek will have some teneficial
effects. Higher winter flows may well increase survival of salmonid
eggs and alevins ty decreasing the frequency of ice formation in the
incubating gravels, especially upstream of Black Lake. Higher
summer flows may decrease the frequency of occurence of high water
temperatures which presently occur during dry summers. This would
tend to increase survival of rearing salmonids, but associated
higher water velocities may reduce rearing habitat in certain
reaches.
Water temperatures in Black Bear Creek upstream of Elack Lake
could be as much as 1.5-2 degrees C above natural temperatures under
extreme low winter flow conditions, which can occur in January and
February. Measures which might be employed to reduce witL-Project
winter water temperatures include a structure which would cascade
water, a broad and shallow tailrace, a shallow cooling pond, and
selective clearing of streamside vegetation. However, it should be
noted that removal of streamside vegetation would also probably
increase summer maximum water temperatures.
The feasibility of a small spawning channel downstream of the
Project tailrace will be considered if post-Project salmon
escapement monitoring indicates that such a facility would be of
value. Any spawning channel studies or other appropriate mitigation
measures necessary will be fully coordinated with ADFG, USFWS, NMFS,
and USFS.
Proposed visual impact mitigation measures are discussed in
detail in Appendix I.
VI-48
Public Acce§§ and Recreation
Public access and the proposed recreation plan are discussed in
Appendix H.
Preparation Q1 Lands
Proposed land treatments are discussed in Appendix I.
Beneficial ~ironmental Effe£i2
Management of the transmission line ROW for low vegetation will
aid grouse and edge-dependent birds (flycatchers, waxwings, some
warblers) by providing berry-and seed-bearing plants.
The Project may have a beneficial effect on stream water
temperatures during summer low flow periods. Flows with the Project
will be higher than natural flows for a significant part of the day
during summer months, which can reduce water temperatures.
Higher winter flows with the Project may well increase survival
of salmonid eggs and alevins by decreasing the frequency of ice
formation in the incubating gravels, especially upstream of Black
Lake. Higher winter flows also would tend to ameliorate any
lowering of winter minimum water temperatures that might occur due
to streamside vegetation removal during timber harvest in the lower
basin.
The proposed Project recreation plan provides for parking and
boat access to Black Lake and fishing access to Black Bear Creek
upstream of Black Lake (see Appendix H).
Potentially Significant Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Effects
Relocations
The USFS cabin on Black Bear Lake will be relocated upslope to
avoid inundation when the Project reservoir is filled.
Cultural, Historic and Archeological Values
The Project will have no effect on known cultural, historic, or
archeological sites or values.
VI-49
Esthetic ang Visual Valu~§
Unavoidable adverse effects on esthetic and visual values are
discussed in Appendix I.
Recreational Values
~e proposed recreation plan and Project effects on present
recreational use are discussed in Appendices H and I, respectively.
Land Use
At full pool (EI. 1715) the reservoir will inundate about
70 acres in addition to the natural water surface area. Reservoir
slopes will be cleared of vegetation between EI. 1680 (existing lake
level) and EI. 1710. Approximately 60 acres will be cleared, more
than half of which will require only light clearing.
A maximum of 220 acres will be cleared for the transmission
line, assuming a 40-ft. wide ROW. Since the line will follow
existing roads along much of its route, actual clearinq required
will be considerably less than 220 acres, since only about 15
additional feet of clearing will be needed along roads. A more
precise estimate of clearing requirements must await final design
phase survey of the transmission line alignment.
A total of approximately 12 acres will have to be cleared for
other proposed Project structures (dam area four acres, pcwerhouse
area three acres, access road five acres).
Excavation, borrow, and fill areas will occupy a total of less
than seven acres.
All lands to be cleared and excavation, borrow, and fill areas
will receive mitigation treatment as discussed in Appendix I, so
that no significant adverse impact will result.
Wildlife Habitat and Populations
Less than 25 acres of habitat will be removed from the Black
Bear Creek valley and thus denied to wildlife. The population
changes induced will be so small, that, on a regional basis, they
will be masked by other types of development, especially logging.
Improved access will probably lead to increased hunting and trapping
pressure. Human -bear encounters will be more frequent and number
of bears killed will probably increase.
VI-50
fish Habitat and Populations
Projec~ Effect~. Existing rainbow trout spawning areas in
Black Bear Lake will be inundated and will protably no lenger be
suitable. It may be possible to place substrate appropriate for
rainbow spawning in selected areas of the lake to replace inundated
spawning habitat. When operating, the reservoir will have a maximum
daily fluctuation of about one foot and seasonal fluctuations as
shown on Exhibits 42 trIough 45. These fluctuations may reduce
rainbow trout spawning success. Any reduction of the lake's trout
population could probably be fully mitigated by the stocking program
and/or creation of new spawning habitat areas discussed previously.
Increased fishing pressure can be expected in the lakes and
stream, with possible season or bag limit restrictions.
Adequate flows in Black Bear Creek will be maintained during
reservoir filling as proposed earlier.
SUs~ended sediment levels will increase
placement and removal of the construction staging
Lake, but no significant adverse impact on the
expected •
temporarily during
area in Elack Bear
fish population is
Increased sediment loads will occur in Black Bear Creek above
Black Bear Lake during initial and final construction activities in
spite of -preventive measures proposed above. However, sediments
deposited would be washed from streambed substrates by freshets and
floods.
Some power intake entrainment mortality of fish is Expected,
but intake design will keep such losses to a minimum.
Even with the multilevel intake designed to reduce water
temperature changes, winter water temperatures in Black Eear Creek
between the powerhouse and Black Lake could increase by as much as
1.5-2 degrees C under extreme low flow conditions, which can occur
in January and February. The increase would te smaller under more
normal winter flow conditions. Potential mitigation measures to
avoid or reduce this increase were discussed earlier.
The effect of the Project on stream water temperatures during
summer low flow periods will be beneficial, as discussed ~reviously.
Flows in the existing stream bed between the dam and powerhouse
will be essentially eliminated, but this reach is not critical
fishery hacitat.
The original discharge regime was modified during Project
planning to reduce the potential for significant adverse impact on
downstream fishery resources. This part of the planning process is
summarized in the section on alternatives considered. Downstream of
the powerhouse, the principal flow regime changes witt project
operation will be higher winter and summer flows, less frequent
VI-51
flood and low flow events, and more frequent flow fluctuations on a
daily basis. Effects on fishery resources in different reaches of
the stream are discussed in the section on operation effects on
aquatic resources and in Appendix F.
Summary. Although further studies are proposed to gather more
specific data on fishery resources in Black Bear Creek, present data
would indicate that Black Lake and headwaters could reasonably
support a salmon resource on the order of 1,000-10,000 fish
annually, in addition to a significant sport fishery. A
conservative (high) estimate of Project effects on this resource
without mitigation would be that the fishery potential in this part
of the stream system might be reduced by half. The post-Project
monitoring studies listed earlier would be designed to determine the
magnitude of Project effects over the long term. If these studies
indicate that significant adverse impact is occurring, then, as
mentioned previously, a small spawning channel downstream of the
powerhouse is a possible mitigation measure. Such a spawning
channel could probably fully mitigate decreases in fishery
productivity due to Project operations, even if such decreases were
as large as those tentatively suggested above.
The potential for salmon production in Black Eear Creek
downstream of Black Lake is much greater than for the upper
watershed. Present data suggest a resource on the order of 10,000-
100,000 fish annually. However, the potential for adverse Project
effects on this resource is much less than in the upper watershed,
as previously discussed in detail.
As indicated above, any reduction in the Black Eear Lake
rainbow trout population could probably be fully mitigated by a
stocking program and/or creation of new spawning habitat areas.
Unique Ecosystems ang Endangered or Threatened §~ecies
There are no unique terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems in the
Project Area. No endangered or threatened species will be affected
by the Project.
Ai~ Quality
The Project will have no significant adverse effect on air
quality.
Noise
There will be no significant increase in noise levels with the
Project.
VI-52
Solid Wast§ and wastewater Disposal
Solids wastes and wastewater will te properly dispcsed of, as
discussed elsewhere in this report, so that no adverse impacts will
result ..
Water Resources ---
Principal impacts on water resources were discussed atove under
the section on fish habitat and populations.
Alternatives ~onsidered
Alternative Sites
Studies of the Thorne Bay and Reynolds Creek sites are
summarized in Appendices C and D.
part
most
Lake.
Black
Water temperatures in the stream below Black Bear ~ake are in
determined by temperature of lake outflows.. This effect is
important for the reach of Black Bear Creek upstream of Black
Under existing conditions, outflows are from the surface of
Bear Lake.
The original power intake concept provided for a single port
located between El. 1672 (invert) and 1679 (top).. Under this
concept, water would have been withdrawn from relatively deep in the
reservoir much of the time.. As a result, summer water temperatures
in Black Bear Creek would have been colder than normal much of the
time, and winter water temperature would have been warmer tr.an under
existing conditions.. Since these changes would proba~ly have
significant adverse effect on downstream fishery resources, the
single port low-level intake was excluded from further
consideration ..
In order to minimize changes in the natural downstream water
temperature regime with the Project, two alternative multilevel
intake concepts were then examined.. A multilevel intake would allow
withdrawal from nearer the reservoir surface, and with-Project
downstream water temperatures would more closely follow the natural
regime.
VI-53
'IWo-
analyzed.
and three-port multilevel concepts were formulated and
Criteria used in both cases were:
1) Eight-foot minimum submergence from the reservoir surface to
the top of the 4 ft x 4 ft conduit, to avoid vortex action
and air entrainment,
2) withdrawal from as near the reservoir surface as ~ossible as
much of the time as possible during all seasons of the year,
and
3) Placement of the lower intake to allow withdrawal at minimum
~ool elevation (1685 ft).
The resulting concepts are as shown in Tarle VI-6.
Table VI-6
MULTI PORT INTAKE CONCEPTS CONSIDERED
A. Two-Port Intake
Port Invert Operable Range of Port
Port EI~~il (Reservoir EI. in ft)
Upper 1688 maximum 1715
minimum 1700
Lower 1673 maximum 1700
minimum 1685
B. Three-Port lntake
Port Invert Operable Range of Port
Port EI~~il JReservoir El. in ft)
Upper 1693 maximum 1715
minimum 1705
Middle 1683 maximum 1705
minimum 1695
Lower 1673 maximum 1695
minimum 1685
VI-54
Depths of withdrawal and
depths for both concepts were
summer (August), based on
downstream flow constraints.
61 and 62, and are summarized
percent of time of withdrawal at those
calculated for winter (January) and
reservoir elevations in 1991 with
Results are shown on Exhibits 46, 47,
in Tatle VI-7.
Table VI-7
COMPARISON OF MULTIPORT INTAKE CONCEPTS
Range of
withdrawal Depths Approximate
Month .!ntake_ConEept jft below surface) percent of time
January Two ports 12-20 35
20-27 65
January Three ports 12-20 80
20-22 20
August Two ports 12-20 50
20-27 50
August Three ports 12-20 80
20-22 20
Analysis of these withdrawal depth calculations and temperature
profiles for Black Bear Lake (Figure Sa and 5t of Appendix F) showed
that the three-port intake concept would give much better
temperature control more of the time throughout the year than would
the two-port concept. A three-port intake would give colder water
more of the time during winter and warmer water more of the time
during summer than would a two-port intake. Thus, the three-port
intake would give a downstream temperature regime much closer to
existing conditions, and was selected as the preferred concept.
Cost estimates for the three intake concepts analyzed are shown
in Tatle VI-8. These estimates are at January 1981 price levels and
do not include engineering or contingency.
VI-55
Table VI-8
ESTIMATED COS~S OF DIFFERENT IN~AKES
Intake
Single Port, Low Level
Two Ports
~hree Ports
Transmission 1ine Design
Estimated cost ($1
70,000
325,000
365,000
The design proposed would provide an average span of
approximately 600 feet, and utilize a stacked rather than horizontal
frame configuration which provides for a very narrow line path. The
insulators for this construction are 14.5 inches long, for an
overall width of three feet. This narrow profile will be more
environmentally acceptable in the Project Area than other types of
construction, for reasons discussed elsewhere in this report.
Besides the switch yard at the power plant site, a substation is
needed along the Hollis Road. Alternative sites, associated with
the corridor alternatives discussed below, are shown on Exhibit 63.
This substation will provide the bus arrangement necessary to split
the single incoming 34.5 kV circuit into two outgoing circuits, one
to Klawock-Craig at 7.2/12.4 kV; the other to Hydaburg at 34.5 kV.
The 7.2/12.4 kV voltage was selected for the Klawock-Craig
portion because this is the existing primary voltage in Klawock.
There is also an existing line from Klawock to the ADFG hatchery on
Klawock Lake, near the proposed substation (Exhibit 63). This
existing line could be reconductored to add the required capacity
from the substation into Klawock. South of Klawock to Craig a new
line would be built, tapping the Klawock line via fuses. Small
stepdown transformer stations will be used in Craig and Hydaburg to
convert the incoming voltage to the primary distribution voltage
in each community.
Alternative Transmission Corridor RO~Ees
The evaluation of the transmission corridor alternatives
included field reconnaissance by APA's consultants, review of
federal and state guidelines, and comments from concerned state and
federal agencies. Because of the generally rugged and heavily
forested areas in the Project vicinity, the initial identification
of alternative routes was based primarily on following the shortest
feasible distance to load centers, and paralleling existing roadways
VI-56
as much as possible to reduce the need for new access roads. From
this evaluation, a preferred, least overall impact rcute was
determined. Refinements in the route were then made by focusing on
some of the more environmentally sensitive areas.
In the initial planning stages, three alternatives were
considered. The first route was from the powerhouse south up the
steep slope to Black Bear Lake, along the lake shore, over the ridge
at the south end of the lake, and down to the Craig -Hollis road.
This route would involve construction over very rough terrain, would
put the transmission line over EI. 2000, and would have severe
adverse visual impact. For these reasons, this alternative was not
considered further.
Two other alternatives were then examined, as descrited below.
Alternative A, shown on Exhibit 63, begins at the powerhouse
site and proceeds west along Black Bear Creek for a distance of
approximately two miles. At this point, the route leaves the
logging road, swings southwesterly and goes cross country through a
low saddle to the substation on the Hollis Road. The rcute from
Black Bear Creek to the proposed substation is generally through
open terrain, although it does reach an elevaticn of 1,400 feet.
From the Alternative A substation, one circuit follows Hollis
Road westerly into Klawock, and along the Craig-Klawock Road into
Craig. The second circuit would provide service to Hydaburg. The
routing from the Alternative A substation is easterly along Hollis
Road to a point approximately four miles past the southeast end of
Klawock Lake, where a principal logging road intersects Hollis Road.
The line would then run to the south, following the general route of
the logging road. The logging road terminates near the head of
Natzuhini Bay. ADOTPF and the Federal Highway Administration have
proposed that this logging road be extended another six miles to
Hydaburg, routed around Natzuhini Bay. Alternative A cuts across
the mouth of the Bay and then follows the road route on into
Hydaburg.
The second alternative corridor, Alternative E (Exhibit 63),
follows existing roadways almost exclusively. Under Alternative B,
the line follows the existing logging road along Black Eear Creek to
Big Salt Lake and then proceeds to Klawock following the Thorne Bay
road. The Alternative B substation site is in Klawock at the
junction of the Thorne Bay and Hollis roads. One circuit serves
Klawock and craig. The Klawock to Craig section of Alternative B is
the same as that for Alternative A. A second circuit serves
Hydaburg and is routed from the Alternative B substation in Klawock
to Hydaburg as shown on Exhibit 63. This circuit follows the same
route as under Alternative A, except for two sections. Cne section
is near Natzuhini Bay, where Alternative B follows the shoreline
more closely than Alternative A. The other section is tetween the
Bay and Hydaburg, where Alternative B is routed away from the
proposed road route and passes to the landward side of higher
terrain there.
VI-57
Criteria for Evaluation of Alternative Corridors
Alternatives A and B were
environmental r social r economic and
using the following specific criteria:
1) Elevation Constraints
2) Wildlife Constraints
3) Visual Impact Constraints
4) Land Use Constraints
evaluated with res~ect to
engineering considerations r
These criteria were developed from various literature sources r
agency contacts and professional value judgements r and were used as
a broad-based assessment tool for the selection of one transmission
route over the other. The result of this process was to select the
route which would have the least overall impact r recognizing that
refinements in the selected route would occur as the Project
evolved. FinallYr once the preferred route was selected r
refinements were made in order to avoid or reduce adverse effects on
certain sensitive areas.
1. Elevation Constraints. Keeping the line below El. 500 ft
minimizes icing and wind loading r access protlems r special design
and construction techniques r and maintenance costs. Exhibit 64
shows the general elevation constraints. Elevations over 1500 feet
msl are the most severe.
2. Wildlife Constraints. Wildlife is not only a part of the
natural scene perceived by visitors to Alaska but is also important
to the subsistence way of life for many residents. Avoidance or
reduction of adverse impacts on wildlife resources is important r
then r for any proposed development.
From review of ecological studies and discussions witt various
agencies r the following four general wildlife habitat categories
were developed r rated as to their significance ana mapped
(Exhibit 65) :
Shorelines/inlets
Lake/Stream Corridors
Highland Areas (above 1500 feet)
Forest and Muskeg
VI-58
Shorelines/Inlets. Shorelines and inlets were rated as the
most significant habitat association because of their value to many
wildlife species, most notably eagles, bears, and wolves. Bald
eagles tends to nest and feed in the vicinity of salt water and at
the mouths of salmon spawning streams, and black bears and wolves
also use these areas during salmon runs. In mapping this habitat
association, guidelines from various agencies for routing
transmission lines in the vicinity of eagle habitat areas were
followed.
Lake/Stream Corridors. Many lakes and streams are important
fisheries resources. Salmon, in particular, are an important source
of food for wildlife as well as contributing significantly to the
economic well-being of local residents. The streams and lake edges
seasonally attract bears and wolves which feed on the grasses,
berries and fish. They also provide year-round habitat fer many of
the smaller animals of the region.
Highland Areas. These areas are used by deer most of the year
(except winter) and by bears in search of forage and resting cover
in the fall. wildlife habitat in these areas takes longer to
recover from disturbance, due to the shorter growing season.
Forest and Muskgg. Forest and muskeg are the most common
vegetation types on Prince of 1ilales Island. While they are
important habitat areas, particularly for deer, their disruption by
a transmission corridor would not adversely impact the general
wildlife population as significantly as would disruption of the
other hatitat associations described above.
1. Visual Impact Constra!nts. An important and primary asset of
Southeast Alaska is its scenic character. The rugged beauty of the
region annually draws many visitors and is often cited as tte reason
people come to live in Southeast Alaska. For these reasons, any
development in the area should be planned so that impact en visual
resources is reduced to a minimum.
The development of the visual resource management classes shown
on Exhibit 66 was based on the USFS visual Resource Management
System and field observations by Applicant's consultants. These
classes reflect the relative ranking of the area's scenic quality
and the general visual sensitivity of visitors to the area. The map
shows a gradation of areas from the most scenic (and therefere most
sensitive to development) to the least scenic areas (least sensitive
to development). In evaluating corridor alternatives with respect
to the visual resource classes, those alternatives that would least
impact the higher quality areas would be preferred.
VI-59
4. Land Use Constraints. The impact that a transmission corridor
has on surroundinq land uses is an important social consideration
which must be included in the evaluation process. In general, areas
that are used for work and recreational activities should be
avoided, as should cultural and historic sites. In addition, areas
planned for future developments or activities should be reviewed so
that conflicts do not arise. Exhibit 67 shows areas of recreational
and cultural/historic interest and major land use (logging) in the
Project Area. Areas of potential logging were identified based on
review of aerial photos and USFS timber type maps. Areas noted as
"planned for logging" were identified from discussions with the
landowner (,$ealaska Corporation). Roads and commercial-residential
areas were' considered the most compatible with the develot:ment of a
transmission corridor.
~valuatio~ of Alternative Corridors
After the initial identification of Alternatives A and B, they
were compared to determine which route has the highest compatibility
with environmental, social, and engineering considerations.
Alternative B was selected as the preferred corridor route. While
Alternative A is the shorter route, Alternative B was considered to
have the least overall potential adverse environmental and social
impact, primarily because of the logging that is occurring along Big
Salt Road. The loqged areas reduce the amount of clearing required
for transmission line construction, and the road also provides quick
and easy access for maintenance. The evaluation of the two
alternatives with respect to the stated criteria is summarized on
Exhibit 68 and discussed below.
1. Elevation Constraints. The Alternative A section of the
transmission corridor traverses the 1000 to 1500 foot elevation
range for about two miles while crossing the saddle to Klawock
(Exhibits 64 and 68). Aternative B remains within the 0-500 foot
elevation range.
2. Wildlife Constraints. Evaluation of the alternatives with
respect to the general wildlife criteria showed that Alternative B
has the potential for impacting more of the important stream and
shore areas (Exhibits 65 and 68). However, the evaluation must also
take account of the specific changes in land use conditions that are
occurring in these areas. Alternative B follows the Big Salt road,
where substantial logging has recently occurred. Furthermore,
additional logging along the road is planned for the near future.
Therefore, Alternative B is preferred with respect to wildlife
habitat since the Alternative B corridor will already have been
disturbed by logging activities and will thus have lower impact on
wildlife habitat than the Alternative A route across the saddle.
VI-60
3. Visual Impact Constraints. Comparison of the two alternatives
with respect to potential visual impacts showed that Alternative E
affects the sensitive visual Class II areas less than Alternative A,
but impacts more of the Class III areas than does Alternative A
(Exhibits 66 and 68). However, it is anticipated that with logging,
much of the Class III area around Big Salt road will be changed to
Class IV or Class V, thus reducing the visual impact cf a line
there. The trade-off for a line along the Eig Salt road versus
routing through the saddle is that road corridors are the areas
receiving the most use, and are therefore the areas of highest
visual sensitivity.
Alternative B has less effect on
water edge in the area around Hydaburg
However, final route selection here
alignment of the. proposed road extension
the more visually sensitive
than does Alternative A.
will depend largely on the
to Hydaburg.
!. Land Use Constraints. Alternative B is preferred with respect
to land use-because it follows road corridors and will require less
clearing because of logging along the road corridors. In addition,
maintenance will be easier if the transmission line is adjacent to
existing roads. However, routing the line along the Eig Salt road
may conflict with logging operations if the logging of that area is
not completed before the line is constructed.
Refinement of the Preferred Transmission Corridor
After Alternative B was selected as the preferred route,
certain areas of concern which were identified during the evaluation
process were examined in more detail. Such refinements also
involved comments provided by various state and federal agencies.
The major siting refinement described below was incorporated into
the final proposed transmission corridor routing. This corridor is
shown on Exhibit 69.
1. Major Siting Refinement During Plannirrg
Natzuhini Bay. Crossing Natzuhini Bay north of Hydaburg has
the potential to adversely affect eagle populations and a site of
cultural interest located at the neck of the bay. Also, long spans
would be required and construction would be difficult. The
refinement in this area routes the line around the bay, generally
following the ADOTPF-proposed road route, but staying at least
0.5 mile upstream of the mouth of the salmon spawning stream, in
conformance with USFWS guidelines.
An additional benefit of routing around the bay is that the
line would be screened from the open waterway. Such waterways often
receive considerable recreation-oriented use in Southeast Alaska.
VI-61
2. Refin~m~nts ~uring Kina! Design and Construction
Although transmission corridor selection and major refinements
as described above will greatly reduce the potential for adverse
effects, some further refinements will probably be necessary during
the final design and construction stages to insure that im~acts are
reduced to a minimum. Such refinements in the final, surveyed
alignment of the transmission line will, for example, avoid eagle
trees and reduce visual impacts by following guidelines discussed
below and in Appendix I. Any archeological or historical artifacts
encountered during construction will be brought to the attention of
the Alaska State Historic Preser'::ation Officer.
The access road to the Project powerhouse site would be an
extension of the existing logging road which ~resently terminates at
the north end of Black Lake on the east side of the outlet stream.
The proposed continuation of this road would follow the east shore
of the lake. As close to Black Lake as is practicable, the road
would begin climbing from lake level to the Project powerhouse site
at El. 258. The new road is about two miles in length and is
estimated to cost about $6,600,000 excluding engineering and
contingencies.
Routing and construction of the portion of the road along the
east shore of Black Lake will require measures to minimize the
potential for slope failures and mass movement. The road will cross
an active slide zone near the northeast end of the lake. It is
proposed that this zone be crossed by placing a rockfill embankment
along the lakeshore at the toe of the slide with the ex~ectation
that this portion of the access road will require periodic
maintenance.
No road would be built to Black Bear Lake, which would continue
to be accessible only by float plane or helicopter.
Two alternatives to the proposed routing of the road between
Black Lake and the Project were considered during planning. One
alternative consisted of routing the road along the east shore of
Black Lake and then following the course of Black Bear Creek to the
powerhouse rather than climbinq steadily to the site as is ~roposed.
Conditions on the east shore of Black Lake would be esssentially the
same for this alternative as for the proposed route. However, this
alternative would route the road through the wet areas along the
creek southeast of Black Lake. Also, due to its proximity to the
stream, this route would result in greater amounts of suspended
sediments entering Black Bear Creek both during and after
construction than would the proposed route. Based on these
environmental considerations, this alternative was rejected.
The second alternative considered consisted of routing the road
around the west side of Black Lake. Since the existing road and the
VI-62
Project are both on the east side. of Black Bear Creek r this
alternative would require stream crossings toth upstream and
downstream of Black Lake. It would also involve bridging two
streams upstream of Black Laker both of which contain salmon
spawning areas. The road is also longer and estimated tc be more
costly than the proposed access road. For these reascns this
westerly routing was rejected.
Alternative Construction Procedures
As previously discussed in Chapter Ir Project Construction r the
majer construction problem presented by the Project is access to the
upper level construction site. Alternative construction procedures
considered during planning mainly involve evaluation of various ways
to overcome this access problem. In addition to the recommended
schemer the following methods of obtaining upper site access were
investigated.
1) Highlin~. In earlier studies r the water conductor for power
flow was envisaged to be a surface penstock constructed on
the right bank of Black Bear Creek. Construction of the
penstock was to be facilitated by the use of a highline
which would follow the penstock route. Tr.e highline was
also to have been used to bring equipment and material to
the upper site and it was proposed to leave the highline in
place to serve the Project for maintenance purposes. The
cost of the highline and the necessary clearing required to
ensure the highline's long term viability would have been
distributed equally between penstock and dam construction r
making it an attractive alternative. For reasons ~reviously
stated the surface penstock routing was rejected. With the
deletion of this feature r the entire monetary and
environmental cost of the highline alternative would be
torne by the dam. This could not te justified and the
highline access alternative was subsequently rejected.
2) ~cces§ through th~ penstock shaft and tunnel. The chosen
penstock routing incorporates a vertical shaft from the
upper site to EI. 370 and a near horizontal tunnel
(1% grade) which provides access to the base of the shaft.
This configuration would allow hoisting of materials r
personnel and equipment to the upper site through the shaft.
In order to facilitate such access r both the tunnel and
shaft would have to be constructed to sizes larger than
those required only for power generation. This method would
extend the Project construction schedule by about one year
and was determined to be too costly as compared to other
methods of access. It was rejected on that basis.
3) Transporting wet concret~ Qy helicopter. In this
alternative r helicopters would be used to haul materials r
personnel and equipment to the upper site. It differs from
the chosen method in that the helicopters would be used to
VI-63
transport wet concrete, in buckets, from a batch plant,
located near the powerhouse, to the dam site. Consequently
all of the concrete for Project construction ~ould be
~roduced at the lo~er site concrete plant. ~his would
eliminate installation of a concrete plant at the u~per site
and would reduce upper site power requirements. Even
considering these savings, the continuous helicopter service
required to facilitate this scheme makes the alternative
more expensive than other methods. It was rejected on that
basis.
Another construction problem for which alternatives were
considered is power supply to the upper construction site. ~he
selected method to supply power for construction of the upper site
works is to lay a temporary power cable from a two unit, 2000-kW
diesel generating station located near the powerhouse. Electrically
powered equipment for upper site construction will be utilized to
the greatest practical extent. An alternative would be to locate an
appropriately sized generator at the upper site. Fuel for the
generator and other diesel equipment would be brought in by air.
The selected method was determined to be the most economical of the
two methods and is considered to pose the least threat to the
environment by reducing diesel fuel requirements at the up~er site.
~gregate Sources, anQ ~Q~Q~ ~nd §Eoil Disposal Areas
~he followinq is a discussion of the alternative sources of
construction aggregate and fill materials and alternative locations
of spoil disposal areas considered during planning of the Project.
~~~te Sources. The following four different scurces of
aggregate for concrete were considered during Project planning.
1) Purchased Material. Processed material of appropriate
gradation would be purchased from a local distributor and
delivered to the site using barges and trucks. Although
this alternative would eliminate the need for material
processing at the site, it is the most costly of the
alternatives considered and was rejected on that basis.
2) Quarried Material. Rock quarries would be established near
the Project site or along the access road. Blasted rock
would be hauled to a crushing plant which would reduce the
rock to sizes appropriate for use as concrete aggregate.
~his method was determined to be more costly than other
sources of supply and was consequently rejected.
3) Borrowed Stream Gravels. On the basis of cost only, the
most attractive source of material for concrete aggregate
would be th~ natural sand and gravel beds deposited by Black
Bear Creek between the Project site and Black Lake. This
material would be excavated and hauled to the concrete plant
VI-64
where a minimum of processing would be performed. While
this source of aggregate is the most economical of the four
sources considered, borrowing these gravels has been
rejected for environmental reasons. This is because these
gravel beds are salmon spawning areas which ~ould be
severely impacted by ~orrowing.
4) ~roE~§inq Excav~ted Materi~!§. Crushing excavated rock and
talus is the selected method of aggregate supply ~ecause it
is relatively economical compared to the other alternatives
and it is expected to have a minimal impact on the
environment. As required excavation proceeds, the excavated
material will be hauled to a crushing plant which will
produce aggregate for concrete. The aggregate will be
stockpiled nearby for use as needed. Wash water used in the
production process will be passed through settling rasins to
remove sediments before being returned to the natural
drainage. Use of the excavated material for concrete
aggregate will reduce the size of required spoil deposits.
Since any rock excavated would be the property of the
landholder (See Exhibit 70), use of this material wculd have
to be negotiated with the landholder.
Borrow Area§. In order to construct the left abutment
embankment, about 4,200 cubic yards must be borrowed at the upper
site. Talus material taken from either upstream or downstream of
the dam will be suitable for this purpose. Because the bulk of the
embankment is upstream of the dam and because the area will be
inundated, and thus hidden from view after reservoir filling, the
upstream borrow area has been selected.
Spoil Disposal Area§. As previously noted, excavated rock will
be used for concrete aggregate or incorporated into the Project
works as fill. Excavated overburden material will be distri~uted to
encourage revegetation. Consequently there will ~e relatively
little material requiring placement in permanent spoil areas. No
spoil deposits are anticipated at the upper site. At the lower site
two locations near the powerhouse have been designated as spoil
areas. About 3,800 c.y. of material will be placed in these areas
and will be graded to blend in with the surrounding areas and
revegetated. Spoil from shaft excavation will be in the form of
small chips which will be suitable for access road maintenance. It
is proposed that this material, about 2,000 cubic yards, be
stockpiled near the switchyard for future use.
VI-65
operations
Early in Project planning, a discharge regime to follcw system
load demand was developed. This regime would cause daily flow
fluctuations which are large compared to minimum releases for the
reach of the stream above Black Lake, and would greatly modify
natural seasonal discharge patterns in the upper reaches of the
stream. Such a regime would almost certainly have significant
adverse effect on fish spawning and egg and intragravel larval fish
survival upstream of Black Lake. Therefore, in order to reduce the
potential for significant adverse impact, the release regime was
modified ty decreasing daily maximum discharge and/or increasing
daily minimum discharge during those months identified as important
for salmon spawning (July tt-rough November) and incubation (December
through May). The result is a discharge regime which would have
smaller daily fluctuations and would more closely follow seasonal
changes in natural discharge than would be the case for the original
regime.
The modifications analysis was performed for two cases:
1) 1986, when Project generation capacity would not yet te fully
absorted and Project discharge would therefore include spills from
the reservoir, and 2) 1991, when essentially no spilling would
occur. Tte original regime and the proposed modified regime
incorporating flow constraints for fishery impact reduction are
shown on Exhibits q9 and 55 for 1986 and 1991, respectively. The
modifications made in the original regime are summarized in
Table VI-9.
VI-66
Table VI-9
MODIFICATIONS IN ORIGINAL RELEASE REGIME
TO REDUCE POTENTIAL FOR FISHERY IMPACTS
For 1986
Total
Increase Decrease Decrease
In Daily in Daily in Daily
Minimum Maximum Q Fluctuation
!'12 nth Q(cfSi_ Q (cfs) (cfs)
Jan 5 5
Feb 5 5
Mar 5 5
Apr 5 5
May 5 10 15
Aug 10 10
Sep 5 10 15
Oct 10 10
Nov 10 10
For 1991
Total
Increase Decrease Decrease
In Daily in Daily in Daily
Minimum Maximum Q Fluctuation
Month Q(cfs1-Q (cfs) (cfs)
Jan 5 5
Feb 10 10
Mar 10 10
Apr 10 10
May 5 10 15
Aug 20 20
sep 5 15 20
Oct 10 5 15
Nov 5 10 15
VI-67
These modifications to
peaking power capability
Exhibit 17. The cost of
discussed in Chapter IV.
the original regime would reduce Project
and energy production as stown on
these power and energy reductions is
After more detailed information on fish habitat and use becomes
available throuqh the continuinq studies discussed elsewhere in this
document, the modified flow regime described above may require
refinement in order to assure that downstream fisheries im~acts are
reduced to a minimum.
Permits and Other Authorizations
Permits ~nd Authorizations
Federal. The followinq permits will be required before the
proposed action can be completed.
Description
Department of Energy,
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
1. Hydroelectric License
(Major)
Department o~riculture,
Forest Service
1. Special Use Permits
2.
a. Project civil works on
National Forest lands
b. Transmission line ROW
c. Acce~s road ROW
d. Reservoir
e. Temporary construction
camp
f. Fuel and lubricants
storage
Timber Sale Contract (?)
3. Environmental Assessment
Controlling
Statute
Federal Power
Act, Part I.
34 Stat 225;
16 USC 431,432
VI-68
Governmental
. Regulation
18 CFR 1-149
36 CFR 251
________ -=Description
Report
Department of Defense,
u.s. Army Corps of Engineers
1. structures or Work in or
Affecting Navigable Waters
(Section 10 Permit)
2. Discharqe of Dredged or
Fill Material into u.s.
Waters (Section 404 Permit)
Environmental Protection
~gency
1. National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination
System Permit
(Section 402 Permit)
Department of Transportation,
Federal Aviation Administration
1. Structures Which May
Interfere with Airplane
Flight Paths, Notice of
Proposed Construction or
Alteration
Controlling
Statute
30 Stat 1151;
33 USC 403
PL 92-500
PL 92-500
VI-69
Governmental
Fegulation
33 crn 209.120
40 CFR 209.120
40 CFR 125
14 CFR 77.13
state of Alaska. The following state permits will be obtained
through a-Master Permit Application to be submitted to the Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation.
Description
(Granting Agency)
1. Discharge into
Navigable Waters
Reasonable Assurance
Certificate
(section 401 Permit)
(ADEC)
2. Wastewater Disposal
Permit (ADEC)
3. Solid Waste Disposal
Permit (ADEC)
4. Open Burning
Permi t (ADNR)
5. Burning During Fire
Season Permit (ADNR)
6. Anadromous Fish
Protection Permit (ADFG)
7. Water Rights
Permit and Certificate
of Appropriation (ADNR)
8. certificate for
storage (ADNR)
9. Right-of-way and
Easement Permits
(ADNR)
10. Encroachment Permit
(ADOTPF)
11. Utility Permit
(ADOTPF)
12. Public Utilities
certificate of Public
Convenience and
Necessi ty (ADCED) (1)
Controlling
statute
PL 92-500
AS 46.03.100
AS 46.03.100
AS 46.03.020
AS 41.15.050
AS 16.05.870
AS 46.15.040
AS 46.15
AS 38.05.330
AS 19.25.200
AS 19.25.010
AS 42.05
VI-70
Governmental
Regulation
18 AAC 70.081
18 AAC 72
18 AAC 60
18 AAC 50.120
11 AAC 92.010
5 AAC 95.010
11 AAC 93.040
11 AAC 93.150
11 AAC 58.200
17 AAC 10.010
17 AAC 15
3 MC 48
Native Corporations. Easements for parts of the proposed
transmission line and access road will ce obtained from the
following private Native corporations, as required:
1. Sealaska Corporation
2. Klawock Heenya Corporation
3. Shaan-Seet, Inc.
4. Haida Corporation
See Exhibit 70 for present land ownership in the vicinity of the
Project.
Compliance ~ith Health ~nd §~!~EY Regulations and code§
Compliance with the following regulations during ccnstruction
will be the responsibility of the contractor, and will ce so stated
in the construction contract:
Description
1. Explosive Handlers
Certificate of
Fitness
2. Prevention of
Accidents and Health
Hazards (Inspections)
Controlling
____ ~Stat~u~t~e~ __ __
AS 08.52.010-080
AS 18.60.010-105
Governmental
____ ~Requlatio~n __ __
8 AAC 62.010-070
8 AAC 60.010-75.030
1. Appropriate regulations of the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA).
Pertinent ADOL and OSHA regulations will also te met during
operation and maintenance of the Project.
VI-71
Compliance wi~Q Other Regul~!ions, Qodes, Guidelines, and Re~iews
Endanger~g Species ~ct of 1973. In response to APA's
consultants' letter of inquiry of 2 February 1981, USFWS has stated
that no candidate, proposed, or listed endangered or threatened
species occur in or near the proposed Project Area (see Appendix J).
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. APA's consultants
have performed a pre-construction archeological survey of the
proposed Project Area and have found that the Project is not likely
to have significant adverse effect on any pro~erty listed in or
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places
(see Appendix G).
Coastal ~one Management Act of 1972. APA will sutmit the
feasibility report and License Application to the Alaska State
Clearingtouse for Alaska Coastal Management Program review.
Eaql~ Protection. APA's consultants requested USFWS to provide
available eagle nest site data for the Project Area and comments on
the proposed transmission corridor and proposed pole design (see
letter dated 13 January 1981, Appendix J) •
Transmission Li~ Q~sig~ and Routing Guidelines. The following
guidelines were used in transmission line design and routing as
described in this report, and will also be applied during
construction of the Project:
1. USFWS Eagle Protection Guidelines
2. REA Guidelines on Powerline Contacts by Eagles and Other
Large Birds (revision of REA Bulletin 61-10 of 9 March 1979)
3. FERC Guidelines: Electric Power Transmission and the
Environment (Commission Order No. 414 of 21 Novemter 1910)
4. u.S. Departments of
Environmental criteria
(1910).
Agriculture
for Electric
and the
Transmission
Interior
Systems
5. USFS policies on protection of fisheries habitat during
logging or clearing operations (Southeast Alaska Area Guide,
USFS 1971).
Alaska Department Q£ ~nvironmental Conservation Guidelines for
Remote Camps !n Southeast Alaska. Plans for the construction camp
will be submitted to ADEC for their approval. In additicn to the
ADEC-issued permits required (see list atove), the agency will
perform reviews of the sewerage system plan and the drinking water
plan for the construction camp and for any such facilities provided
in the Project powerhouse for maintenance personnel.
VI-12
Alaska state Clearinghouse Requirements. The feasibility
report and License Application will be sutmitted to tr.e state
Clearinghouse, which will perform A-95 Review and Alaska Coastal
Management Program (ACMP) review. ACMP review is required tefore a
certificate of Consistency can be issued for the proposed Project.
Proposed Requlation~ of the ~lask~ Power Authority. These
proposed regulations (draft dated 2 December 1980; AS
44.56. various) require distribution of the draft feasibility report
to affected local governments, utilities, public and private land
managers, and to pertinent federal and state agencies for ccmment.
Stat~ Endangered §pecie~ Statute~. In response to APA's
consultant's letter of 4 February 1981, ADFG has stated that the
only species considered endangered which may occur in the Project
Area are the two subspecies of peregrine falcon, and then only
during migration. No other proposed or candidate species for such
classification under state statutes are known to occur. See
Appendix J.
Authorities Consulted
The following publications were consulted:
1. Directory of Permits, state of Alaska (ADCED and ADEC 1979)
2. State of Alaska Coastal Management Program and Final
Environmental Impact Statement (AOCM and USOCZM 1979)
3. Hydroelectric
(THREA 1978)
Power Facilities: Legal Requirements
Agencies and other entities consulted are listed telow.
§ourc~~ of Information
several public meetings were held in the communities in the
Project Area to inform residents of proposed Project plans and to
solicit their views. Public meetings devoted entirely to the Black
Bear Lake Project and alternatives were held by Power Authority
staff and their consultants in July 1980 in Craig, Klawock and
Hydaburg and in January 1981 in Hydaburg. In addition, Power
Authority staff gave special presentations on the Project as part of
regional economic development symposia held in May 1980 in Craig,
Klawock and Hydaburg and in November 1980 in Craig. Power Authority
staff and their consultants discussed the draft feasibility report
at public meetings in each of the three communities in June 1981.
VI-73
~gen£Y Meetin~, CorresPQnde~ce, and Telephone Conversations
The following agencies and other entities were consulted during
the Project planning process (see also Appendix J).
Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game
Habitat Protection Section
Commercial Fish Div.
Sport Fish Div.
FRED Div.
Game Div.
Alaska Timber Corporation
u.S. Forest Service
Alaska Coastal Management Program
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Univ. of Alaska Arctic Environmental
Information and Data Center
u.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Sealaska Corporation
National Marine Fisheries Service
Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation
Alaska A-95 Clearinghouse,
Office of the Governor
Ketchikan Public Utilities
Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources
state Parks Div.
Forest, Land, and Water Div.
u.s. Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service
Waterfall Group
Alaska Dept. of Revenue
u.s. Environmental Protection Agency
u.s. Army Corps of Engineers
Tlingit-Haida Regional Electrical Authority
u.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs
VI-74
u.s. Rural Electrification Administration
u.s. Alaska Power Administration
u.s. Bureau of Land Management
Alaska Power and Telephone
International North Pacific Fisheries Commission
u.s. Soil Conservation service
u.S. National Park Service
u.S. Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission
Cities of craig. Klawock r and Hydaburg
Craig Community Organization
Shaan-Seet r Inc.
Klawock Heenya Corp.
Haida Corp.
£1~dies Conducted
The following environmental studies were performed ty Alaska
Power Authority's conSUltants:
1. Phase I aquatic studies (Appendix F) r
2. Winter aquatic studies (Appendix F) r
3. Spring 1981 fry trapping (Appendix F).
4. Archeology and Historical Resources survey (Appendix G) •
VI-75
EXHIBITS
F 1
, .
L ,
r •
SCALE 0
I
EXHIBIT 1
KEY MAP
N
MN
28.:10
NOTE: TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN IS A REPRODUCTION
OF USGS MAP CRAIG, ALASKA, 1:250,000.
SCALE. THE CONTOUR INTERVAL IS 200 FEET.
DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL.
LEGEND
----ROADS
--TRANSMISSION LINE
z
I
4
I
1:100,000
• I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
GENERAL MAP
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
• [
101li1a
I
,
l
,
l
MINIMUM RESERVOIR
ELEVATION 1685' ~-----+----
/\
I \
\
\
\
\
EXHIBIT 2
II
LEGEND:
PROPERTY LINE ........ ---PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINE
APPROXIMATE PROJECT BOUNDARY
BOUNDARY OF PROPOSED
WILDERNESS AREA
NOTES:
"~;g~~}:~E~1~~~J~~~~~~~~
SIDES.
OPO GRAPHY SHOWN IS A REPRODUCTION
2. T NGLE SHEliT C-3
OF USG!~~:~:\HE CONTOUR INTERVAL ~R,~g·FEET. DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL.
OWN ARE BASED ON U.S •• 3. PROPERTY LINES SHRtCUL TURE FOREST OEPARTME,.~~~~:~EGION PUBLICATION NO.
SERVICE-F WALES ISLAND ROAD SYSTEM. 103. "PRINCE 0 . ..
TONGASS NATIONAL FOREST.
SCALE 2400
400 800 1200 16,00 2000 I (\\ __ -=!'~~1'~~~I~~~ _____ LI __ ~
I, -11-400 FEET
BLACK BEAR LAl<E
HYOftOELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
GENERAL PLAN
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
/
/
/
/
/
/
,
/
/
/
/
/
/ \ /
EXHIBIT 3
SCALE 0 40 80 120 FEET
LI ____ -L ____ -L ____ _
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROElECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
SITE PLAN
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
,
, ~
r 1800
1m
r Axi4 01 CO/IDN~
r!~tI" 9f':JV#gdtJm
LCIV$f E1.172fJ.0 I ft-.,...-Inv. V672.0,
,-l".al66J. , ,
lfiW
-~
, ,
ISOO
~ ~ r--....
• ~
IIII) ~ ,
"'" 1300 "" r ,
!!! 1200
I ~
.;}
Ii , . ~ 1100
1 , ~ .... 1001 ~ , I
" .~
l ~ fKX)
~
V COf1C'lVte ~s/Qff
J'O'fi;lIsl Fttd't1.
f 800
l
700 ,
~ 5aJ
~
sao ..
400 / In, E!.370. ~
V
• 300
~ 200
lOa TQ II{)() £/00 JfOO #00 5ffXJ 5fOO lfOO 6'00 !J'{)()
~
\"48'dllJ_ bu~1t!d penslocit
\
~
\
~ ~
~ -AppIOXI/TK1!e e;(;sfing
{Jl'OUnd II;'" '*"! t penstJck
1'-... -----e-~'" ~
~ ~
----
""'1.0;); g.ngdi!, r=::r
10100 ",no 12,00 !8loo 14'00 15rOO 16,00 17100
~30o-l"'. slnl en410ck
PROFILE ALONG C; PEN8TOCJ(
<_ ,_ Ho~;z _ I~ /00 '
"'--"'~.-VerI. 1"100'
~
~ ~
N
le,oo 19100 20100 PII{)()
~
rr--Porlfll
~nv.E/' 350.0
f -InttC/.32rJ.l
lfw.£Lnao ~
£1100 F9f(Xl 24'00 15fOO 26'00
EXHIBIT 4
--
-
/lnrEL 3lXJ.O ~(r 7'l:umt '
Ifw. EJ.e55.25
~ ~~ \.r:1l1
tn.£l2GOlJ 1m. ff
I I
27fOO illfOO P!JfOO atJffX} (J1fOO 92fOO !l311J1J .Nf IJIJ
r.JO'diA btKY«I ~ ~
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
GENERAL PROFILE
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
, ,
~"
-\
-\/)'00
.~ , .
1 , \(
f
, '
AXIS ofconcrefe d:vn
,
, •
900
l. [99•
, ,
~
,
i
"
i.
penslock sh,fI
, /780
177()
1760
1740
l 1110
.... 1790 ~
~ 1720
~ 1710 ! 1700 ~ 1690 a 1!J80 1 '" 1!J70
1!J60 I-
StDtions Otoo
/6'$1
17,-
\
""". ~\.
'\ ~l ~.
~\
\ ~\
\
J \
I \\
\
// / : .
'., , ,
.
\1: "~,I
48'1d/~, steel , \
pipe penstocH \ \ , , , ,
\ '\: \ \ , , , , , ,
~ I I , ,
\ ,
\
ItOO
/
"--"'~"'-"'-... -/ .. ---~11i80 .,---~-....----
~/I/s rac/rfill
PLAN
Toe of CO/JCl'ele
g!':;v;t~1 d~tn
I
{'tOO
lOp afdDm
lL1729.0
Or'ln autlel (fyp)
DONNSTREAA! ELEVATION
\
\
~ ~ '" ~ ~ ~
8tOO
\ \ \
\
\ ,
Concrek d:vn .mhedd!d
in """_ roc"'i71
4-too
SCALE 0
I
20
I
40
I
60
I
I"· ao'
80
I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
EXHIBIT 5
100 120FEET
I I
DAM, PLAN a ELEVATION
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
,
,
,
r
r '
L
r
L
.. .
( AI" •. filY. £!.I7/!O.8
M,,)(. NormgT HIUI. 171S.0
FIOIW -
Axis of COflCf'e1e
g~"y/t!l d~m
./ /bpoftlQm
~ £1.172J.0
SpilIN:i!J C~$f
£1.1710.0
r
CM3lo'd:Jm
fI. 1123.0
'~:I':':!:" 075 ,,,-:' '.. \]'
il' :·7\\ _~_==;t-~=-=::=:t:~;JC;;;:1::;I;.;:~~===t==:::::;;:L;;;::y::y:J
. '. . .. \,
• o· ".\:" ; .. : ... : ..... ··v
" \I
.•. : .. ':'-.....
I'
\rDf'Rinho/,
" II
SECTION A-A
SECTION AT PENSTOCK ANOSHAfl
SC.ille 0 .5 Feel ............... ,··,,!o#
TYPICAL PENSTOCK SECTION
(Section (flom po,.f:J/ to pOl'/ef'hou.se looking downsfregrn)
1'=5~O~
ROf" bo/ls
os f'equlred
if flJnne/
L..BI
""'l1l:I::;0=-:1""'= -P~~~~.~lII!!ilic=h Gr;;vellevellflg
course
TYPICAL TUNNel SECTION
S:dle 0 2 Fl!Ct
~
1'1'0'
'I I, I, \ \ V,,/ve mflnho/~
\'\'---Dp~ifJ hole
J8molof' opet'~fed
bulledlil,glve
15 0
SECTION 8-8
TYPICAL PfNS70CK SEC7l0N
( Secllon Ipom dQm 10 .IIgII)
';'=/'-0'
Unc/Qssir,ed f,jl
1714 O'~------:5{fi='O:------/-:-oo.L0:------I-~.LOO------2000.....l---
D/sm:Jr{1~ ~ cfs
SPILLWAY RATIN6 CURVE
IYQfe~ level8efl8Ol'
"nd G~k contMI
HIindNJil
-6;'. opt:~"fot>(fyP)
DIversion condlJil QI7(f
emt'l'gi'ncy 0IJ11eI
5'O'd/D'°Pel1l"g
EXHIBIT 6
SECTION BI-81
12 'm':, /'equlPsd
lining lliicknU8
SCALE 0
I
(/O'ncm/;",I sholl
eAC'Qv:Jllon liM
TYPICAL SHAFT SECTIC)!\:
j-=/!O
10
I
20 30 40
I I I
(EXCEPT AS NOTED)
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
50
I
DAM a PENSTOCK, SECTIONS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
60 FEE
I
, 1
F 1
,. ,
r •
l ,
i
, 1
..
£19-
r--r-
\ s,
~
A
L
-'» '"
F/o,., -
II! 90 "d,D. skel
l'tpB pen.rock \ r
:'i> 'lL..
'"
N""frQI ground
equipment 1fpC:J(
t!fld! Un;!-_____
.~ ......... ... .• o-tl4 .••.
tN .. """
8~ckr,il .....
!t='l
-~ ~
a--,
['2!O'
I
I j
I I
,61"_~1o"1.
D
'--V~nli/otDn /ouVlY'S
I
:-
I
1
I
70'0'
2~O'
"--Sf"lien NNice
IN~1ir
PLAN
1
SECTION A-A
m
I. ----{]rotJfed. rein!rJroed fluk<!
J>..:;vyweigllf crJnC'~fp IJlodr
(2'e"tel'i0l' fllRt!3 nolshown)
I
~
I
1
~SfHlrolumncr_
supporl (lypJ
mile/a,
Shower
!R
I-f-
A
:<;> J
~ v----lOl0~/6!O· commerciQ/
:Jluminum dJol'
_nuolly cpel'tlfed
E'---'-----'" . ..,
~
2
0
L
J V
f!OO
.q, alC'Of1<wfe
IJ':;II £L266.50~
It penslrJck
.:
8N~c"on~
HUon c:Jp<JCiI.v
Slr!el crOM colt1mn
Bxkfiil
--~ --------V ..-
600 8(}() 1000 IlfXJ 1100
81Qck 8eQr Creek flo,., -o'lr
TAILWATER RATING CURVE
SECT/ON a-a
~ f..--
1800
t Ihi* Groult!d, reinfof'Ceti
ixYJcf't!1rI block
12'.lhick (Iyp)
t;. runner £1. 2fJ9.0
. tVeuINH gl'O<N>d
': eqtJipmeni
EXHIBIT 7
~ eOOf' EI. 258.50 "';1"0011 chwz~1
~~ .. :.
EXCDvation lIne
SCALE 0-5 10 15 FEET
I 1'1 I I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
POWERSTATION PLAN AND SECTIONS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
f
, ,
,
, .
...
,
a ,
f
L ,
/
PLAN VIEW--PROJECT POWERHOUSE AREA
INTERPRETIVE STRUCTURE AND PROJECT SETTING
\
,
\
This drawing shows only a conceptual
arrangement of the proposed developments
and must not be construed as the final
design.
--''>.-_~-----':'~, ______________________ .ENTRYI INFORMATION SIGN
-1500 "'
'\
'\ ....
\ 0
0 0
\ \
,
\ \ I
l
Project or
Client Logo
"-----
ENTRANCE SIGN
~ T ACCESS TO BLACK LAKE, PICNIC TABLES,
VAULT TOILET. ROAD WIDENED FOR PARKING.
___ ------------f~HING ACCESS TRAIL TO BLACK BEAR CREEK.
~------------.INTERPRETIVE STRUCTURE EXPLAINING PROJECT
" ""'\ FACILITIES & OPERATION. VEHICLE PARKING
" " ) PROVIDED AT POWERHOUSE.
"\ / \ '-......
\ \..
\ ')
\ I
J ) §
/
/
1
\
DAMS~E \
"" "-) "-
( ,....., '--
') \ "'-'" \ ~$Oo \.
\.. __ '-. 2:J
NORTH
'" c---" -----'\ "'\ l \\, \
~ \
~~I~I~-10REST SERVICE CABIN LOCATION
"'\ ,-' .
\ ( /" 3000 '.
.---+-IiIt:L(JcAn~li FOREST SERVICE CABIN
) \ ~
( \ \..
I '\..
"
SCALE 0
I
1/2
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
PROPOSED PROJECT
RECREATION PLAN
1 MILE
I
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 8
EXHIBIT 9
DE SC RIPT ION YEAR I YEAR 2
J F M A M J J A 5 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A S 0 N 0
I , .(ARI~ ----
'Y
LOWER SITE _ .. .... ----... ' .... -. _. . '-' ".-. -. --" _ .. "0 ....
MOBILIZATION I _. -- -
CAMPS 8 SHOPS -l-I
! I
TUNNEL
PENSTOCK -
POWERHOUSE
CIVIL WORKS
---f---._---. --
I '
MISC. EQUI PMENT
TURBINES 8 GENERATORS
INSTALLATION
TESTING
--
TR ANSMISSION LIN E 8 SUB -STATIONS PRI tJECT
r ' RECREATIONAL FACILITIES ~ ~ COl ItPLETE
-
CLEAN UP 8 DEMOBILI ZATI ON T
--
OM L.a.. or. '~
UPPER SITE --"" ' .... " ... --
CAMPS ~ ~ ~ W -PENSTOCK ~ ~ ~'-
VERTICAL SHAFT ~ ~~ ~
EXCAVATION ~ ~ ~
CONCRETE LINING ~ ~ ~ --.. -...
BURIED PENSTOCK ~ ~ ~ ~ i
DAM, INTAKE 8 SPI LLWAY I -~ ~ ~ I
EXCAVATION ~ ~ ~ I
GROUTING 8 DRAIN HOLES ~ ~ ~ ------
CONCRETE ~ ~ ~ -_.
GATES 8 VALVE ~ ~ ~ ~
BACKFILL ~ ~ ~
RELOCATION 8 RESERVOIR CLEARING I ~ ~ ~
CLEAN UP 8 DEM081LIZATION ~ ~ ~ ~
RESERVOIR FILLING ~ W ~
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
t . CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
I-~ ENGINEERING COMPANY' MARCH 1981
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
.. .
· ,
· .
· ,
, ,
, .
~. j
,/
/
/
/
V
/
/
" /(
limpomy sloei<pik>
\ t7. vQ/'I;e'$-
SCALE 0 40 80
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
CONSTRUCTION
SITE PLAN
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 10
120 FEET
-
-
-
-
-
......
......
ESTIMATE
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HA.RZA. ENGINEERING CO~IPANY
CHIC.4.GO. ILLINOIS
EXHIBIT 11
Project HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Oate_J_A_N_U_A_R_Y __ l_9_8_1 ___ Page __ l __ of __ 6 __ Pages
St t PROJECT WORKS E· d b RD Checked by KTW rue ure ______________________ stlmate y_______ _ ___ _
.....,
ITEM QuantIty Unit PrIce AmcHmt No.
330 Land and Land Rights $ 399 000 ----
331 Powerstation and Improvements 1737 000
332 Reservoir Dams and Waterwavs 13 25.8-.Q.QQ..
333 Waterwheels! Turbines and Generators 1 ,380 000
334 Accessorv Electrical Equipment 695 000
335 Miscellaneous Powerstation Equipment 48 000
336 Roads and Bridqes 660 1000
353 Substation and Switchinq Station I
Equipment and Structures 1 nRR Innn
355 Poles and Fixtlres 1 71 1 Innn
356 Overhead Cond'lr.tors and Devir.f>s ] hqR Innn
Subtotal Direr.t Cost S 21 1674 000
!:;;;Qnt.inr:rencies
Civil Works 15% 2 769 000
Electrical and Mechanical Equip. 8% 257 000
1-
r---
Total Direct Cost $ 24 700 000
Engineering & Administration 3 300 000
January 1981 Construction Cost $ 28 000 000
I
ESTIMATE
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY
CBICA..GO. ILLINOIS
Project __ H_Y_D_RO_E_L_E_C_T_R_I_C_P_R_O_J_E_C_T _____ Date JANUARY 1981
EXHIBIT 11
Page, __ 2 ___ of_......;.6 __ Pages
Structure PROJECT WORKS Estimated by __ ~R~D"--__ Checked by KTW
IIwm ITEM QuantIty UnH~ Amount No.
330 Land and Land Rights
.1 Land Purchase
.11 Reservoir and Dam 260 Ac. 1,500 390 000 -
.12 Water Conductor and Powerstation 9 Ac. 1,000 9 000
Subtotal Item 330 399 000
331 Powerstation and Improvements
.1 Powerstation
.11 Diversion and Care of Water L.S. 19 000
.12 Clearing 3 Ac. 6,100 18 300
.l3 Excavation -talus 1,180 cy 7.50 8 850
.14 Backfill 400 cy 6.00 2 400
.15 Substructure
.151 Concrete -mass 385 cy 690 265 650
I~ Superstructure
.161 Concrete -structural 65 cy 2,350 152 750 -
.162 Masonry 4,560 S.F. 17.50 79 800
.163 Architectural Treatment L.S. 24 000
.164 Steel Roof Structure 12,000 1bs 2.30 27 600
.165 Roofing 3,900 S. F. 5.50 21 450
.166 HVAC and Plumbing L. S. 25 000
.167 Miscellaneous Metal 2 500 1bs 2.90 7 250
.168 Crane Supports 24 500 1bs 2.90 71 050 ,
Subtotal Item 331.1 723 100
.2 Station Yard
.21 Fill 600 cv 6.00 3 600
.22 Crushed Rock 200 cv 23.00 4 I...Q.QQ.
.23 Fence and Gates 200 L.F. 28.50 5 700
Subtotal Item 331. 2 l3 900
Subtotal Item 331 737 000
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-•.
-.. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
....
-
... -
-
-
-
......
" ..
-
-
-
.-
ESTIMATE
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HARZA ENGINEERING COlIPANY
CHICA.GO. ILLINOIS
EXHIBIT 11
Prolec:t __ H_Y_D_R_O_E_L_E_C_T_R_I C_P_R_O_J_E_C_T _____ Date __ JAN_U_A_R_Y_l_9_8_l ___ Page __ 3 __ of __ 6 __ Pages
Srructure PROJECT WORKS Estimated by ___ RD ___ Checked by KTW
tt.m ITEM QuantIty Unit Price Amount No.
332 Reservoir Dams and Waterways
~ Reservoir --
11 ClearinQ - -
III Heavy 23 Ac . 8 000 184 000
. 11" Light 35 A~ . 4 200 147 000
Subtotal Item 332.1 331 000
.2 Dam and S~illway --
.21 Diversion and Care of Water lcS 31_ 000
.22 Clearing 4 Ac 4 200 16 ROO
I
.23 Excavation - -
.231 Talus 15 150 rv o SO lloS R7S
.232 CommOQ 1 loOO rv 7 "in 1 n "iOO
.23':1 Rock 2 _400 r..Y 71 nn 'U 2nO
714 C;1nnn-r:t C;vc;rpm T c: ~r;n nnn
24 Foundation PreoaratiQn --
.241 Grouting 4 hSO T F' sn nn -2.3.2. f-.s.oo
.24') Drain Holes and Drains o sn T F' hh r;n 1',1 17 r;
.25 Backfill 17-" 200 Cy 8.00 13~ 69Q.
.26 Concrete I --
.26 Mass 6 250 Cy 410 2 362 500
.26 Structural 1 SO {'v ~r;n 1 ? 7 snn
.27 Miscellaneous Metals 2000 Ibs 2 qO 'i 800
Subtotal Item 332.2 4 264 400
.3 Waterwavs --
.31 Intake - -
.31 Excavation -rock 2O~~v 4~~0 0 onn
11 r.nnrrprp -str~tural ]00 ('v 1 270 241 300
11 Gates Guides Frames
Allrnm::1rir r.nntrols ann Tr:lshr:lrks L ~ 1 ?q oon
314 Miscellaneous Metals 2 non lh", ? on s Rnn
ESTIMATE
BLACK BEAR LAKE
I .. UHiI t , j
HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY
CBIC..LGO. ILLINOIS
EXHIBIT 11
Prolect HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Oate __ J_AN_D_A_RY_1_9_B_1 ___ Page __ 4 __ of 6
•
Pages
Structure PROJECT WORKS Estimated by_..::.:R.,.,D ____ Checked by..:..:K:.:;.TW~ __ .... ITEM QuantIty Unit PrIc. Amount No.
.32 Penstock --
.321 Buried Penstock --
.321 Excavation --=--
32111 Talus 2 500 cv 7 50 18 750
32112 Rock 1 050 ('v 4'i 00 47 ?'iO
3212 Backfill 4.100 cv 7 00 ?R 700
321 Beddinl! 1.000 ('v 11 00 11 000
3214 Concrete -anchor blocks 140 cv F,q'i q7 inn
321" Valve -4B" ~Butterf1v Valve 1 ea 450 4'i 1100
322 Shaft Penstock
3221 Excavation -rock (72"~) 1 3SD ('v , inn , 7C;C; nnn
322') Concrete Linin!! 750 ('v 1 qOO 1 lU~ noo
33 Tfmnt>l Exca.vation and SIlDDort 1.850 L F 1 250 2 112 500
r--
34 Pen.<:;to('k Steel
341 4811~Power Conduit. 30,000 1bs 3.80 114 000
342 30"~Power Conduit 624.000 1bs 3.80 2 371 200
35 Tailrace and Existin!! Creek
351 Excavation -talus 2 160 cv 7.50 16 200
352 Backfill 2 100 cv 7.00 14 700
Subtotal Item 332.3 8 662 600
Subtotal Item 312 11 2'iR 000
I
-
--
-
--
-
-
-... -, -.,.
-. .. -
-
-
-
-
....
....
.....
ESTIMATE
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HARZA ENGINEERING CO!IPANY
CRICA-GO. ILLINOIS
Prolect HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Date JANUARY] 981
EXHIBIT 11
Page 5 of_--O.6 __ Pa g es
Structure PROJECT WORKS Estimated by __ .... RU""-___ Checked by KTIJ .... ITEM QuantIty Unit PrIc:. Amount No.
333 Waterwheel, Turbines, and Generators
.1 Turbines and Governors 2 ea. 400,000 800 000
.2 Generators 2 ea. 290,000 580 000
Subtotal Item 333 1380 000
.334 Accessory Electrical Equipment
.1 Supervisory Control System L.S . 175 000
. 2 Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment L. S . 520 000
Subtotal Item 334 695 000
335 Miscellaneous Powerstation Equipment
.1 Powerstation Crane -10 ton 1 ea. 38 000 38 000
.2 Miscellaneous Equipment L.S. 10 000
1-
Subtotal Item 335 ~ 1000
336 Roads and Bridges
.1 Access Road 2~i. 3..3..Q 000 1660 1000
,
i----
I
ESTIMATE
t if ""IIiL til * I "iii M
HARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY
CHICA-GO. ILLINOIS
BLACK BEAR LAKE
EXHIBIT 11
Prolect HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT JANUARY 1981 p 6 f 6 P Oate ___________ age ____ o ____ ages
Structure __ ;:..::.;PR...;;.O.;:;.J.;;E;.;;C;.;;T:........:.W,;,.;O:..:RK:.;;.::S~ ______________ Estimat.d bY __ ....;RD= ___ Checked by KTW
hili ITEM QuantIty Unit PrIce Amount No.
353 Substation & Switching Equip. & Structures --f-
.1 Powerstation Substation
.ll Transformers -4000 JNA 2 each 20,000 $ '0 40 000
1-
.12 Switches, Breakers, Bus, Misc. L.S. 350 pOD
.2 Klawock Substation
.21 Transformer -3750 ¥:!VA 1 each 20,000 20 pOD
.22 Switches, Breakers, Bus, Misc. L.S. ~50 1000
.3 Craig & Hydaburg Substations
.31 Transformers -2000 JNA 2 each 14,000 28 1000
. 32 Switches, Breakers, Bus, Misc . L.S. 200 pOD
Subtotal Item 353 $ 1 1088 000
355 Poles and Fixtures
.1 Clearing
f-
. ll Heavy L.S . 447 000
.12 Light L.S. 665 1000
.2 Poles
.21 Material L.S. 230 000
.22 Construction L.S. 369 000
Subtotal Item 355 Is 1 7ll 000
356 Overhead Conductors and Devices
.1 Conductors L.S. 330 000
.2 Insulators L.S. 225 000
.3 Hardware and Miscellaneous ~c£ 1222 1000
.4 Construction
.41 Strinaina L.& 611 1000
LI.? GUYS, Anchors and Miscellaneous L.S 12RR 1000
Subtotal Item 356 Ie:; 1 698 000
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Jif;."'
-
-
-
I-w w u.
Z
z
0
i=
ct > W
....I w
1800
1700
1600
1500
1400
, ..
300
" .......... ~
~ ~
/ V'
V
o
1.
RESERVOIR AREA IN ACRES
200 100
"-~ ......... ~ ~ l1li""""" --......... ............ ,."",---~ ...
~ ~ ......... ............
~ ~
t" ............... ~
10,000 20,000
RESERVOIR STORAGE IN ACRE -FEET
~ ,."",---
~
.............. -,
30,000
EXHIBIT 12
o
I
1800
EL. 1721 Max W . S.
EL. 1715 Max N orm W.S.
rm W.S. EL. 1685 Min No
1700
1600
'-, 1500
1400
BLACK BEAR LAKE.
I-w w u.
z
z
0
i=
ct > W
....I w
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
RESERVOIR
AREA -VOLUME CURVES
ALASKA POWER AUTUORITY
l t
6,500
iI: • ,
"
EXHIBIT 13
PAGE 1 of 2
. l:Oi~jIII ++-+--t-++ +-+-+t-t---I-+--jl-t-·f---t-H---+---+---+-l-f --l-++-+·l-~
~~ .. ~+++;~ --~-++~-t-t-jf---t-~++t-~-+11-1
~ .+..j'---+--l_Hf---+--lI-Hf..:te.:t~.+~+.. .. ·_or-..
.lI: 5,500 -I--+++++1+f+H-+++++1~R-H-+++++1+H-H-+++-I+I+H-+++++-I+H-H-++++--l-1I+H-+++++-I+I
I
> ....
::::i
m « a.. «
.l-.l-+.1--+-+---. .. ..
u 5,000 ~+++++1+f+~+++++1+I+H-+++++1+H-+++++-I+I+H-+++++1+H-+++++-I--l-1I+H-+++++1+1 a: w
~
2
tJ
. __ :~'-I1-f---t-t-t+H
~ IJ ··1-1-1-+--.1-/
4,500 ...... +-++-+.+.--bI.R--__ +++++++++++++++++++++++-+44-H-H-H-HH-1f-+-f-+-f-+-I-+-I-+-H---H-+-++-++-++-++++++I
1690 1695 1700 1705 1710 1715
NORMAL MAXIMUM RESERVOIR WATER SURFACE ELEVATION -FEET
1720 1725
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
RESERVOIR LEVEL
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
26.000
.r:.
~ 24.000
:!: .. ---
I
z
0
i= u -. ~ .. ::J
0
0 22.000 jlL a:: a..
>-<!' a::
UJ
Z
UJ
UJ
<!' 20.000 ct a::
UJ > ct
-J
ct
::J
Z z 18.000 ct
16.000
1690 1695
I , J f
. -. -.
.. . ..
1700 1705 1710 1715
NORMAL MAXIMUM RESERVOIR WATER. SURFACE ELEVATION -FEET
, 1 t , , ,
1720 1725
EXHIBIT 13
PAGE 2 of 2
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
RESERVOIR LEVEL
AlASKA POWER AUTHORITY
, 1 ,. I
1 l t 1
AVERAGE HONTHLY FLOWS (cfs) EXHIBIT 14
IJCl NlIV I":C JAtI Ft:.H ,..,AIl APR "'AY .JUN JUL AUG SE.P
YEAR (j 1 ) 0(1) (1) (j I) (2tn Ul ) 00 ) (31) UO) (31) (3.1 ) nO)
1 40.1 55.'t h.Q 10. 1 6.1 1.'1 .. lq.b 27.6 bO.7 28.q 6.2 25.9
2 21,.6 29.2 2~ .1 6.1 ".7 0.9 7.9 q8." ~8 .1' 18.2 27.8 13.b
j 2~.'1 26.3 ."S'). 1 q.s 0." h.2 9.'1 q'l.2 3".1 25.0 18.b 25.8
It .H ... 1 I~ II • '1 16.7 o.~ 2.'1 5.1 1/~ • 1 29.1 53.1 31.1 20.Q 31.9
5 31.l-1 It .• 9 22.3 B.3 6.9 1 • 1 19.0 qq.3 5".1 21.8 b.7 Q3.q
6 110. 1 27 .0 25.6 8.'1 b.2 1.2 21.0 52.1 3b.3 20.6 2'1." qq.5
7 5't • U lIl." 32.7 1 • 1 tt.3 ".2 11.q q7.2 55.9 lb.9 q7.9 19.5
Ii 28.0 3ll.1t 22.6 b.O 0.1 5.q 11.5 27.7 50.5 2b.0 b.3 3q.8 (i q 1 .1 lI7.'I III • 1 1.5 1.11 7.') 17.3 33.8 15 ... 3 7."1 11.5 2b.5
10 511.1 q2.tt 2/, • 1 8.ll 10.5 0.7 18.0 qq.Q lq.2 q2.b 2tt.9 .38.1
11 25.1 "b.l 28.4 9.j 0.9 8.7 13.1 55.6 q9.1 23.q 20.q 30.q
12 7l.~ .30.1 19.7 7./1 b.b 7.2 12.5 15.1 61t.O qq.o l.b q5.()
13 52.2 18. I 13.U 9.5 1.8 8.6 :: 15.8 12.1 16.7 36.2 19.q qo.q
Itt q2.3 27 .2 2q." 9.b 2.0 6.7 11.3 32.1 Sit. b 26.3 29.7 q7.6
15 q".6 23.3 27.1 9.b 3./t 3.5 0.6 20.0 ql.3 17 .b 20.3 bl.1
Ib 50.9 35.5 19.5 b.q 6.2 1.9 30.tt ttl.8 bO.O 3/t .6 25.1 71.3
11 7tl.0 4b.b 10.1 o.q 6.0 q.q lH.3 55.3 32.9 q6 • .3 31.0 52.q
lt1 32.11 23.'1 29.9 7.5 q.~ 8. 1 lb.2 35.q 6b .1 35.3 17.q 1 9 ./~
19 37.1 24.2 20.3 8.1 6.11 3.5 21.q it 1.8 55.1 31.11 27.q 57.tt
20 Ju.o 2';;.4 22.(J 1.6 12.1 8.2 11.0 53.3 33.q 25.1 17 .2 qq.8
21 bO.l lI0.2 3b.1t 5.0 12.3 1.0 15.2 31.5 51.7 25.0 2.5 26.6
22 51.1 31. q 3ti.5 6.7 1.1\ 2.1 17. It 52.5 63.1 lq.2 qb.2 32.3
23 ~b.1 23.1 8.2 (J.9 5.b q.7 11.1t 5b.3 13.q 27.6 56.2 lb.7
2 1t q'l.O lI2.t 35.2 0.5 q.q 3.q 15.5 3~.9 qb.O 22.6 lq.2 21.9
25 31.0 It 1. q 2l1.'1 9.1 'j.l O.b 17.q 5q.2 lb.9 12.b lIb.l 3q.l
2h b':i.9 30.b 24.2 2.3 b.q 8.6 13.0 33.3 39.5 26.2 25.9 3q.b
21 5'-1.1 lI2.R q6.0 6.3 1.5 12. 1 18.5 31.3 q9.9 q6.1 lq.q .31.7
20 7q.5 27. 'I 31.q 6.8 10.8 2.2 17 .0 31.5 q9.6 18.9 38.0 26.5
29 12.b 31. q 27.1 lq.3 0.3 5.3 19.6 25.0 59.1 2q.7 20.0 lI2.1
30 3'1.6 37.'1 . 35./t 7.2 10.1 1.0 lq.6 32.8 bb.8 39.1 2.0 ('9.3
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
SYNTHESIZED
AVERAGE MONTHLY FLOW
~z.A f"NGINEEnING COMPAN~ • MJl.nCH 19B1 AlASKA POWER AUTHOmTY
(I)
II..
U
80
60
z 40
3: o
...J
II..
20
o
~
\
"'lII
o
~ ~
"""1IIIIIIII ~ IiII.... ........
10 20
,
l 1
r---~ ...... --....... r---. '"--r---. ~
30 40 50 60 70
PERCENT OF TIME EQUALED OR EXCEEDED
i
80
EXHIBIT 15
-.......
90 100
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
MONTHLY FLOW DURATION CURVE
-'ASKA POWER AUTHORITY
1 j 1 1 ; I
REQUIRED FLOW RELEASES
Without Environmental Constraints
Minimum Maximum Average
Flow Flow Flow
Release Release Release
cfs cfs cfs
January 9 29 18
February 12 34 18
March 9 34 18
April 9 34 18
May 15 49 27
June 15 49 27
July 24 58 36
August 24 58 35
September 24 61 35
October 15 49 27
November 18 52 27
December 9 29 18
Annual 9 61 26
~z.A ENGINEERING CO'\,/1PANY • 'V'IAI=tCI---I 1981
l l
With Environmental ---.
Minimum Maximum
Flow Flow
Release Release
cfs cfs
9 24
12 24
9 24
9 24
20 39
15 49
24 58
24 38
29 46
25 44
23 42
9 28
9 58
I 4 l
Constraints
Average
Flow
Release
cfs
17
17
17
17
27
28
36
33
36
33
31
17
26
EXHIBIT 16
PAGE 1 of 5
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
RESERVOIR OPERATION
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
FOLLO~ING RESULTS BASED ON 30 OUT OF 30 YEARS EXCEEDENCE
OCT NOli DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP ANNUAL
ORAfiDO~N (ELII) lb87.8 lb8b.7 lb88.0 Ib65.b Ib85.0 lb85.0 Ib85.0 lb85.7 Ib91.5 lb85.b Ib85.0 lb85.0 lb85.0
YEAR 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 13 9 15 9 15
CAPACITY (M~) 2.b93 2.b99 1.797 1.79b 0.973 0.113 1.453 2.b91 2.b98 3.588 1.384 2.711 0.113
YEAR 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 9 9 9 5
************************************************************************************************************ _______ a _______ *_.*_*
FOLLOWING RESULTS BASED ON
DRAWDOWN (ELI!>
YEAR
CAPACITY (1'11'1)
YEAR
OCT
Ib91.b
11
2.b98
10
28 OUT OF
NOli
Ib92.7
4
2.703
3
30 YEARS EXCEEDENCE
DEC
lb95.1
b
1.805
b
JAN
lb92.8
b
1.80b
3
FE6
lb89.1
3
I .80 I
3
MAR
lb85.8
b
1.797
3
APR
Ib85.4
5
1.794
5
MAY
Ib89.2
14
2.b9b
3
JUN
lb91.8
15
2.704
3
JUL
Ib90.7
3
3.594
13
AUG
lb8b.3
3
3.58b
3
SEP
lb8b.7
4
3.582
4
ANNUAL
lb85.0
5
1.384
9
a __ a _____ a ___________________________________ * ______________________________________ * __ * ______________________ a_a ___ *** _______ ***
FOLLOfiING RESULTS BASED ON 27 OUT OF 30 YEARS EXCEEDENCE
OCT NOli DEC JAN FEB
ORAWDOWN (ELII) lb91.9 Ib92.9 lb95.9 lb93.2 lb90.1
YEAR 3 b 14 3 b
CAPACITY (1'11'1)
YEAR
2.701
b
2.705
b
1.805
3
1.80b
b
1.802
b
MAR
Ib8b.l
3
1.797
b
APR
lb8b.7
b
1.795
b
MAY
lb90.2
5
2.b97
III
JUN
lb92.5
4
2.705
13
JUL
lb91.4
4
3.594
4
AUG
lb8b.5
5
3.588
4
SEP
lb88.7
5
3.584
5
ANNUAL
Ib85.0
4
1.47b
3
a_a __________________ * ______________________________ ** __ a* _____ * ____ * ___________ * _________ ** ______________ *_aa. ___ a ____________ **
FOLLOWING RESULTS BASED ON 24 OUT OF 30 YEARS EXCEEDfNCE
OCT NOli DEC JAN FEB
DRAWDOWN (ELII) Ib93.8 Ib9b.7 lb99.7 Ib97.5 lb94.4
YEAR 14 11 11 11 10
CAPACITY ("11'1)
YEAR
2.703
3
2.709
10
1.810
11
1.811
11
1.807
11
MAR
Ib91.2
11
1.803
11
APR
Ib89.9
2
l.tlOI
11
MAY
lb94.0
13
2.705
10
JUN
lb9b.O
b
2.707
5
JUL
lb93.b
10
3.bOO
b
AUG
lb90.b
b
3.593
b
SEP
Ib91.8
15
3.593
10
ANNUAL
lb87.8
14
1.800
10
a __ aa ________ * ______________ * _________ *******************************************************************************************
FOLLOWING RESULTS BASED ON 21 OUT OF 30 YEARS EXCEEDlNCE
OCT NOli DEC JAN FEB
ORAfiUOWN (ELII) 1700.3 1702.~ 1703.2 1700.7 Ib97.4
YEAR 2 Ib 15 9 Ib
CAPACITY ("11'1)
YEAR
2.713
7
2.721
lb
1.81b
lb
1.815
9
1.811
Ib
MAR
lb94.1
15
1.807
9
APR
lb94.0
9
1.805
9
MAY
Ib9b.0
9
2.709
9
JUN
1702.0
25
2.719
2
JUL
lb9b.O
25
3.b12
25
AUG
lb92.8
6
3.bOb
8
SEP
lb93.1
b
3.bOO
14
ANNUAL
Ib90.0
10
1.802
15
*********************************************************************************************************************************
FOLLOWING RESULTS BASED ON 18 OUT OF 30 YEARS EXCEEDENCE
OCT NOli DEC JAN FEB MAt{ APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SE!' ANNUAL
DRAVjOOWN (EL II) 1701.4 1704.9 170b.9 1704.4 1701.2 Ib98.1 Ib9b.8 Ib98.0 1704.0 1700.1> 1.,98.9 Ib98.8 Ib93.2
YEAR 15 25 25 13 7 8 7 11 2 11 25 25 Ib
CAPACITY (MW) 2.719 2.724 l.d21 1.821 I.Slb 1.812 1.809 2.71b 2.722 3 • .,20 3.bll 3.b12 1.809
EXHIBIT 16
PAGE 2 of 5
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
YEAR 25 25 7 8 7 13 8 12 12 I I 11 2~ S RESERVOIR OPERATION WITHOUT
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
~ ENGINEERING COMPANY· MARCH 19B1 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
I I f 1 , I • f • I , 1 f • 1 , I 1 I 1 r I f , 1 , , I
, a l 1 I I
FOLLOWING RESULTS BASEO ON 15 OUT OF 30 YEARS EXCEEDENCE
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP ANNUAL
ORAWDOWN (ELV) 1709.1 1708.7 1709.4 170b.7 1704.1 1700.7 1700.1 1702.8 1709.9 1707.2 1703.0 1701.7 1b97.0
YEAR 19 19 12 12 12 19 12 1 7 24 24 21 12
CAPACITY (MW) 2.727 2.735 1.823 1.823 1.819 1.81b 1.813 2.720 2.730 3.&34 3.b27 3.bl1:1 1.813
YEAR 8 13 19 19 12 19 12 25 7 12 24 1 12
*********************************************************************************************************************************
fOLLOWING RESULTS BASED ON 12 OUT Of 30 YEARS EXCEEDENCE
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB
DRAWDOWN (ELV) 1710.0 1713.1 1712.1 1708.4 1705.7
YEAR 22 22 1 2b 2b
CAPACITY O~W)
YEAR
2.731
27
2.741
22
1.829
23
1.82b
2b
1.821
2b
MAR
1702.8
17
1.818
17
APR
1702.3
2b
1.61b
2b
MAY
1705.b
24
2.72&
19
JUN
1711.b
1
2.734
24
JUL
1709.4
22
AUG
170b.1
30
3.b34
21
SEP
1704.3
7
3.b30
7
ANNUAL
1700.7
19
1.81b
2b
*******************************************~*************************************************************************************
FDLLOWING RESULTS BASED ON 9 OUT OF ]0 YEARS EXCEEDENCE
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB
DRAWDOWN (ELV) 1715.0 1714.7 1715.0 1710.5 1707.4
YEAR 29 27 30 24 1
CAPACITY (MW)
YEAR
b.018
24
2.747
18
1.829
24
1.824
24
MAR
170].b
24
1.819
24
APR
1703.1
24
1.817
24
MAY
1707.1
30
2.731
30
JUN
1711.b
28
2.740
17
JUL
1712.1
21
AUG
1708.1
29
3.b39
20
SEP
1708.b
27
3.b37
27
ANNUAL
1702.3
2b
1.817
24
*********************************************************************************************************************************
FOLLOWING RESULTS BASED ON b OUT O~ 30 YEARS EXCEEDENCE
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB
DRAWDOWN (ELV) 1715.0 1715.0 1715.0 1712.2 1709.5
YEAR 23 29 27 28 20
CAPACITY (MW)
YEAR
b.024
21
b.028
17
b.027
20
1.830
28
1.82b
18
MAR
170b.3
22
1.823
21
APR
170b.3
22
1.6211
22
MAY
1708.8
18
2.732
28
JUN
1715.0
29
b.020
30
JUL
1712.3
20
3.b49
20
AUG
1710.0
28
3.b42
22
SEP
1711.3
20
3.b45
22
ANNUAL
170b.2
18
1.820
22
**************************************************************************************~******************************************
fOLLOWING RESULfS BASED ON 3 OUT OF 30 YEARS EXCEEDENCE
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR API< MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP ANNUAL
DRAWOOIIN (ELV) 1715.0 1715.0 1715.0 1712.b 1710.~ 170b.8 170b.9 1710.7 1715.0 1715.0 1712.3 171S.u 170b.8
YEAR 18 21 21 27 21 29 20 17 22 30 22 19 29
CAPACITY (MW) b.028 b.028 b.028 1.830 1.827 1.823 1.821 2.73b b.023 b.025 3.b4b b.021 1.821
YEAR 20 24 28 27 30 30 20 27 27 17 18 Ib 20
EXHIBIT 16
PAGE 3 of 5
*********************************************************************************************************************************
fOLLOWING RESULTS BASED ON lOUT OF 30 YEARS EXCEEDENCE
OCT. NOV DEC JAN FEB
DRAWDOWN (ELV) 1715.0 1715.0 1715.0 1714.2 1710.b
YEAr. 1 1 18 29 28
CAPACIT Y (MW)
YEAR
b.028
1
b.028
1
b.028
21
~ ENGINEERING COMPANY· MARCH 1981
1.831
22
1.828
29
MAR
1707.3
27
1.823
28
API<
1707.&
27
1.822
27
MAY
1714.1
20
2.739
20
JUN
1715.0
18
b.027
20
JUL
1715.0
17
AUG
1715.0
17
b.028
17
SEI'
1715.0
Ib
b.028
17
ANNUAL
1707.3
27
1.822
27
BLACK BEAR LAKE.
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
RESERVOIR OPERATION WITHOUT
ENVI RONMENT AL CONSTRAINTS
ALASKA POWEll AUTHORITY
FOLLOWING RESULTS BASED ON 30 DIIT OF 30 YfAR~ FXCEEDFNCf
OCT NOV DEC .TAN FER MAR APR I'AY .lIJN Jill AUr. ~EP "NNIl"L
DR"wDOWN (ELV) 16B~.? 1661>.0 11>87." IM'i." 11>8'i.0 I 1>1:l'i. 0 161\'i.O 11>8'i.7 11>91.7 168'1.3 11>/l'i.0 161i'i.0 1/,8'>.0
YE"R /I 'i '5 'i 'i 'i 0 II 10 'I 'I 'I 'I
r.APACITY (MW) ;>.'1911 2.'19'i 1.67;> 1.1>7? 0.'1311 O. II ~ 1.1153 ?61i1 ;>.68/\ ~.'i9'i ;>./\1;> ;'.711 0.1 13
YE"H II '5 '5 'i 'i 'i ~ 'l /I ~ 'I q 'i
.**** •••• ** •• ***************************.**************t_t*t.* __ t_ ••• _ •• __ • _________ ._._. ___ • _______________ *tttt*ttttt _________ _
FOLLOwING RESULTS BASEO ON ;>8 aliT OF 30 YEAR~ FXCEFDENCE
ORAWOOWN (ELV)
YEAR
CAPACITY (MW)
YEAR
OCT NOV DEC JAN FER
11>91.6 1693.3 169'i.0 16Q3.0 1690.6
II 'l /) I> I>
1."80
"
1.1>1\0
I>
1.678
I>
APR
161H .0
~
1.1,13
"
JIIN
169 11 .1
t3
.JilL
1I>'1I.'i
II
AUG
1688.1
1'5
~EP
1667.'5
II
ANNlIAL
168<;.0
1I
I."n
6
tt**t**t**_t ___ * _______ ••• _________ • ______ • ___________ *t_ ••• _tt_t _______________________ • ___________________ *tttttt*ttt _________ _
FOLLOWING RESULTS R"SED ON ?7 OUT OF 30 YEARS FXCEFDFNCE
DRAWOOWN (ELV)
YEAR
CAP"CITY (MW)
YE"R
OCT NOV DEC JAN FER
1691.7 1693." 1"97.3 11>9'5.;> 11>91.7
10 3 10 10 3
1.1>811
"5
1.f.80
~
MAR
1689.1
~
APR
If.87./\
6
ANNUAL
168&.1,
I>
1.67/1
'I .*. ______ *_t*_*. _____________________ ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• _. ____ • _____ • __ ••••••
FOLLOwING RESULTS BASED ON ?q OIJT OF 30 YEARS EXCfFDfNCt
ORAWDOWN (fllil
YEAR
CAPACITY (MW)
YEAR
OCT NOV DEC JAN FER
1&96.3 1696.1 169'1.3 11>97.~ 11>93./\
III II II II I"
l.OIO
"3
3.01~
10
1.6f1'i
II
1.686
11
1.1>8?
11
"'AR
11,91./\
11
1.67'1
1 1
APR
I I.ql .1
III
1 .677
11
"'AY
16911.9
1 0
JIIN
11.'17.;>
I,
?701
"
SEP
~.59C;
10
ANNUAL
1.677
11
******.******_*. ___ •• ___ ••• _ •••••• _* •••••• * •••••• * •• _ •••••••••• _ •• _t •• _ •• ** ••• _ •• __ •••• ** __ • __ • ___ * •• _. __ *_.**_ •• __ •• _.* __ •••• * __
FOLLOWING RESULTS BASEn ON 21 DIIT OF 30 nAI<5 FxrEFDfNCE
ORAWOOWN (E:LV)
YEAR
CAPACITY (MW)
YEAR
nCT NOV DEC JAN FE~
1701.'1 17011.0 1705.7 170~.1I 1699.~
2 I~ 'I 'I 16
3.01'1
'I
l.0211
7
1.693
I'>
1.1.93
'I
1.1>8'1
'I
1.1>81,
'I
APR
11>97.7
'I
;>.701>
I~
?71?
1 I
ANNIIAl
1691 • /I
13
•• _ ••• t ••••• ** •• __ ••••• __ ••• *._.**.* ••••••••••••••• _ ••••• * ••••••••• _ ••• ___ ••••••• _ •••••• _ ••••• _ •• _____ • _____ ._ •••• _._ •• __ •• _ •• _ ••
FOLLOWING RESULTS BASED ON 18 OUT OF 30 Yf. Afl 5 fXrEFtlFNCE
OCT N(iv DEC ,T A ~r nA "AR APR f1A Y ,ruN .lUI AlJG SEP ANNUAL
ORAWI)OWN (ELV) 1 7 Oll.1\ 170f..~ 1707.'1 1700:;./\ 170?/' 169'1.9 11.9'1./1 169'1.7 1706.4 1 7 0'1.11 1 7 01.7 170 I.f, 11>96.1I
VEAR 10:; 'I t:5 25 1~ 7 /\ II ? /\ 25 211 1\
CApACITY (MW) 3.026 3.02'1 1.691> 1.6'16 1.69,\ 1.61iq 1 • bi'.7 ?709 ?71'i 3.626 '1.321> 3.61'1 1.687
EXHIBIT 16
PAGE 4 of 5
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
YEAR )'i l'i 7 1~ I'
I-tARZA ENGINEERING CONIPANY MARCH 19B1
7 7 !? I? 1\ ;> 2'i 7 RESERVOIR OPERATION WITH
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
, 1 , , , ~-, • I 1 1 I 1 1 • I I , I
l 1 l • I , I l 1 l
FOLLo"rl'<r. QFSIJLTS RASEn OL! . .., IIItT l!F "I n Yf-AhS r,nFDFr!n"
nCT "'(1\1 ntr J I, P FEI< t·1f\rJ ~t'R -~ A V .JI.'~' Jill ~ Ilr. SEP ANNIIAI.
l1IHW[)n~'N (fL v) 170'1.1 17(1~.<; 170q.~ 17(.7.? 170ll. I, 1701.2 17 (j 1 • R 17o"i.~ 171 I • q 170~.'i 17u ll •Q 1 7 0?1, 1&'1/\./\
Yf~~ 14 P I? P, 1<) 1° 1? II, 2/1 "a I 21 7
CAPACITY 0".') 3.03<; " 3.03 Q 1.I,</fl 1.I,QA I • f. 'I lJ 1 • I, 'I I 1 • f:.'J0 ?7 III ?7?'i ~. 1,3'1 3.3 /lO 3."<,il 1."'10
Y f:A '" "<,I, I? q !? 1<) 1<) ,,"3 "" 21, P 2" 1 2~
****************************J.****** ••••• *************t**_,_ •• ___ t_. ___ .", ___ ,_. __ " •.. ________ ,_.,._. __ ••• _*._, ____ , •.•.. _ .•. ,.
FOLLO"TNG RESULTS RASEr) 0" 1" O'll U" 30 HUS FxrEFnF,.CE
(lRAWl!n\';~! (FLV)
YUI<
CAP4CTTY (,"",)
YE ~I<
nCT ~UV ntr JAN F~R
1711.'" 171?" 1712." 170°.] 1707.?
2" 2? 1 17 17
I. 701
17
1."'17
17
1 .1,9 11
17
APR
17 () lJ • I
I
MAY
1701,.'1
"II
?727
]1,
.Ilil
1710. •
I?
AIIr;
1701,.'1
30
~.~1I11
7
StP
17U7.0
III
ANNIIAL
1701.6
211
1 • &<j~
1
-**-,_.--.-., .. __ .-.,_._ .. ,._.-.. ,.,._---_ .. ,--*--, .. --** .•.. , .. ,*--, •••• ".,------•• ,--, •• ***,** •• , •••• *.*.*.* ••••• * ••• **.* ••• **
FOLLowINr; RfSl1i TS RASEr> (1" q 0111 OF 30 Yf. AtiS F~n.FlJFNCE
ORAWI)O .. ~' (I'LI/)
n ~k
CAPACTTY (t-'W)
Y£ ~f<
nO:T HilI nu: J"~' FFR
171<;.0 171Q.l 171".0 1710.11 170R.~
,>9 c'0 "~o 2'1 1
1 .7 U ~
,>a
170'i.?
21,
MAY
17(1M.'1(
30
? 7??
30
,III"
171 Il. 'I
i'R
? 7.n
17
Jill
1712.?
21
~ur,
1710.?
27
~.3£11\
30
ANNUAL
170 11.0
]7
1 .1,911
26
••• ,.*******,****,*****,.**,.* ••••••• * •• * •••• * •• *.**** ••• , •• *, •• ***.*****.*.* •• ,.,.***, •• **".*****,.**,*****.***.*** ••• ********.
FllI.LOWHIr. R~.SUL 1 S f\p,Sl:n O~. I, 111fT IIF 30 YF ~Id; Fxr.rFljFr.rE
CAPACIl Y (Plo)
Yl:~f<
nCT "1111 or.1: .IH' FfR
171'i.0 171<;.n 171".0 171?<; 171 0 .1
2~ 2'1 ~7 ?A 20
1.701
II',
,.··AP
1707.?
2?
1.1,91'
21
APF
1707.<;
2?
~AY .1lJN
171'i.0
27
.flll
171~.1
I"
~.35?
Iq
SEP
171;>.0
20
ANNIIAL
1707.0
III
l.fI<j1,
2;>
*.**** •• ***.***.*.*.*.** ••• * ••••• * ••• * •••••••• ** •••••••••••••••••••• * ••••••• *.*.****,* •• *** ••• *, •• ************* ••• *.*****.**.* •••
FOLLOWJNr, RfSULl S AASEn (1(\! i Olll uF ~o YFAf<S F~r.fI'IJFI\;r:1:
nCT ~'(J \I nEr: " A '.I FER r-~ A h' ~I'P MAY .II1N .]UI AUr, ~~ P ANNUAL
lJRAWllm,~1 (l:LV) 171 <;.0 171 'i. n 171'i.O 17!?Q 1711 .1 17u7.7 171)1\.? 171?3 17I"i.0 171 'i. 0 17 n.o 171".0 1707.7
Yl:Af< 111 <'1 <'I ?7 21 2<1 ;>0 17 21 30 n 1'1 2'1
CAPACITY (.w) h.Or'1I 1,.0",1' ".021' 1 .7 (J II 1.701 1 .I,'JR 1 • h'!7 ? 7 ['.q 6.02lJ 1>.027 3.~~3 1,.02lJ 1.1,97
HAt< <,0 ,>IJ ;>7 i'1 ~o 3n 2 0 27 27 ] 7 III 1'1 20
*.***.****.***.*.*, •••••• , ••••• ,.* •• * ••• *.* •• ,* ••• *,**.** •• , •••••••••••••• , •••• ,* •••••• ** •••••••• *.,***,*****.* •• *.***.*.***.****
FOLLO~;I"r. RI:SUL1S I<ASE:P nl' I Ull1 OF 30 YHf<$ FxrfFr'FNr~
ORAWlIn"N (I:LV)
HAl<
nCT 'JO" OEr: .JA" FER
171".0 171'i.0 171".0 1714." 171'.?
1 1 1 II ;>'1 2 II
"" •. j
171<;.0
III
.11)1
171'i.0
17
A~'NIJAL
170R.?
27
EXHIBIT 16
PAGE 5 of 5
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
CAP4CJTY (""I)
YUfi
h.O?1l
t
I .7 u? "q 1 .1,91<
;>7
1.1,'1/\
27 RESERVOIR OPERATION WITH
I-tARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY MARCH 1981
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
8000
1
EXHIBIT 17
PAGE 1 of 2
6000
3:
,Jt.
I
> ~
(3
4000 c(
h,'\ ~0 ~ ~~~ ~ !-l.\
~
LEGEND
Q.
c(
U
~
I%:
u..
2000
o
~~ 1-",::' ,~,~ ~ ~:~~:-,\01-~:>-
JAN FEB MAR APR MA Y /UN JUL AUG
YEAR 1992
Without Environmental Constraints (Equal to Load Demand)
- - - -With Environmental Constraints (Limited by Maximum Allowable Release)
l-lAR.ZA ENGoNEE"I'NG COMPANY. MA"ICH 199'
SEP OCT NOV DEC
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
POWER AND ENERGY PRODUCTION
ALASKA POWER A~TY
4000
.c
~ :!!
I
z
0 3000 i=
(.)
;:)
0
0 a:
CL
> C!' a: 2000 w z w
w
C!' « a: w > «
> 1000
..J
:I:
~
Z
0
:!!
o
~ :\~
~ ~~ .....
~
'" ~~ ~\
,~\\,
EXHIBIT 17
PAGE 2 of 2
JAN FEB MAR APR MA Y JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
YEAR 1992
LEGEND
Without Environmental Constraints
- - - -With Environmental Constraints
~ ENG'NEE"'NG CONI_NY, MA .. C .... 19B1
f , J 1 1 t , 1 1 1 1
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
POWER AND ENERGY PRODUCTION
ALASKA POWER AtmfORITY
1 1 1 , 1 I
r;.l!~iIf Year Craig Klawock
Historical
Data -1930 231 437
1940 505 455
a~ 1950 374 404
1960 273 251
1970 272 213
1971 332 221 -1972 397 230
1973 467 240
1974 475 251
,,"" 1975 484 266
1976 493 290
1977 503 300
,,, 1978 560 350
1979 620 404
Projections
'1~~,.
1986 810 530
1991 890 590 ... 1996 990 650
2001 1,090 710
,~,.
l--LARZ.A eNGINEEFI'NG COMPAN'" • MARO-< 19B1
POPULATION
Hydaburg
319
348
353
251
214
225
245
264
291
350
384
380
380
381
570
690
840
1,020
EXHIBIT 18
.l.'horne
Subtotal Bay Hollis
987
1,308
1,131
775
699
778
872
971
1,017
1,100
1,167
1,183
1,290
1,405
1,910
2,170
2,480
2,820
550
550
550
550
400
375
300 50
350 70
380 90
420 115
460 150
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
POPULATION
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
..
INCOME ($1,000) 1973
tUning 340
Construction (D)
Manufacturing 8,204
Transportation Utilities 191
Pho1esa1e Trade 0
Retail Trade 165
Fin. -Ins. -Real Estate 0
Services (D)
Federal Government 382
State & Local Government 1,263
Miscellaneous 900
Total 11,570
PER CAPITA INCOME ($)
Prince of Wales 6,439
Alaska 6,046
United States 4,981
Source: U.S. Bureau pf Economic Analysis
Alaska Statistical Review 1980
i t
PRINCE OF WALES ISLAND
1974 1975 1976 1977
409 (D) (D) (D)
(D) (D) (D) (D)
9,477 8,584 6,939 12,603
(L) 58 115 (D)
(D) (D) (D) (D)
181 311 377 349
(L) (L) 63 173
103 72 86 (D)
434 453 405 594
1,444 1,677 1,980 2,201
1,011 472 602 566
13,159 11,951 10,758 17,603
6,273 5,888 5,893 7,666
7,138 9,673 10,274 10,455
5,428 5,861 6,401 7,038
(D) Not shown to avoid disclosure of confidential information. Data are included in totals.
(L) Less than $50,000. Data are included in totals.
EXHIBIT 19
1978
(D)
(D)
12,091
380
(D)
492
194
(D)
903
2,507
530
17,693
7,025
10,849
7,840
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
SOCIOECONOMIC STAT1STICS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
,
i.
PRINCE OF WALES
EHPLOYr1ENT (YEAR
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
'lining * * * * * *
Construction * * * * * *
'1anufacturing 121 168 237 447 533 601
Transportation Utilities * * * * * *
Wholesale Trade * * * * * *
Retail Trade 30 32 38 33 46 53
Fin.-Ins. & Real Estate 9 9 12 9 7 9
Services 25 22 20 25 26 17
Federal Government 21 22 22 29 32 29
State & Local Government 167 170 166 143 141 112
,\1isce11aneous 2 2 37 * * *
Total 375 425 532 686 785 821
Source: Alaska Department of Labor
1--l.AR.z.A ENGINEERING COMPANy· MARCH 1981
ISLAND
1979)
Ju1 ~~ Se 1 ·L
"/~ ole *
,', * *
623 643 538
* 1, *
* * *
50 43 42
5 6 6
16 23 27
36 37 37
111 124 164
42 42 9
883 918 823
Oct
*
*
409
,/,
*
34
10
25
33
162
9
682
EXHIBIT 20
r;v~r.J. ~c
Nov Dec Annual
,~ * ~IC
1< 1< ,~
420 303 420
* 'i, *
1, * ,~
32 41 40
11 9 9
22 22 22
31 30 30
159 151 148
3 3 12
678 559 681
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
EMPLOYMENT
N..ASKA POWER AUTHORITY
DIESEL ..
HEATING
OIL ..
WOOD •
GAS
•
J-lARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY' MARCH 19B1
CUNITI: BILLION BTU'SI
REJECTED
'~_,-,":::::=--' ENERGY ..
USEFUL
ENERGY ..
EXHIBIT 21
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
1980
ENERGY BALANCE
ALASKA POWER A",THORITY
....
-
."",
..
•• ,,<i/J
Town
Klawock
Craig
Hydaburg
Thorne Bay
Hollis
Owner
THREA
ATC
APT
Craig
Fisheries
APT
Sealaska
Fisheries
Unit No.
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
Louisiana 1
Pacific Corp. 2
3
4
U,S.F.S. 1
2
3
II Largest unit out of service .
UARZA ENG'NEEF'I'NG COMPANY· MAF'lC'" 1881
EXHIBIT 22
Na~eplate Capacity, .kWl/
Unlt Total Flrm-
500
500
300
250
65
800
1000
300
300
90
75
75
255
255
255
65
250
250
90
90
75
75
500
500
500
300
150
90
100
100
100
1615 1115
1800 800
840 575
830 575
830 580
1000 500
1040 540
300 200
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
EXISTING GENERATING FACILITIES
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
RESIDENTIAL-COMHERCIAL SECTOR
KLAWOCK!! CRAIG~I
Energy Number Energy Number
Consump-of Consump-of
Year tion Customers tion Customers
(kWh) (kWh)
1973 N.A. N.A. 918,128 173
1974 N.A. N.A. 1,053,683 181
1975 N.A. N.A. 1,199,937 184
1976 N.A. N.A. 1,332,335 195
1977 362,170 89 1,483,214 -212
1978 563,315 94 1,607,762 219
1979 952,838 97 1,857,238 220
11 Sales by THREA (without the Klawock Cannery). II Sales by APT.
l-tARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY' MARCH 1881
HYDABURG~I
Energy Number
Consump-of
tion Customers
(kWh)
323,727 105
466,341 92
551,345 105
725,094 102
675,120 107
840,260 119
901,210 121
1
EXHIBIT 23
TOTAL
Energy Number
Consump-of
tion Customers
(kWh)
N.A. N.A.
N.A. N.A.
N.A. N.A.
N.A. N.A.
2,520,504 408
3,011,337 432
3,711,286 438
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
ELECTRIC ENERGY CONSUMPTION
HISTORICAL DATA
AlASKA POWER A4THORITY
,.
-~, ....
....
'-
,.,...
,,4
"..,.
'."",
,...,
EXHIBIT 24
RESIDENTIAL-COHMERCIAL SECTOR
1979 MONTHLY
CRAIG
January 166,524
February 185,578
March 141,222
April 140,582
May 146,984
June 140,878
July 137,614
August 154,083
September 145,665
October 157,422
November 178,823
December 161,863
Total 1,857,238
!/ Estimated
~ ENGINEERING COMPANY. MARC'" '9B1
ENERGY CONSUMPTION
( kvlh)
KLAWOCK
102,914
78,050
72,144
75,185
76,103
70,440
70,000!/
70,000Y
70,000Y
83,790
90,422
93,790
952,838
HYDABURG TOTAL
100,129 369,567
92,659 356,287
84,377 297,743
75,145 290,912
63,903 286,990
63,960 275,278
57,062 264,676
55,664 279,747
63,182 278,847
72,915 314,127
85,192 354,437
87,022 342,675
901,210 3,711,286
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
1979 MONTHLY ENERGY
CONSUMPTION
ALASKA POWER A~ORITY
Klawock
Per Capita Consumption (kWhl
Population
Energy Consumption (HWhl
Peak (kWI
Craig
Per ~pita Consumption (kWhl
Populat ion
Energy Consumption (HWhl
Peak (kWI
Hydaburg
Per Capita Consumption (kWhl
population
Energy Consumption (HWhl
Peak (kWI
Subtotal
Per Capita Consumption (kWhl
Population
Energy Consumption (HWhl
Peak (kWI
Thornp. 8ay
Per Capita Consumption (kWhl
Population
Energy Consumption (HWhl
Peak (kWI
Ho11 is
Per Capita Consumption (kWhl
Population
Energy Consumption (HWhl
Peak (kWI
~ ENO.NEERlNIJ COMPANY· MARCH 1BB1
i.
RESIDENTIAL-co~rnERCIAL
1979
2,350
404
950
240
3,000
620
1,860
470
2,360
381
900
230
2,640
1,405
3,710
940
5,370
300
1,610
460
5,370
50
200
80
Annual
Growth
Rate -,--
4.0
4.0
3.0
4.0
4.0
6.0
3.4
4.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
5.0
1986
3,100
530
1,640
390
3,680
810
2,980
710
3,110
570
1,770
420
3,345
1,910
6,390
1,520
6,170
350
2,160
580
6,170
70
430
120
Annual
Growth
Rate -,--
3.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
2.5
2.6
1.0
2.0
1.0
5.0
SECTOR
1991
3,600
590
2,130
510
4,060
890
3,610
860
3,605
690
2,490
590
3,795
2,170
8,230
1,960
6,485
380
2,460
660
6,485
90
580
160
Annual
Growth
Rate -,--
3.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
2.5
2.6
1.0
2.0
1.0
5.0
1996
4,170
650
2,710
620
4,485
990
4,440
1,010
4,180
840
3,510
800
4,300
2,480
10,660
2,430
6,815
420
2,860
730
6,815
115
780
200
Annual
Growth
Rate -,--
3.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
2.5
2.6
1.0
2.0
1.0
5.0
2001
4,830
710
3,430
780
4,950
1,090
5,400
1,230
4,850
1,020
4,950
1,130
4,890
2,820
13,780
3,140
7,160
460
3,290
830
7,160
150
1,070
270
EXHIBIT 25
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
RESIDENTIAL -COMMERCIAL
DEMAND
. ALASKA POWER AQTHORtTY
1979 1986
Klawock Peak ~ Peak ~ kW MWh kW MWh
Res./Corn. Sector 240 950 390 1640
Industrial Sector
Fisheries Industries 200 610 400 1400
Forest Products Indust. 0 0 150 520.
Total TIO 1560 940 3565
Craig
Res./Corn. Sector 470 1860 710 2980
Industrial Sector
Fisheries Industries 300 920 400 1400
Forest Products Indust. 0 0 150 520
Total 7'fO 2780 1260 4905
Hydaburg
Res./Corn. Sector 230 900 420 1770
Industrial Sector
Fisheries Industries 350 1070 800 2800
Forest Products Indust. 0 0 1250 4380
Total 580 1970 2470 8950
Subtotal
Res./Corn. Sector 940 3710 1520 6390
Industrial Sector
Fisheries Industries 850 2600 1600 5600
Forest Products Indust. 0 0 1550 5420
Total 1790 6310 4670 174TO
Thorne Bay
Total 460 1610 580 2160
Hollis
Total 80 270 120 430
~ZA ENGINEEnlNG COMPANY. MARCH 1981
1991 1996
Peak ~ Peak
kW HWh kW
510 2130 620
480 1680 530
190 660 220
1180 4470 IT'7O
860 3610 1010
480 1680 530
190 660 220
1530 5950 1760
590 2490 800
970 3400 1070
1600 5600 1850
3160 11490 3720
1960 8230 2430
1930 6760 2130
1980 6920 2290
5870 21910 6850
660 2460 730
160 580 200
~
MWh
2710
1950
810
5470
4440
1950
810
1200
3510
3950
6810
14260
10660
7840
8430
26930
2860
780
EXHIBIT 26
2001
Peak ~ kW MWh
780 )430
585 2160
250 920
1606 6510
1230 5400
585 2160
250 920
~ 8480
1130 4950
1180 4340
2150 7910
4440 17200
3140 13780
2350 7210
2650 8120
liT40 32190
830 3290
270 1070
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
TOTAL
PEAK AND ENERGY DEMAND
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
t 1
12,~
10,~
EXISTING DIESEL
5,115 kW
8,000
6.000
EXISTING DIESEL
4,000 5,115 kW
BLACK BEAR LAKE
6,000 kW
2,000
YEAR
LEGEND
PRDJECTED PEAK LOAD
UARZA ENGINEEFlINCi COMPANY· MAI=CH 1981
1 1
EXHIBIT 27
~,~-.--------------------------------------------------,
.,
I
1:1
Z « 20,000
::Il w
0
>-
t:! a: w
Z w
.... 15,000
«
::l
Z
Z «
10,000
5,000
LEGEND
DIESEL
,...-
iDIESEL OR OTHER
/HYDROELECTRIC
I PROJECTS
I
I
I
I
I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
23,100 MWh
~i~!~~!~i!!!~;~!I~i
YEAR
PROJECTED ENERGY DEMAND
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
POWER MARKET FORECAST
' ....
-
' .... -
:,....
,-
.....
.-
"~J<:dI
,,,.,
",ofI/
,""
RESIDENTIAL -COMMERCIAL LOAD
EXHIBIT 28
PAGE 1 of 4
WINTER SEASON
PEAK DAY
100 100
,--
::0:: cs: w "---11.
...J cs: => z 50 z ----50
cs:
LL -0
~
o o
12pm 12am 12pm 12pm
SUMMER SEASON
PEAK DAY
100
1
100
i
::0:: cs: ,--
W
11.
...J cs: => -z 50 z .--50
cs:
LL
0
~ ---.,
o o
12pm 12am 12pm 12pm
OFF SEASON
PEAK DAY
100 100
r--
::0:: cs:
W
11.
...J cs:
r 1 '----
=> 50 z -f---50
Z cs:
LL
0
~ -
o o
12pm 12am 12pm 12pm
a-tARZA ENGINEEI'lING COMPANY , MAI'lCH 19B1
WEEKEND DAY
-
-
12am
WEEKEND DAY
I-
12am
r--
f-
12am
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJ~CT
ALASKA
-
12pm
-
-
12pm
-
12pm
LOAD CHARACTERISTICS
ALASKA POWER A~THORITY
INDUSTRIAL LOAD EXHIBIT 28
PAGE 2 of 4
SEASON I December and January SEASON III May, June, October and November
WEEK DAY WEEKEND DAY WEEK DAY WEEKEND DAY
100 100 100 100
" " r---< < w w a.. a..
..J ..J < < ::J 50 50 ::J 50 50 Z z
U
z z < < ... ...
0 0
*" n In *"
0 0 0 0
12pm 128m 12pm 12pm 128m 12pm 12pm 128m 12pm 12pm 128m 12pm
HOURS HOURS HOURS HOURS
SEASON II February, March and April SEASON IV July, August, and Septemoor
WEEK DAY WEEKEND DAY WEEK DAY WEEKEND DAY
100 100 100 100
r---
" " U < < w w a.. a..
..J ..J < < ::J 50 50 ::J 50 50 z z z z
J < -< ... ...
0 0
*" *"
0 0 0 0
12pm 128m 12pm 12pm 128m 12pm 12pm 128m 12pm 12pm 128m 12pm
HOURS HOURS HOURS HOURS
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYOROElECTR IC PROJECT
ALASKA
LOAD CHARACTERISTICS
I-tARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY· MARCH 19B1 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
f , f I , I , , , , I , f 1 f , , , , I r I , , f , • 1 , , ,
DAILY LOAD CURVES FOR PEAK DAY
January
~ « ~
..... «
100 -,--------,---------,
50
O~---------r--------~
12pm 128m 12pm
HOURS
100 -r--------,---------,
i 60 -I-------f----j,-----+-------l
~ ... o ...
o
12pm
September
12pm
128m 12pm
HOURS
120m 12pm
HOURS
February
100 -,---------,--------,
50
o
12pm 128m 12pm
HOURS
June
100
50 _r----~--_r----~--~
o
12pm 128m 12pm
HOURS
Oc1ober
100 -r--------,--------,
50
o _r--------~--------~
12pm 120m 12pm
HOURS
~ ENGINEERING COMPANY' MARCH 1981
March
100 -,---------,---------,
50
O+----f------j
12pm 128m 12pm
HOURS
July
100
50 _r----~I_-r------l:=---l
o -+-----1-------1
12pm 128m 12pm
HOURS
November
100 -r--------,--------,
50 _r----~I_~----r_--___l
o
12pm 121m 12pm
HOURS
,
April
100
50
o
12pm
I
128m
HOURS
12pm
EXHIBIT 28
PAGE 3 of 4
100 -,--------.. --_..---,
50 _r----~I_~----~--___l
o
12pm 128m 12pm
HOURS
Dac:ember
100
50 -I--------jf---------I
o ~--------~--------___l
12pm 121m 12pm
HOURS
BLACK BEAR LAKI
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
LOAD CHARACTERISTICS
.. ASK ... POWER AUTHOfIITY
:oc « ~ ... «
100 ~--------r-------~
i 50 +-----~----+-------~
t
u. o
#.
u. o
#.
o +-----+-----t
1:rpm 120m 12pm
HOURS
100 ~--------~--------~
o +-------+-------~
12pm 120m
HOURS
12pm
100~--------r--------'
o +------t-----I
12pm 120m
HOURS
12pm
~
DAILY LOAD CURVES FOR WEEKEND DAY
March
100
~ ~--------~------~
o +---...-4----04
12pm
June
120m
HOURS
12pm
100~--------~--------,
0+----+-----1
12pm 120m
HOURS
12pm
100 ~--------~------~
o +----1------1
12pm 121m 12pm
HOURS
100··~--------~···~------~
o
12pm
July
121m 12pm
HOURS
100 ~--------~---------
o
12pm 121m 12pm
HOURS
November
100 ~--------~---------
0+-----+----1
12pm 121m 12pm
HOURS
~ ENGINeEFIiNG CDMPANY MARCH 1981
, , f I , 1 f , f , , I f • , . , I f I I , I
April
EXHIBIT 28
PAGE 4 of 4
100 ;---------~~
50 +------
o
12pm
1::!pm
December
100
50
o
1:rpm
,
12am 12pm
HOURS
121m 12pm
HOURS
128m 12pm
HOURS
IUCI( BEAR LAI<l!:
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASI<A
LOAD CHARACTERISTICS
ALASKA POWER AI.I114ORITY
, I , J
METEOROLOGICAL DATA FROM ANHETTE ------,4
1/ Solar-.,'""
Mean Daily
(Btu/ft 2 )
':-,,,,,iIIf
January 177.9
.. February 374.7
l1arch 717.1
,,-. ~ .. April 1,149.5
Hay 1,473.1
.-
June 1,465.6
"
July 1,439.2
August 1,162.3
<,' '\'1 September 812.2
October 422.2
'" November 218.6
December 122.5
Annual 794.6
1/ Based on 1941-1970 period
,"
2/ 3ased on 1941-1979 period
.,.
I-lARZA ENGINEEI=IING CO~NV • IVIA"'C .... 1981
EXHIBIT 29
ISLAND
Wind 1/
Speed Prevailing
(m. E.h.) (Direc tion)
12.1 ESE
12.3 SE
11.1 SE
11.2 SSE
9.4 SSE
9.0 SSE
8.1 SSE
8.3 SSE
9.4 SE
12.0 SE
12.4 ESE
12.8 ESE
10.7 SSE
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
SOLAR AND WIND DATA
ALASKA POWER A~THORITY
15,000
i ... 10,000
c z
c(
::E ...
C
:..: 5,000 c( ...
A-
o
15,000
i ... 10,000
c z
c(
:::E ... c
:..: 5,000 c( ...
A-
0
./
• ~ /
BASE CASE PLAN -' ~ l,-/
V r ~ r--ESTIMATED PEAK DEMAND
...I
~ / /
J
/
/"
1980 1990 2000
I I I
PREFERRED PLAN
2010
YEAR
/
I
DI~SEL
2020
//
2030
./ ~ ESTIMATED PEAK DEMAND
/ V
i.-" V
L
/
1980 1990 2000
I
I I
LAKE MELLEN
BLACK BEAR LAKE
2010
YEAR
I
2020 2030
I-tARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY MARCH 1981
15,000
i
10,000 ...
C
Z
c(
:::E ...
C
:..:
c( 5,000 ...
A-
o
15,000
10,000
5,000
o
, ,
t
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
/ V
V
1980
1 l i
EXHIBIT 30
I I I I I 15,000
SECOND MOST PREFERRED PLAN //
./' /
./
1990 2000
./
/ ~ ESTIMATED PEAK DEMAND
LAKE MELLEN
2010
YEAR
I I I 10,000 I I I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
5,000
o
2020 2030
BLACK BEAR LAKE.
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
ALTERNATIVE EXPANSION PLANS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
i :~-1: • j L • l
CRAIG-KLAWOCK-HYDABURG INTERCONNECTION EXHIBIT 31
BASE CASE 1 PAGE 1 of 5
COST OF I'IONEh. 0.030 INFLATION RATE= 0.000 FUEL ESCALATION RATE_ 0.035~ OISCOUNT RATE= 0.03U
REFERENCE DATE=JANUARY 1981 ALL COSTS IN S 1000
FIXED 0+1'1 FUEL CUMULATIVE PRESENT CUMULATIVE
YEAR COSTS COSTS COST TOTAL TOTAL WORTH P.W.
1981 O. 1t.9. 9t.0. 1126. 1128. 1095. 1095.
1982 O. 195. 11119. 131111. 21172. 12t.7. 23t.2.
1983 O. 225. 1374. 1t.00. 11072. 11It.1I. 382t..
19811 23. 261. 1t.1I5. 1928. t.OOO. 1713. 55110.
1985 23. 301. 1968. 2292. 8292. 1977 • 7517.
198t. 1t.2. 3118. 23511. 28t.1I. 11157. 2399. 9915.
1987 1t.2. 3t.5. 2551. 3078. 1112311. 2503. 121118.
1988 185. 382. 2765. 3332. I 75t.t.. 2t.30. 1501111.
1989 185. 1100. 2997. 3582. 211118. 27115. 17793.
1990 208. 1119. 32118. 38711. 25022. 28113. 20t.7t..
1991 208. 1138. 3519. 1I1t.5. 29187. 30U9. 23t.85.
1992 231. 1157. 3795. 111182. 33t.70. 311111. 2t.829.
1993 231. 117t.. 11093. 11800. 3811t.9. 32t.8. 30097.
19911 2511. 119t.. 1I111t.. 511ot.. 113t.35. 31115. 33512.
1995 2511. 517. 117t.2. 5533. 1191t.8. 3551. 370t.3.
199t. lilt.. 538. 5135. t.089. 55257. 3795. 1108511.
1997 lilt.. 558. 5510. 1>11811. t.17111. 3923. 1111781.
1998 lilt.. 578. 5909. t.903. t.1lt.1I11. IIU55. 118113t..
1999 lilt.. 599. t.33/1. 7351. 75998. 11193. 53029.
2000 1139. b21. t.798. 7859. 11385t.. 113~1. 57381.
2001 1139. t.1I11. 701lt.. B128. 919811. 11369. t.175U.
2002 1It.2. bt.t.. 7293. 111121. 1001l0t.. 11395. t.t.11I5.
2003 1It.2. b90. 75117. 8t.98. 1091011. 111107. 70552.
20011 508. 7111. 7812. 90311. 118138. 11111111. 711996.
2005 508. 739. 8085. '1332. 1271170. 111157. 791153.
200t. 508. 7t.5. 83t.8. 9t.1I0. 137110. 111170. 839211.
2007 5511. 791. 1It.t.I. 1000t.. 1117117. 11505. 881128.
2008 5511. 819. 89t.3. 1033t.. 1571153. 11518. 92911t..
2009 t.00. 8118. 9278. 1072t.. 1t.6179. 11552. 971197.
2010 t.00. 877. 9t.02. 11 080. 179258. 115t.5. 1020t.2.
20 II t.llt.. '108. 9939. 1111'13. 190751. 115'17. 10t.t.5'1.
2012 t.llt.. '1110. 10287. 11873. 202t.25. 1It.11. 111270.
2013 t.t.9. 973. 10t.1lt.. 12288. 2111913. 1It.33. 115'103.
20111 t.t.9. 99t.. 10900. 12St.5. 227478. 115'1'1. 120502.
2015 t.t.9. 99t.. 10900. 125t.5. 21100113. 1I11t.5. 12119t.8.
201t. t.t.'I. 99t.. 10900. 125t.5. 252t.08. 11335. 129303.
2017 t.t.9. 'I'It.. 10'100. 125t.5. 2t.5173. 11209. 133512.
2018 t.t.9. 9'1t.. 10900. 125t.5. 277738. 1I08t.. 1375'1'1.
2019 t.t.9. 'I'It.. 10900. 125t.5. 2'10303. 39t.7. IIiISt.t..
2020 t.t.9. 9'1t.. 10'100. 125t.5. 3028t.8. 3852. 11151118.
2021 t.t.9. 9'1t.. 10900. 125t.5. 315433. 37110. 1119158.
2022 t.t.9. 99t.. 10'100. 125t.5. 327998. 3t.31. 15278'1.
2023 t.t.'I. 99t.. 10900. 125t.5. 31105t.3. 3525. 15t.3111.
20211 t.t.'I. 99t.. 10900. 125t.5. 353128. 31122. 1597lt..
2025 t.t.9. 99t.. 10'100. 125t.5. 3t.5t.'I3. 3323. 1t.305'1.
202t. t.t.'I. 'I'It.. 10'100. 125t.5. 378258. 322t.. 1t.t.285.
2027 t.t.'I. 9'1t.. 10900. 12St.5. 390824. 3132. 1t.91117.
2028 bt.9. 99t.. 10900. 125t.5. 1103389. 30111. 1721157.
2029 t.t.9. 99t.. 10900. 125t.5. 11159511. 2952. 175110'1.
2030 t.t.9. 9'1t.. 10'100. 125t.5. 42851'1. 28t.t.. 17827t..
2031 t.t.9. 9'1t.. 10'100. 125t.5. 111110811. 2783. 1111058.
2032 t.t.9. 9'1t.. 10'100. 125t.5. 1153t.1I9. 2702. 1837t.0. BLACK BEAR LAKE 2033 t.t.9. 9'1t.. 10'100. 125t.5. 1It.t.2111. 2t.23. 18t.383. HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT 2034 t.t.'I. 'I'It.. 10'100. 125t.5. 1178779. 25117. 188929. ALASKA 2035 t.t.'I. 99t>. 10'100. 125t.5. 119131111. 21172. 1911102.
1I 3.5% DURING THE FIRST TWENTY YEARS, THEN 0%. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
~ ENGINEERING COMPANY· MARCH 19S1 ALASKAPOWERAU~TY
EXHIBIT 31
CRAIG-(LAWOCK-HYDABURG INTERCON.~ECTiON PAGE 2 of 5
PREFERRED PLAN
COST OF MONEY= 0.030 INFLATION RATE= 0.0' 10 FuEL E.SCALATION RATE.:: U.035 DISCOUNT RATE= 0.U30
REFERENCE DATE=JANUARY 1'181 ALL COSH IN ~ 1000
FIXED O+M fUEL CUMULA TI VE i'RESENT CUMULA Tl VE
YEAR COSTS CUSTS COST TUTAL TOTAL WOIHH P.W.
1'1111 . o. Ib'l • '1bU. 11211. 1128. 10'15. 10'15.
1'182 Y.. 1'10;. 11'1'1. 13'1'1. 2'172. 12b7. 23b2.
1'183 iJ. . 22~. 137'1; Ib~O • '1072. l'Ib4. 3112b.
1'I~4 . 0. 2b I. Ib'l5. IQ05. 5'H7. I b'l3. 551'1.
1'1115 0. .!U I. l'Ib8 • 22b'l. 82'1b. 1'157. 7'17b.
I'I~" 113u. 137. 1111; I'!b~. 9b31. I1bO. 8b3b.
19b7 1130. U8. 12b. U'II:>. 11027. 1135. '1771.
l'IIlB 1130. 13'1. n8; 1'107. 12'134. 1111. 10882.
l'IIl'l 1130. 140. 150. 1420. 13854. 101111 • 11'170.
19<:10 Illu. 141. 11>2. 1433. 152118. IOb7. 13037 •
1'<41 II~U. 14<'. 17b. 1'I4tj. I b 735. 104b. 140113.
19,,2 II ~u. 14.!. 1'10. 14b~. 181 '16. 102b. 1510'1.
14'13 <'31 U'. 220. v, 2~~0. 207211. 1723. lb1l31.
1'1'14 231U. 22u. 0, 2!>30. 232511. Ib73 • 18':>04.
1"'15 231u. 220. O. 2!>.!0. 257811. I b24. 2012t1.
t'l9b 2310. 22u. 0, 2530. 28.!16. 1577 • 21705.
144/ 231v. <,20. 0 <'5l0. 3011'18. 1'>31. 23235.
I""~ <'310. <'iv. t>, 2~.!0. ~B711. 1411b. <''1721.
1',1\/9 <'311). 2,,0. u. 2'>3v. ,!''1UII. 1'143. <'blb'l.
~(JtJu <,3IV. 2cv. 0, 2'>.!0. .!84311. 1401 • 275b5.
<,uul 231U. au. 0'. 25.!0. 40'lb6. l.!bO. 28'12~.
<,OU2 <'~Iu. <,<,0. u, 2530. '13'1'111. 1320. ,!024~.
cOO.! ~jl\). c21J. u. <''>30. "6028. 1282. .!1~27.
t?OIJI..I 231v. 2;>v. IJ. <''>30. 48556. 12'15. 32772.
<'UO'> <'HU. t!.ttl • Q. 2~30. 510118. 12U8. .! 3'18 0 •
20Ub 2~IU. c2(} • l'. 2'>30. '>3blll. 1173. 35153.
<'l)u7 2310. 2<'0. o. 2~:do. ':>61'111. 113'1. 3b2'12.
LOve 2310. ccll. O. ;'530. ':>ob78. IIUb. 3B'III.
<,ou'l <'~Iu. ~i:.·u • lI. ~O;~O. bI2UH. 10 '/ ~. j8'1T;!.
~lJIU <'3Iu. ~clJ. li. <'~~U. b37 36. I V'42. .!'1':>lq.
21111 diC. c2U. ('. <'~3v. b02btl. 1012. 'I0':>2b.
<'VI~ ~310. <'<'0. u. 2':>.!0. bb7'lH. '1112. 4150'1.
<'I, I.! <' 31 (,. <'2l1. (, . 2'>30. TUell. '1':>~. 'I2'1b2.
c-Ill ~ <'3 h'. <'2V_ O. 2~30. 7365H. '12~. 'IBH'I.
~t.11,) ~31(). 22v. C. c~31J. 'Tb3I1H. 11'1'1. '1'1<'1111.
clJl n c';lll. ~cu. l • ~53u. 78'111:1. 1173. 'I51bl.
<' v I / ~jlO. t!.i:!.l;. I • <,530. 81'1 "II. H4H. 'IbUOtl.
ell 1."4 ~~ 1 IJ. ~2c. ( . <,5~0. H5'17b. Hd. ~b831.
201~ ".!IU. c211. ( . 2'>~0. 66':>011. 7'1'1. '17030.
c ll 2u <,31U. ~2". ( . <'530. 1:19038. 77b. '18'10':>.
<,u2l c~lv. c£-'v. ,,~.!o. '115b8. 753. "'11511.
CI)?<' <'3Iv. 22u. ?~3u. '1ijO'l8. 731. 'I'IH8'1 •
2v<,3 231" • 2~lJ • I'. .,S.!,I. 'Ibb2tl. 710. 50~'1'1.
<,V24 c31V. <'<'0. ". 2'>30. '19156. bllq. ':>12611.
<'0<,5 ,,3IC. ao. " . 2':>3V. 101bHII. bb'l. 51'157.
20<'" <'.Hu. 22v. 'J. 2530. lUij2111. b50. 52b07.
20127 <,:1 I O. 22v. ,J. 2~30. lUb7'18. b31. 53237 •
202<1 <'.!IV. 22V. ,) . 2':>30. 109278. b12. 53650.
2U29 231v. 22[; • ) . 2':>30. 1118UII. 5'14. 5'1'1'1'1.
2030 diU. 220. ) . 2530. 11'1338. 577 • 55021.
20.!1 2310. 220. J. 2530. llb8b8. 5bO. 55582. IILACK BEAR LAKE
2032 2310. 220. 'i • 2530. 11 '13'111. ' 5'1'1. 5b12b. HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
2033 2.!IO. 220. o. 2530. 121'128. 52t1. 5bb5'1. ALASKA
203'1 2310. 220. O. 2530. 12ij458. 513. 571bb.
2035 2310. 220. O. 2530. 12b'l88. '1'18. 57bbll. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
J-...IARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY' MARCH 1981 .-LASKA POWER AUTHORITY
, , , 1 , J , , , • I I f , 1 I , J , 1 ,
EXHIBIT 31
CRAIG-KLAWOCK-HYDABURG INTERCONNECTION PAGE 3 of 5
SECOND MOST PREFERRED PLAN
COST Of MONEY= 0.030 INflATION RATE= 0.000 fUEL ESCALATION RATE_ 0.035 DISCOUNT RATE= 0.030
REFERENCE DATE=JANUARY 1'181 All COSTS IN S 1000
fIXED 0+1'1 fUEL CUMULA TIVE PRESENT CUMUlATI VE
YEAR COSTS COSTS COST TOTAL TOTAL ,WRTH P ....
1'181 U. 10'1. '1bO. 1126. 1128. lU'I5. 10'lS.
1'1112 ° . I'I!>. 114'1. 1344. 2472. 12b7. 23b2.
1'183 u. 225. 1374. I bOU. 4072. 14b4. 362b.
I 'Ill 4 U. 201. Ib45. 19u5. 5'177 • lb'l3. 551'1.
I'IH~ o. 301. 1'166. 226'1. 824b. 1'157. 747b.
I'IHo 0. 3q8. 2354. 270l. 10'14'1. 22.b3. '173'1.
I 'Ill 7 13ilU. 178. 126. I b8b. 12b54. 1371. 11110.
1'I1l1l 13;'0. 17'1. 1311. 10'17. 14332. 1340. 12450.
I~e'l l:ldU. 100. I!>O. 1710. 10042. 1310. 13700.
1'1'10 13M. I ~ 1. 102. 172:1. 1770~. 1282. 15043.
19'11 Utlu. Ib2. ll" • 173t1. 1'I!>03. 12!>5. 10<''16.
1'1'12 13.,u. 1~3. 14U. 175.3. 21255. 122'1. 17527.
1'1'13 Ub~. 1~4. 2u'>. 1708. 23024. 1204. 18732.
1'1'14 13<10. III!>. 221. ll6b. 2460'1. 116O. 1'1'112.
1'1'15 l:sev. 18b. dtl. 11104. 20013. 11 ~II. 21u70.
1'1'10 c310. 220. o. 2530. 2'1143. 1577 • 22047.
1'1'11 <'310. 2co. O. 2530. 310/3. 1531. 24 I 77.
1'I4il 231v. 22u. lI. 2530. 34203. 14110. 25003.
1'19'1 2310. c~u. II • 25;0. 30733. 14'13. 2"1100.
cOOO 231 u. au. o. 2':do. 3'1205. 14UI. 28507.
2001 2.>1 u. 22u. u. <'!>30. 41H5. 1300. 2'1llol.
2002 231u. 2<'0. u. 2~30. 44323. 1320. 3111l7.
c003 231u. 22(; • o. ~ ~3v. 40653. 12112. 3240'1.
;> 0 0" <''\11I. c2t.' • U. 2~;O • 443H3. 1245. 33714.
<'ou5 <,311). 2d'. u. 2~3U. 51'113. Il08. 34'122.
"Ollb <'.Slu. ~2\J .. U. 2!>30. ~q443. 1173. 5009~.
2v07 <'5Iu. c:'c:'1I. O. 2~50. !>0'l73. 113'1. 51234.
200" <'3IU. <,cO. o. 2'>3v. !>'1~03. 1100. 38340.
i!(J')"'i c.;! u. c:'c (; .. O. <'~3U. b2v55. 1074. 5'1414.
2VIU c~lv. ~clJ. u. 2~3iJ. b4503. 1042. 4045b.
?ull <'~IO. ~(lo. o. <'~50. 070'13. 1012. 4140tl.
2ul2 <'HO. 22h. o. <'~:I". 0'1025. '1b2. 42451.
<,uU ~<~ Ill .. c<,o. o. 2~5U • 7C 153. '154. 4340!>.
20lQ 2J10. 2;'0. o. 2~30. 74btl3. '120. 44HI.
cOI~ 231u. 220. u. <'~5U • 17213. 8'1'1. 452.30.
<'Olb 2310. 22u. u. 2,:)30. 7'1743. 873. 40103.
<'017 c 31 u. c<,u. I!. 2~30 • 82273. 1l48. QO'l50.
<'Oltl <'~IU. 22l' • o. 2!>30. 6411U3. 11<'3. 47773.
c019 <'5Iu. 22o. u. 253u. 87333. 7'1'1. 4657C •
2020 2310. 22u. 0. 2530. 8'1803. 770. 4'1347.
2021 <'.HU. 220. 0. <,53u. '123'13. 753. 50100.
",,22 <'310. 22u. O. 2530. '14'123. 731. 50tl3l.
<'023 2310. <'2u. U. l~30 • 'I74!>3. 71 O. !>1541.
2024 2310. 220. O. 2!>30. '1'1'183. b6'1. 52230.
2025 2310. 220. o. <'~3u. 102513. Ob'l. 528'1'1.
2020 2310. 220. O. 2~30 • 105043. 050. 5354'1.
2027 2310. 22v. o. 2~30 • 107573. 031. 54160.
2026 2310. <'20. o. 2530. 110103. 012. 547'12.
202'1 2310. 220. o. 2530. 112033. 5'14. 55380.
2030 <'310. 220. o. 2530. 115103. 577. 55'1b3.
2031 2310. 220. O. 2530. 1170'13. 500. 5b524. BLACK BEAR LAKE. 2032 2310. 220. o. 2530. 120223. 5 ..... 57008. HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT 2033 2310. 220. O. 253u. 122753. 528. 575'10. ALASKA 2034 2310. 220. o. 2530. 125263. 513. 5610'1.
2035 <'3Il1. 2<'0. o. 2530. 127613. 4'18. 58000. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
I-IARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY MARCH 1981 ALASKA POWER AUTHDmTY
,.',
EXHIBIT 31
PAGE 4 of 5
I'LAC~ IllAR LAKE PROJECT
Cv:'! U~ ".'1:1jt:.1': I) • \1 ~~ li T,.FLA rIUN kAlf.= II.OOU FUEL ESCALATlo~ RATE= 0.035 DISCOUNT RATE= 11.030
.... ~tti\t:i\lct uA Il=.iANl'Atiy 1'11:11 ALL COSTS IN $ 1000
FIXED O+M FUEL CUMULATl YE PRESENT CUMULATl YE
YEAR COllfS COSTS COST TOTAL TOTAL WORTH P.W.
1981 O. 11>9. 91>11. 1126. 1128. 1095. 1119!'>.
1982 U. 195. 1149. 1344. 2472. 121>7. 231>2.
19tH U. 225. 1374. !bOO. 4072. 141>4. 3821>.
1984 o. i!b1. 11>,.!>. 19U!'>. !'>977 • 11>93. 5519.
196~ U. 301. 191>6. 221>9. 8241>. 1957. 7471>.
1981> 1130. 120. o. 1250. 9491>. 1047. 8523.
1967 1110. 120. O. 1250. 1D 741>. 1011>. 9539.
1986 1130. 120. o. 12~0. 11991> • 967. 10!'>21>.
1969 1130. 12U. O. 1250. 13241>. 9!'>8. 11484.
1990 113(1. 120. o. 1~~0. 14491>. 930. 12414.
1991 II~U. 120. u. 12!'>0. 15741>. 9U3. 13317.
1992 l1.)u. 120. u. 12!>u. 169'11>. 877. 14194.
1993 1130. 1 i!O. o. 1250. 18241> • 851. 151145.
1994 113u. 12U. o. 1250. 19491>. 821>. 15872.
1~'1!> 1130. 120. o. 12~0. 20741>. 6112. 11>1>74.
19~1> 1Uu. I.1U. II. 12!>0. 21991>. 779. 17453.
1'191 1 UO. 1211. o. 12!>u. 23241>. 7!>1>. 18209.
19'18 1130. 12U. u. 1250. 24491>. 734. 18Y43.
19'19 1130. 120. o. 12!>O. 25741>. 713. 191>51>.
2000 1130. 120. u. 1~50. 26991>. 1>92. 20346.
2001 113u. 120. U. 1250. 28241> .• 1>12. 210211.
20u2 II.so. Ilu. u. 1250. 294'10. 1>52. 211>73.
2003 113u. 12u. u. 12!>U. 301,.1>. I>B. 22301>.
~OO" 1 !.sU. 12U. o. 12!>11. 31~91>. US. 22921.
20115 1110. 120. o. 1250. 33241> • 5'11. 23!>16.
20lll> 1130. 120. O. 1250. 34491>. 560. 24096.
2007 1 DII. 1211. o. 12':>u. 35741>. 503. 241>110.
2u06 1130. 120. o. I ~!>.). -So991>. 541>. 25207.
2009 lUO. 120. II. 12S". 38241> • 5.s0. 25737.
2UIII 11,)0. 12U. Ii. 1250. 391191> • 515. 21>252.
2U11 1130. 120. o. 125u. 4\1741>. 5UU. 21>7~2.
2(>12 113u. 12u. o. 12!>O. 1I1~91>. 485. 21236.
2UU 11.s0. 120. o. 1250. 43241>. 411. 277119.
2UIII 113", 12u. u. lc!!>O. 1144YI>. "56. 2811>1>.
201~ l1.su. 12u. lI. 1250. "5141>. 4114. 281>11.
2U1b 11,)0. 120. u. 125U. 469'11>. 4.s1. 29u42.
2017 1130. 120. o. 12SIi. 118241>. 419. 29111>1.
2011! 1 !.sO • 120. o. 1250. 4'1491> • 407. 2981>7.
2Ul9 113u. 120. o. 125u. 50741> • 395. 3021>2.
2020 1130. 120. o. 12'>0. 51991>. 363. .sOo45.
2021 1110. 12u. o. 1c!5u. 53241>. 312. 311117.
2022 11.s0. 120. o. 1250. 54491>. 31>1. 31376.
2023 1110. 120. O. 1250. ~5HI>. 3!>1. 31729.
2024 1130. 120. o. 1250. ~b991>. 340. 3201>~.
2025 1130. 12u. O. 12!>0. 582"1>. HI. 324011.
2021> 113U. 120. o. 1 c!~o. 59491> • 321. 32721.
2027 1130. 120. o. 1250. 00741>. 312. 33032.
21126 1130. 120. O. 1250. 1>1990. 3112. B335.
2029 1130. 120. o. 1250. 1>3241>. 294. 331>29 .•
2030 11l0. 1211. O. 1250. 1>4491>. 2115. 33'114.
2031 1130. 120. O. 1250. 1>5741>. 277. 34191. BLACK BEAR LAKE.
2032 113u. 120. o. 1250. 1>6991>. 21>9. 34459. HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
2033 1130. 120. o. 1250. 1>6241>. 21>1. 34720. ALASKA 201Q 1130. 120. o. 12511. 1>9491>. 253. 311974.
2035 113u. 120. o. 12!;0. 70741> • 241>. :\5220.
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
l--tARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY MARCH 1981 ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
, , , 1 1 f , , , f • ·f , f J , 1 J , 1 J I 1 1 I 1
EXHIBIT 31
LAKE. ~ELLE'" PRUJECT PAGE 5 of 5
COST OF MONE.Y: O.OSO INFLAlluN !lATE: U.OUO fUEL ESCALATION RATE: 0.03S DIScuU",r HATE: 0.030
REFERENCE I)AT~:JANUARY 1981 ALL COSTS IN S 1000
FIX~D O+M FUEL CUMULA TI VE PRESE"'T CUMULATIVE
YEAR COSTS COSTS COST TuTAL TOTAL WUIHH P ....
1981 v. Ib'l. '1bU. Illb. 1128. IU9S. 1095.
1982 ~ . 195. 114'1. 134" • 2472. 1267. 23b2.
191>3 o. 225. 1374. IbOO. 4U72. 1464. 3112b.
1984 U. 2bl. Ib4~. I'IO~. '0971. Ib95. 5S19.
1985 O. 301. I'lod. 22b'l. tl2"b. 19~7. /47b.
198b O. 341>. 2S~". ~ lUi:.. 10'149. Ub5. 97S9.
l'Itll 131l0. IbO. O. 1'4 v. 1'<409. 12,2. 10992.
198t1 1300. Ib~. O. 1'40. 14029. telb. U207.
191>9 131> v • IbO. 0 .• I '4V. 15509. IIl1v. 13388.
19'1v UOV. 16v. v. J 5~ (J .. 17109. 114b. 14~53 •
19'11 13~v. 16u. O. 1'4 v. Il>b49. 1113. 1504b.
1'I~2 Ijov. 16\1. u. 1'4 u. clJltI'I. lOtiO. Ib726.
19'13 U~O. i60. u. 154 v. 21 }C9. 1049. 1717'>.
19'14 U~U. I~v. V. "4v. <'J2b'l. 101tl. 18'1'13.
1995 13dO. lI,v. u. 1 ';)LI lJ .. 24Ilv'I. 'I1j8. 19/61.
1'1'16 13~~ • 16". v. 1 ')4 u .. bd49. 9bV. 20741.
1'197 13l"'u. IbO. V. 1 ')4\J .. d1:>09. 'I5~. 2Ib73.
1'I'Itl 13t\ " .. lb'-'. U. l~'4u. 294"'1. 'IU~. 22'>71.
1'1'1'1 l~/jl!. 16U. U. 1;'4·J. ~V9b". 1>10. c345b.
20vo 13<.HJ .. Il,u. u. "40. 32'>0'1. HSS. 245U6.
2001 13ou. 1 t: l) .. v. 1'4 v. S4U49., 8ctl. 25156.
evve Ijr.v. lbu. ". 1'4V. S~'>I>'I. I:>U4. 25940.
.!ClOS U~V • 11"(1. U. I~" v. j7129. 71>0. 2b120.
"OU4 13t'li .... It-v. V. i ,I.! v .. ~hbo~. 7~h. 21471:>.
20vS l~bU. 1 (,Ij .. !J. D"v. 4ve,,'I. /Jb. 2112B.
2vOb U6V. It-u. U. "4IJ. 41/4'1. 'fl4. 26921.
2vv1 156\;. lh",_ U • I)"v. 4~2"~. b'lJ. 29621.
200b 1 ~('I \'. loll. \.I. 1'>4" • ~4ti<'9. b'/3. ~O2'14.
,eUu"l l.3hu. lbu. J. I'><l v. q"S69. b'OJ. ~09"7.
<'lIlv 15::HI. It-v. u. I ~q". 41'1u'l. 634. 315,,2.
21)11 l:'oU. lou. U. 1 ~'I u. ~944'1. bib. 32191:>.
2vI2 l3~v • lell. o. "4u. ~0'l1j9. ~'II:>. 327 qb.
cOI~ l:lou. Ihv. v. 1 'Jf4 \J. '>2,c9. '>1>1. H37b.
"U14 IS"~. If:lu. U. I)4V. '>4Vb'l. 5b4. 33'1"v.
<'vl~ 15(1.u. IhO. u. l'J.:.1v. ~5bU9. 547. S448'1.
c?UU"'1 ISoV. Ih\J. U. 1 ,4v. '>7149. 531. 3'OV1Y.
2u II J.36u. IhV. u. 1 StU). ~lIb"9. Sib. 35~S4.
2011; I5IHI. Ibv. O. I ~u u. "vee'l. ~UI. S603~.
2vl9 U"V. lou. i.I. 1 'JI.fI..I. "111:>9. q8b. 3b~U.
c02v 15~u. IhU. u. I ~4V. oJ5v'l. 412. 36'194.
,,"(>1 131:>". 16". O. 1'4 v. b'-ld,,9. 4'08. S1452.
",v<'2 UbV. Ihv. u. 15Qv. 6b~1>9. Q4S. 371:>91.
~v23 13~v. 1M. u. I ,4v. 61929. 432. 31I3e'l.
ev2. 130v. IbO. O. "4v. b'l4b9. 419. 5874Q.
2v25 UbV. Ibv. v. I'QU. 71 V u9. 407. 39156.
2vcb 1300. IbU. u. 1'4 V. 12549. 39S. .s'l~51.
ev27 13bv. IbU. O. 1~4v. 7Q01l9. 384. 39'15~.
c02a I3l\u. 16". V. I ~4 v. '/5b29. 313. 403U6.
20e9 13eO. IbO. U. 1~40. 77 I b9. 362. 40bb'l.
2U30 1360. IbU. O. 154v. 787v9. 351. 41U21.
<'031 13l>v. IbO. ~. I ~4 v. 60249. 341. 4Ub2. BLACK BEAR LAKE 2v32 131>0. 16v. V. 154 V. 1>1789. 331. 41693.
2053 131:10. IbO. v. 15Qv. 63329. 321. 42014. HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
.!034 1380. IbO. O. 15QO. 1;46b9 • 312. 42321. ALASKA
2035 1 :\~tl. 16U. O. 154 U. 80409. 3U3. 42b30.
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
l-tARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY MARCH 1981 ALASKA POWER AUTHOIIITY
60 V
I
50 f -BASE CASE PLAN
V
:c
3= 40 ~ .....
e/)
I-
Z
/ " ~
V , ~ ~ SECOND MOST PREFERRED PLAN
I I I w
U
> 30 CJ a: w z w
/ ....... " ~ I I I
"'--r-PREFERRED PLAN
J
V -"-. ~ ~ t::----.....
"-0
l-
e/) 20 0 u
~ ,-.............. 1--~ ....... ~-. ~ ~ ......... --"1-1-'----,-----__ a
/' .~ ... ;,:..... .Ii .-.--~------. ---__ I
~-7 -----/
./
BLACK BEAR LAKE (ONLY) ~ Lr-LAKE MELLEN (ONLY)
10
o
1980
NOTE:
COST OF MONEY: 8.5 %
INFLATION RATE: 7.0 %
FUEL ESCALATION RATE: 3.5 %
1990
~ ENGiNEERING COMPANY. MARC .... 1981
2000
YEAR
2010
----I""'"...-...::::i
.--'
2020
t
EXHIBIT 32
PAGE 1 of 6
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
COST OF ENERGY
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
BUE CASE
C08T of HOMEY. 0.085 INFLATION HAfEa 0.070 fOEl ~SCAlAfION NAf~= 0.0)5 V
REFERENCE UA'E=JAMUAHY 1981 ALL COSfS IN • 1000
f UEO UtH FOEl fOUL ENENGY COS f UF
YEAM COSf CUSf COS, COSf G("fIlAHII EhEIiGY
~'"" CEMrs/II"H
1981 O. 180. IOl'5. liDS. 114JU. 14.3
19.,l O. 2H. Uh. ISH. '1150. 15.1
198) O. lU,. "'7). 1949. Ill70 • U .J
1984 5l. 341. lil/. l'5H. lJulO. a9.4
1985 ~i!. 4U. 272'1. 3,,04. Isol>o. ll.J
198. 411. SZJ. 348 •• 44iu. U41O. l5.4
198F 1111. S.,s. 40311. SOlo. ItIllo. il ••
1988 "79. .5 •• 4 •• &. 5110). 1911'10. 30.4
1989 479. 7]5. 5401. ..15. 1'19'1U. )).1
1990 557. 82'. .lIl9. 7t1l9. 209JO. 1 •• 5
1991 !IoS7. 921. lll8. 1107. 119lU. )9.7
1'19l • 47. IlIl8 • Ili!<!. 9998. 2lIlJO • II) .8
19U • 47. 1141. 9'5U. II n •• 2)1'10. 47.8
1994 no. 1119. 11039. IJh8. 24800. 5l.1
1'195 lS0. 142 •• 12709. 141185. 2'5840. 57 ••
199. 1575. 1590. 14U •• 1780 I. 11l9lO. • •• a
1997 IS75. In) • 167.1. lolOo. 11'l10. 7i!.'
1'198 1575. 1'155. 19191. lUll. ill9iO. 78 ••
1999 1575. lUll. 11977 • 25719. 19970. 85.8
lOOO I1l9. i404. 151U. 19JoO. 1101>0. 94.J
lOOI 1119. i •••• 17909. lll04. )21'111. 100.4
lO0l 19U7. 1952. )0911. 35770. 3Ulu. 107 .4
lOo) 1907. Jlb9. J4111t. J9401. 3U80. 114.1
lO04 14.1. ).ll. '7901. 4)990. 35 ... 0. 1l1.3
lO05 14.l. 4010 • 41981. 48453. 31>940. IlI.l
luU J49). 44;'0. 4.4811. S4411. 3111JO. a4l.4
lOOT 3'1119. 49U. 5148 •• fIOJ9J. 19S70. 152 ••
lU08 418t>. 5445. 5711 II. ..64). 41195U. IU.7
lO09 47~4. .031. U147. 7)9)). 41)9D. 114.4
lOIO 1191111. •• 79. 1t't9i7. 111'5111>. 431110. 18 •• 0
lOll 56)0. 7397. 17448. 90416. 45410. I".l
lOll .ll •• Ill'll. 85771. 1II01DO. 117000. llJ.l
lOU .l) •• 'lUll. 949711. II 0285. 11111>110 • ll ... 7
i011l • 5)1. 'lUll. 1040511. 1l0519. 119800. 2111.0
2015 • S~I. 10ltJII • IIIJH. 128"911. 11'111110. lS.,.O
lol. .,1191. IIHII • U'1l11t. 1J9"Oi. .. .. SOli. 2"'.9
lOI7 11897. 1ll75. IllU5. 11I8S)1. 119800. 198.J
lOiIl 88'17. l)ol7. I JUes. I S8)Ii!. 11"811'1. )11.9
lOl9 111191. 1J9J9. 111'5'1)'5. 1611771. "'1111111. ))11.9
l020 UOl. lUIS. 15.150. 11111)10 •• "91100. Jlt2.l
Viol" DURI.II 1"( FIRIl nun, nAIlS, 1"(. ""
l--tARZA ENGINEERING COI'VIPANY·· MARCH 1981
f 1 f , 1 , I f , 'I I f , f , , . , 1 1 , , l' J
EXHIBIT 32
PAGE 2 o. 6
.IILACII efAR LA!\!
HYDflOUfCTR.C 'RonCT
ALASKA
COST OF ENERGY
ALASKA !'OWIR AUTHORITY
J f 1 , ,
, •
COST dF MONEY= v.ot)~ J"fLAT IlIl\, I<~n.= u.v70
Rl:f ft!tl,CE llA It.=J~I"liARY 1'I1l1
FIXE I) ll+f"
YE Afi eCIS IS LUSIS
14111 ,J • 1 <, U.
191<2 U. ~i:!l •
14,13 U. 276.
1'It)" u • ~42.
190'0 u. 4?2.
l'1ob 3IH<I. ':Vb.
1'107 .so<ll· • "c2.
l'1dl:< ~6j~ \) • ".s'l.
l'IIj'l ~64(). i!., I.
19'10 .s64!J. 2n.
1'191 .s~4U. 2'1'1.
1'1'12 .s04U. ~2".
1'1'13 ~14'j. ~>3 ().
1'1'14 97 J,.,. 'ob1.
1445 '-I/~'j. 607.
19'10 974'>. 649.
1997 '1-'4'0. 69'>.
19'18 '-! 7'J '0. 7 '14.
1'1'1'1 '1-'4'0. /'16.
200U <'74'0. b'>l.
20UI 4-' It5. 911.
blUi! 97"5. 97'0.
2.0~ .s '1145. lV<I,).
2llU4 "7~'>. I 1 I".
20u5 '174':>. I 1'1" •
,,00b '174'0. 127".
2uu7 '174'0. 1367.
2U t)lj 974':>. 1 ij/o j.
2UU'I '1-'45. 156" •
"u10 474':>. It> 7'>.
,euII 974">. 1 I',,,.
201C' YI4':>. I Y 17.
2ti!S '114'0. cu,>".
21114 474'0. 2 \'1'0.
2vl5 97"':>. 2,)'J".
2016 "7<1':>. 2'>13.
2017 -Jl4':>. "0>;'1.
201t) '17",:>. c'K'-' •
<,uI'I -;7<1':>. ,)ol".
2(I<'lI 'I" 4':>. 52"~.
~ ENGINEERING COMPANY' MARCH 19B1
PREFERRED PLAN
F I)~ L tSCALATIuN \<ATl= o .OYi DISCOUNT
ALL CUS1:> p, j, IUUO
f uf L I: "I:"l, Y ellSI [of
(U~'I TO I AL ('1:'Jl:kA Ttll i:.1'Jt.t<(;Y
IViiv.H CE •• TS/K,,"
1025. 1 ~ II 'l. 1\43u. 1<1.3
I H u. 15.H. 'I7'ou. 1'0. I
107.). 1'14'1. 1127u. 17.~
<:'1.s/. ':4-,'1. !SU30. 1'1.0
27 2'i. 31~2. 15uoli. 2U.'1
114. 4021. 17<11U. 2S. I
;>lJ2. 4lJb4. Itl23u. a.~ "H. 41le. l'Iu'lO. 21. ')
iUv. 41hl. 1'1'1'10. 2u.1I
.sIC. <l2.su • 2U'l~v. 2U.2
SId. 4~'.J I). 21"10. 1'1.6
£lIb. lUI';. 221:dlJ. 1'1.2
o. II'" ''0. 2')79U. 4j.2
II • IU.H2. 24tlUU. 111.6
(I. ltI55~. 25840. <lv.1
v. lu~'I4. 20'130. ~t< .6
U. lu44V. 27'11 v. ~7.11
O. 1 114b'l. 26'120. 3h.~
I) • It) 51J I • 2'197u. ~'o.2
U. IV'>'!b. 31U6U. :!It< • I
u. !llD':>6. ~21'1u. ~.s. I
o. lu/i'.o. 33~"U. ~2.2
U. luft'b. ~<l4t}U. 31.,)
0. It'llbl. ,)">6'1U. 3u.Q
I) • IU'l~'-I. 3O'l4U. 2'1.b
li • 11 vi,). 3tl2:!1U. 2<l.1l
ti • U ll,e. 3'15IU. 2;;. I
II • 11;>1Jt1. 4U'I'oU. 2 I. Q
o. 1 U I U. <l2,)'1u. 2b.1
(, . 1142\!. 43H10. 2b.0
(I • 11'0,)7. 4'>410. "~.4
tJ. I I" "" • 117 IJ V U • 2 11. I,
IJ • 111 9 1. 411b41' • 24.3
u. 1 1'14,1. ,,9(jt, u. 24.V
o • l':v9". 4'1<:\uU. <'4.,)
II • 122'>0. 4'1IlUU. 24.6
II • lilU4. 4'1bUU. 2'>.t)
\I • 12"2". 4\1lju (J. ".,.~
I) • 1 t!t\c: 4. '1'I8vv. c':>.r)
It. ).)".\~. 4"//"',UV. 2b.i'.
fiATE;:; 0.050
EXHIBIT 32
PAGE 3 of 6
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
COST OF ENERGY
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
SECOND MOST PREFERRED PLAN
COST OF "'nl~I::Y= v.U8~ J ,'FL~l IUN :~ATE= o. () 7,) ft...I::L ESCHA T IU;'. ~AIE= u.u.b DISCIJu,,"1
I<EffRE.I\jCE IJAl E=JAI'JIJARY 191:11 ALL CUSlS Iii; ~ Iuou
FI~I:.IJ f;Tt"'l Fuf:L tt,f.KP clJ::.r I.I~
YEAR COSIS eU~IS eUSl IUT AL GE:.r.EKAH.1J t"I:.K6Y
1\'1/'.11 CUd S/KI\t,
1'181 O. Ib(J. 1025. leiu.,. 1:!1I!.u. 14.!.
1982 v. n3. LHD. I.,B. '1'''0. 1".7
19b3 II • 276. 1675. \.,4.,. 1121v. I ( • 3
1'184 U. ~4c. 2137. eil.l79. 13030. 19.0
1985 v. qa. 2129. 31S2. 15u6V. 2G.'1
191:l6 u. .,23. 31.1116 • 400,/. 17 .. 10. 2.3.0
1987 1.176". iob. 20<' • '>2'>';. 18i'3u. eib.tl
1'I1:!1:l 476~. 3vc\. 2.H. .,!.uo. I'IO'/u • 27 .8
19(j'l '176S. ~31. 270. '>366. 199'10. 26.8
19'10 470S. 3"0. 312. ,>qY). 20930. 26.V
1'1'11 476.,. 3/;!.. 3t>1 • ""09. 21'iIU. 2S.1
1<;92 4·' 6S. 41i'. 410. '>"'1~. 22bjO. 2 ... 5
1'1<;3 476'>. 443. 474. 56117. 23l'1o. 2!-.'1
1'191.1 .. 7(-,.,. 477 • .,5". S793 • 24110U. 23.4
I Q'l5 4765. ~U. 6.!>S. 5913. 25111.10. 2ei.'1
1'196 10652. 64'1. O. 11301. 26'dv. "ei.O
19'17 106S<,. 69.,. o. 1131.17. 2741U. ..v.7
1'1'18 IV6'>2. 741.1. O. I !.s'l6. 28'120. ,)'1.4
19'1'1 1,)6.,2. 796. O. 1 11.141:1. 29'1/u. 31:l.2
2000 IUo'>2. IlS I. o. IISO';. jiUbU. !-, • u
2001 1(;6.,2. 'ill. O. II Std. 321'1v. 3S.'1
2002 106~2. 'Ii". u. 11027 • 33320. !.4.9
2003 10652. 1043. O. 116'1'>. 3441:lU. :n.'1
2004 IU6.,ei. I 116. O. 117f>b. 3.,6'1U. j.3.u
200'> IU6.,2. 11'14. O. 111:l46. 36'14u. 32.1
2006 10652. 127tj. v. 11930. 3623U. 31.2
2007 10652. 1367. O. 12UI'I. 39S7U. 3U.4
2008 IU6S2. 1403. v. 1<'1 b. 409.,0. 2<;.6
2009 IU6.,2. 1565. O. I a II. 1.12!.<;0. 2il.1l
2010 IU6'>2. 16''>. O. 12!.27. "!.1I70. 2t1.1
2011 IU6.,2. 1192. U. 1241.111. 4S410. 27 ...
2012 106S2. 1917. O. I<'S04. 1.170uII. 26.7
2013 106.,2. 2u52. O. lei7u4. 41:l61.1V. 26.1
2014 IU6.,2. 21'15. O. 12t14(. 49t\uu. 2o;.1:l
2015 1116.,2. 234'1. O. 1300 I. 491'00. 2b.1
2016 lu6':>2. 2.,13. (I. !.s16S. 4'1bOO. 26.4
2017 Iv6.,c. 26e'l. 1I. l.B41. 4'1t10u. 26.8
2018 lu6,>2. <,81"1. U. U"2~. 4'1I1UU. i! 1.2
201'1 lu6'>2. 3074. O. BUI. I.I'Itluu. 27 .6
2020 lu6.,ei. 3294. 0. 13'146. 498uo. 2il.O
~ ENGINEERING COMPANY· MARCH 1981
r I f , , 1 , , , f , , , ,
kAlf= O.U~O
, ,
EXHIBIT 32
PAGE 4 of 6
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
COST OF ENERGY
AlASKA POWER AUTHORITY
1 ,
I
COST OF MONEY= O.08~ INFLATION RATE= 0.070
REFERENCE DATt:=JANUARY 19tsl
FIXEll O+M
YEAR COSTS CLlSTS
19111 O. III o.
1982 o. 2C!3.
191H u. 2'6.
1964 O. 342.
1'185 O. 422.
198b 3b4u. Its Ii.
1'187 3b40. 1'13.
1988 3b40. 20b.
1969 31>41l. 221.
1990 3b4v. 2~b.
1991 3b40. .?53.
1'192 3640. 270.
1993 31>40. 289.
1'194 3b41l. 309.
1995 3b40. HI.
199b 3b40. 354.
1997 3b40. 379.
19'18 ~b40. 40 b.
1999 3b40. 434.
2000 3b40. 41>4.
2001 3b40. 497.
2002 ~b40. 532.
2003 3b'lU. ~b9.
2004 3b40. b09.
2u05 3b40. b~ 1.
.200b 3b40. b97.
2007 3b40. 74b.
2008 3b'lU. 79tl.
2009 3b40. 854.
2010 ~b40. 913.
2011 3b40. '177.
2u12 ~b40. 104b.
2013 ~b40. 1119.
2014 jb40. 11 97.
2015 3b40. 121:11.
201b 3b40. 1371.
2017 364u. 14 b 7 •
2018 3b40. 1 ~ 7 O.
2019 31>4U. lb7'l.
20.20 3b'40. 1197.
~ ENGINEERING COMPANY· MARCH 1981
I I
BLACK HEAR LAKE PROJECT
FUEL ESCALATION NATE= 0.035 DISCOUNT RATE= 0.030
ALL COSTS IN $ 1000
FUfL I:.NE:K(;Y COST OF
COST ENI:RGY TIJIAL Gb.EolATED
1025.
1310.
1 b73.
21.H.
27.2'1.
O.
o.
O.
O.
Ii •
O.
o.
o.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
o.
o.
o.
o.
O.
O.
O.
o.
O.
O.
o.
O.
O.
o.
0.
O.
II.
O.
O.
O.
O.
120'>.
I'>H.
1'14'1.
247'1.
3152.
31:120.
~bH.
364b.
38bl.
361b.
~b93.
3'110.
3'129.
3949.
3'171.
3994.
4019.
404b.
4074.
4104.
41.51 •
4n2.
4209.
4249.
42'11.
4Hi.
438b.
4438.
4494.
4,>~j.
4b17.
4b!lb.
4759.
4/:137.
'1'121.
5011.
5107.
~210.
5319.
5437 •
MwH
6430.
97~0.
11270.
13030.
150bo.
1741lJ.
18230.
19090.
19990.
20930.
219111.
221:130.
23700.
23·7110.
23700.
2~700.
23700.
23700.
23700.
23700.
23700.
23700.
23700.
.23700.
23700.
23700.
23700.
23700.
23100.
237uO.
23700.
23700.
23700.
23700.
23700.
23700.
23700.
23700.
2370\).
23700.
CENTS/KwH
14.3
15.7
17.3
1'1.0
20.9
21. 'I
21.0
20.1
19.3
16.5
17.8
17.1
lb.b
lb.7
lb.8
lb.9
17.0
17. I
17.2
17.~
17.5
17 .b
17.8
17.9
18.1
lb.3
16.~
lb.7
19.0
19.2
19.5
19.b
20.1
20.4
20.6
21.1
21.5
22.0
22.4
22.9
t
EXHIBIT 32
PAGE 5 of 6
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
COST OF ENERGY
ALASICA POWER AUTHORITY
C051 OF ~1l11'EY= u.UtlS I''IFLA1 Ill"' Rillt= u.u7u
kE FE I<ENCt. ,lA1E=JANU/lflY l'1dl
FP,E') IJ+M
VEAl< ClI:;fS Cr):>IS
1'181 v. Itlv.
l'1tl2 \J • 2<' 3.
l'1tlj u. 271>.
1'11l4 u. j4<:.
1'11:15 U. 'Icc.
l'1tll> o. 52:'.
l'1tl7 470'>. e'>7.
l'ItHI 470'>. 27'>.
19119 471->5. 2'14.
19'1u 470'>. 315.
1'1'11 47 O~'. jj/.
1'1'12 47",>. 5ou.
1993 47"''>. 3«b.
1'194 47b'>. I.j 13.
1'195 476'>. 41.11.
1'190 '176=;. 472.
1'1'17 ,,7b':>. ,>,1,> •
1'1911 47b5. ,>41.
1'1'19 470'>. '>1'1.
cullll 4/b5. 01'1.
2001 .. 705. bbt?
2uu2 4/05. 71..)4.
2Uu:' 47b'>. hb.
200~ <l7b':>. Illt?
20v5 "/65. {lb/!.
2UO .. ~7o-;). 9<,9.
20uI '17 "':>. 994.
2UUtl 41b5. Il'b4.
2uu9 '<7b'>. 11~~.
20lu 470'>. 1216.
2Vll 4705. D1I3.
2012 ",7o~. 13'14.
2U13 470':>. 10.192.
<:01<1 ~7"'>. 1~'10.
20b .. lb~. 1 H'tI.
2011> 47b5. ln2t1.
2U17 'nbS. 1'151>.
2Ultl 47r.5. 211'13.
201'1 4765. U5'1.
cli20 47 r. '>. 2j~".
~ ENGINEERING COMPANY· MARCH 1981
f I , I r I r , I , f , I ,
L~r,t fill:LLFN PIWJFCT
FUtL t::::lCALA'lUr, I<A 1[= O.Uj'" Dl5CUlJN1
ALL CuSIS I" ~ luOI)
f-ur.L t"Et<GY cu:;r flf
Cll~T IPTAL GE fIlt.< A 11'.[' t::NI:~('Y
~"H1 Cf.'" I :i/K"M
1025. 12U'>. 8430. 14.5
131 U • 1'> s.s. '17'>0. 1~.7
Ion. 1'14'1. 11270. 11.3
21 J7. c47'1. 13uj~. 1'1.0
27<.'1. jiSt!. 1'.>01:>1;. 2u.'1
~4b6. 4uO'l. 1741". 25.u
o. '>022. 18<:3". 27.'>
u. 5Ul.lu. 1'10'lU. 21>.4
/j • 50'>'1. 1'1'19u. 25.3
o. ,>utlll. 2U'I311. 24.3
II. 51 1)2. 21910. 2:).3
o. 51?,>. 22tl30. 22.'>
u • 5151. 23"1'1u. 21.7
,) . ~1//j. 2<1l:1uu. 2u.'1
u. 5COI>. 2~d4U. 2U.I
(1. '>237. 21>100. 20.1
o. 527u. 21>10u. 2u.2
U. ,>juo. 21>10ll. t?0.3
o. ~.siI4 • 2bluu. 2".5
o. I.d1:<4. 21>10u. 20.b
o • 5421 • 21>10V. 2U.1l
\I • ':1474. lOlUU. cl.V
u. ':>5d. 21>111u. 21.2
v. 5'>77 • 2610u. 21.4
u. Sbj3. 261UO. 2 1.6
V. '>694. 21>1uu. 21. /j
o • '>1'>'1. 2610U. U.I
U. '>tl29. 21>1uU. 22.j
[I. ~'1uj. 261(1). 22.1>
o. ')'1,,3. 2bllJlI. 22.9
u. blibb. <'bl0(l. 2j.2
o • bl';'1. 2bIUl!. 23.1>
V. 62'> I. <'bIOO. 24.U
Ii • (dbl. t?6Ivu. 24.4
Ii • 04/3. 2bHLi. 24.b
u. 6'>9 S. 261()U. 25.3
v. b 721. 2b101i. 25.8
I) • 6b':>H. 21>1UU. 26.j
v. 7uot!. 26100. 26./1
u • II" I • 261ll0. 27 ...
, 1 , , r , f I , 1
KATE= u.u3u
I 1 I I I I I I
EXHIBIT 32
PAGE 6 of 6
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
COST OF ENERGY
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
f 1 I I • I
i 1
EXHIBIT 33
I YEAR 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985
ITEM I QUARTER 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 , 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
PRECONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
FEASIBILITY STUDY
FERC LICENSE APPLICATION
PREPARATION
REVIEW
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
SITE INVESTIGATIONS ~
EQUIPMENT SUPPLY CONTRACT
DESIGN AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
81DDING --BID EVALUATION AND AWARD -~
CIVIL WORKS CONTRACT
DESIGN AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS COMMERCIAL OPERATION ~
BIDDING ~
BID EVALUATION AND AWARD ~
PERMITTING AND OWNERSHIP
FINANCING
EQUIPMENT SUPPLY
CONSTRUCTION (SEE EXHIBIT 9
FOR DETAILED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE) ACCESS ROAD
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
I-tARZA ENGINEERING COMPANY' MARCH 1981
DELETED
EXHIBIT 34
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
~ POWER AlITHOR'ITY
-
,.""",
Sheet 1 of 3
EXHIBIT 35
COMMON PLANT SPECIES OF TYPICAL VEGETATION TYPES
OF THE PROJECT AREA II
Common Name
Mature Forest
* Alaska -cedar
* Mountain hemlock
* Red alder
* Western hemlock
* Western redcedar
Sitka spruce
Alaska blueberry
* Devilsclub
* Dwarf blueberry
* Early blueberry
* High bushcranberry
* Pacific red elder
* Red huckleberry * Rusty menziesia
* Salmonberry
* Sitka alder
Stink currant
* Trailing black currant
* Western thimbleberry
* Beech fern
* Bunch berry
* Clasping twisted-stalk
* Clubmoss
Dagger fern
* Deerberry
* Deerfern
* False hellebore
Five-leaf bramble
Goldthread
* Heart-leaved twayblade
* Kruhsez
* Lace flower
Lady fern
* Mertens coral-root
* Oak fern
Salal
* Simple-stemmed twisted-stalk
* Single delight
* Single-flowered clintonia
* Spreading woodfern
* Yellow skunk cabbage
~pen Streambanks and
Devilsclub ---
* High bushcranberry
* Lyall nettle
Meadows
Scientific Name -------
Chamaecyparis nootkatensis
Tsuga mertensiana
Alnus rubra
Tsuga heterophylla
Thuja plicata
Picea sitchensis
Vaccinium alaskensis
Oplaponax horridus
Vaccinium caespitosum
Vaccinium valifolium
Viburnum edule
Sambucus callicarpa
Vaccinium parvifolium
Menziesia ferruginea
Rubus spectabilis
Alnus sinuata
Ribes bracteosum
Ribes laxiflorum
Rubus parviflorus
Thelypteris phegopteris
Cornus canadensis
Streptopus amplexifolius
Lycopodium sp.
Polystichum munitum
Maianthemum dilatatum
Blechnum spicant
Veratrum woodii
Rubus pedatus
Coptis sp.
Listera cordota
Streptopus streptopoides
Tiarella sp.
Athyrium filix-femina
Corallorrhiza maculata
Gymnocarpium dryopteris
Gaultheria shallon
Streptopus roseus
Moneses uniflora
Clintonia uniflora
Dryopteris dilatata
Lysichiton americanum
Oplopanax horridus
Viburnum edule
Urtica Lyallii
Common Name
* Nootka rose * Pacific serviceberry
* Red alder
* Salmonberry * Sitka alder
* Stink currant
* Alaska violet
Alpine heuchera
* Baneberry
Beach lovage
Beach pea
* Beach strawberry
Bent-leaved angelica
Bongard buttercup
* Cow parsnip
* Deer cabbage
* Delphinium-leaved aconite
* Fireweed
* Goatsbeard
* Hemlock parsley
Hornemann willow-herb
Kamchatka Fritillary
* Long-leaved starwort
Nootka lupine * Northern geranium * Saxifrage
Shooting Star
Siberian spring beauty
Silverweed
* Sitka great burnet
Stream violet
Villous cinquefoil
* Western buttercup
* Western columbine
* Yellow monkey flower
Muskegs
* Alaska-cedar
* Shore pine * Western hemlock * Western red cedar
* Bog blueberry
* Bog laurel * Bog rosemary
* Crowberry
Labrador-tea
* Mountain-cranberry
* Rusty menziesia
Salal
Sheet 2 of 3
EXHIBIT 35
Scientific Name
Rosa nutkana
Amelanchier florida
Alnus rubra
Rubus spectabilis
Alnus sinuata
Ribes bracteosum
Viola Langsdorffii
Heuchera glabra
Actaea rubra
Ligusticum scoticum
Lathyrus maritimus
Fragaria chiloensis
Angelica genuflexa
Ranunculus Bongardi
Heracleum lanatum
Fauria crista-galli
Aconitum delphinifolium
Epilobium angustifolium
Aruncus sylvester
Conioselenum chinense
Epilobium Hornemannii
Fritillaria camschatcensis
Stellaria longifolia
Lupinus nootkatensis
Geranium erianthum
Saxifraga sp.
Dodecatheon sp.
Claytonia sibirica
Potentilla villosa
Sanguisorba stipulata
Viola glabella
Potentilla villosa
Ranunculus occidentalis
Aquilegia formosa
Mimulus guttatus
Chamaecyparis nootkatensis
Pinus contorta
Tsuga heterophylla
Thuja plicata
Vaccinium uliginosum
Kalmia polifolia
Andromeda polifolia
Empetrum nigrum
Ledum groenlandicum
Vaccinium vitis-idaea
Menziesia ferruginea
Gaultheria shallon
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
...
-
-
-
-
... -
-
Common Name
* Bracken fern
* Bunchberry
* Club-moss
* Cloudberry
* Cotton grass
Copperbush
* Deerberry
Nagoon-berry
Silverweed
Starflower
* Sundew * Rush
* Yellow marsh marigold
* Yellow skunk cabbage
Meadows (subalpine/alpine)
* Alaska blueberry
* Aleutian heather
Alpine azalea
* Alpine bluegrass
Arctic willow
* Arctic wormwood
* Broad-petaled gentian
* Bunchberry
* Caltha-leaved avens
Coastal fleabane
Coast saxifrage
* Crowberry
* Deer cabbage
Holy grass
Kamchatka fritillary
* Luetkea
* Mertens mountain heather
Nagoon berry
Narcissus-flowered anemone
Nootka lupine
Prickly saxifrage
* Purple mountain saxifrage
* Salmonberry
* Sedge
Sibbaldia
Spotted saxifrage
* Stiff club-moss
Sheet 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 35
Scientific Name -------
Pteridium aquilinum
Cornus canadensis
Lycopodium sp.
Rubus chamaemorus
Eriophorum sp.
Cladothamnus pyrolaeflorus
Maianthemum dilatatum
Rubus arcticus
Potentilla anserina
Trientalis europaea
Drosera sp.
Juncus sp.
Caltha palustris
Lysichiton americanum
Vaccinium alaskensis
Phyllodoce aleutica
Loiseleuria procumbens
Poa alpina
Salix arctica
Artemisia arctica
Gentiana platypetala
Cornus canadensis
Geum calthifolium
Erigeron peregrinus
Saxifraga ferruginea
Empetrum nigrum
Fauria crista-galli
Hierochloe alpina
Fritillaria camschatcensis
Luetkea pectinata
Cassiope Mertensiana
Rubus arcticus
Anemone narcissiflora
Lupinus nootkatensis
Saxifraga tricuspidata
Saxifraga oppositifolia
Rubus spectabilis
Carex sp.
Sibbaldia procumbens
Saxifraga ferruginea
Lycopodium annotinum
* -Observed in the Project Area during 1980 field investigations
!/ Sources: Meehan 1974, Viereck and Little 1972, Field observations
." ...
'_J"'".'~~_,"~' _________________________ ! ... , __ ' ... , ________ ...... _____ _
EXHIBIT 3b
PRINCE OF WALES ISLAND
BIRDS IN THE PROJECT AREA
Common Name -----~
American Robin
Bald Eagle
Barn Swallow
Belted Kingfisher
Chestnut-tacked Chickadee
Common Flicker
Common Goldeneye
Common Loon
Common Ra ven
Dark-eyed Junco
Dip~er
Fox Sparrow
Golden-cro~ned Kinglet
Hermit thrush
Lincoln's Sparrow
Northwestern Crow
Orange-cro~ned Warbler
Pine Siskin
Red-breasted Merganser
Red Crossl:ill
Red-tailed Hawk
Ruby-crowned Kinglet
Savannah Sparrow
Song Sparrow
Spotted Sandpiper
Steller's Jay
Swainson's Thrush
Townsend's Warbler
Tree Swallow
Varied 'Ihrush
western Flycatcher
Wileon's warbler
Winter Wren
Yellow-bellied Sapsucker
Yellow wartIer
Common Loon
Source: Gitson 1976, ADFG
Scientific Name ----
Turdus migratorius
Haliaeetus leucoce~halus
Hirundo rustica
Megaceryle alcyon
Parus rufescens
Colaptes auratus
Bucephala clangula
Gravia immer
Corvus corax
Junco hyemalis
Cinclus mexicanus
Passerella iliaca
Regulus satrapa
Catharus guttatus
Melospiza lincolnii
Corvus caurinus
vermivora celata
Spinus pinus
Mergus serrator
Loxia curvirostra
Buteo jamaicensis
Regulus calendula
Passerculus sandwichensis
Melospiza melodia
Actitis macularia
Cyanocitta stelleri
Catharus ustulatus
Dendroica townsendi
Iridoprocne bicolor
Ixoreus naevius
Em~idonax difficilis
Wilsonia pusilla
Troglodytes troglodytes
Sphyrapicus varius
Dendroica petechia
Gavia immer
LEGEND:
1 WATER
2 OLD GROWTH HEMLOCK FOREST
3 OLD GROWTH HEMLOCK -SPRUCE FOREST
4 OLD GROWTH SPRUCE FOREST
5 LOW SITE
6 WET MEADOW
7 MUSKEG FOR EST
8 SUBALPINE VEGETATION
9 SLIDE AREAS (SNOW/ROCK)
10 THICKET
11 ROCK
8
BIG SAL T LAKE
SOURCE:
. . .
\
Forest type map U.S.F.S. Ketchikan
9
2
-~ ... ....,..,--... ~
ijiiII'~-~'---I(L-+----BLACK LAKE
SCALE 0
I
• NORTH
1/4 1/2
I I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
1 MILE
I
BLACK BEAR CREEK VALLEY
FOREST TYPES
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 37
.....
LEGEND:
. '. F FOREST, MAINLY
Mt. HEMLOCK
SUA SUBALPINE VEGETATION
S SALMONBERRY THICKET
SA SALMONBERRY-ALDER
THICKET
SAH SALMONBERRY-ALDER-
Mt. HEMLOCK
SCH SCRUB Mt. HEMLOCK
R BARE ROCK SLIDE
<)7
~
NORTH
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
1700
SHORELINE VEGETATION
AROUND BLACK BEAR LAKE
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 38
''''-!II
-
EXHIBIT 39
SUMMARY OF ADFG SALMON SURVEYS IN BLACK BEAR CREEK
Commercial Species
Available Stream
Spawning Area
Sport Species
Salmon Peak
Escapements
Salmon
Escapement Since 1970
Source ADFG
Pink, Chum, Coho, Sockeye
31,906 square meters:
23,546 upstream;
8,360 intertidal
Stream-Dolly Varden, Cutthroat,
Steelhead; BBL-stocked Rainbow
350,000 Pink
10,000 Chum
6,500 Coho
700 Sockeye
(records for
Pink
low =
high =
last record =
Chum
only record =
Coho, Sockeye
9 Oct 1945
12 Aug 1963
27 Oct 1944
24 Aug 1965
1944 -1978)
30
42,300 27 Aug
30
1978
1975
1978
800 17 Sep 1973
none seen since 1965
..•
-
.....
··if
Pink
Chum
Coho
Sockeye
EXHIBIT 40
TIMING OF SALMON RUNS,
KLAWOCK RIVER AND BLACK BEAR CREEK
Klawock R. Peak
Period, 1977-1980 II
August IV ~I -October I
September II -October I
August IV -November I
July I -September I
Black Bear Creek
Peak Period II
August II -September III ~I
August IV -September III ~I
August IV -November I
July I -September I
II Periods are inclusive.
~I Roman numerals indicate week of the month.
"August IV" denotes the fourth week of August.
For example,
~I Pinks and chums run approximately two weeks earlier in Black Bear
Creek than in Klawock River.
Source: Bates 1979, 1980; Hansen 1980
--4
-
,-
-
-
EXHIBIT 41
RARE AND SENSITIVE PLANT SPECIES FOR
THE TONGASS NATIONAL FOREST ~/
Hymenophyllaceae
1. Mecodium Wrightii (Bosch) Copeland
Poaceae
2. Calamagrostis crassiglumis Thurb. E/
3. Poa laxiflora Buchl. E/
4. Poa leptocoma Trin.
5. Poa merrilliana Hitch. E/
6. Poa norbergii Hult. E/
7. Glyceria leptostachya Buckl.
Cyperaceae
8. Carex Electocarpa Hermann ~/
Orchidaceae
9. Platanthera chlorisiana (Cham.) Rchb.
Scrophulariaceae
10. Rhinanthus arcticus (Sterneck) Pennell E/
Rubiaceae
11. Galium Kamtschaticum Stellar
~/ Source: Muller, 1980
£/ Currently officially classified as rare, status undetermined, for
Alaska (Murray, 1980)
1730
1720
1710
1700 ~
'iii
1690 ~
E
1680 ~ I-w w u. 1670
z
z 1660
0
~ > 1650
w
...J w 1640
1630
1620
1610
1600
J
-PMF POOL El.
-NORMAL MAX. POOL El.
_ MIN. POOL El.
-EXISTING LAKE LEVEL
F M A M J J
MONTH
1
A S
I t
1730
1720
1710
1700
1690
1680
1670
LEGEND: 1660
--_I = 20% EXCEEDANCE
X:~-~X = 50% EXCEEDANCE
e E) = 80% EXCEEDANCE
1650
1640
o
1630
= INTAKE PORT
ELEVATIONS AT END
OF MONTH
1620
1610
N
1600
D (JI
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
RESERVOIR FLUCTUATIONS
IN 1991, NO DOWNSTREAM
FLOW CONSTRAINTS !l
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 42
i
Exceedance
(%) Jan Feb ----
100 1686.2 1685.0
95 1693.4 1690.4
90 1694.5 1690.7
80 1698.1 1694.4
10 1703.2 1699.2
60 17 05.6 1102.4
50 1707.2 1104.5
40 1108.5 1106.2
30 1710.5 1707.4
20 1712.2 1709.5
10 1712.6 1710.5
5 1114.2 1710.6
1 I l
EXHIBIT 43
RESERVOIR ELEVATION PERCENT EXCFEDANCE FOR 1991,
NO DOWNSTREAM FLOW CONS~RAIN~S 1/
Mar Apr ~y-Jun Jul ~9:_ Sep
1685.0 1685.0 1685.8 1691.9 1688.6 1685.0 1685.0
1686.4 1665.5 1691.3 1693.6 1691.1 1681.1 1681.3
1687.4 1687.3 1691.1 1694.2 1691.8 1681.3 1689.4
1691.8 1690.5 1695.0 1696.9 1694.6 1691.4 1693.2
1696.6 1696.5 1698.4 1103.0 1691.1 1695.1 1695.3
1699.5 1698.4 1698.9 1705.2 1702.9 1100.1 1700.1
1700.9 1101.1 1104.2 1110.9 1107.1 1103.6 1102.2
1702.8 1702.5 1105.1 1112.6 1110.2 1106.3 1106.2
1104.1 1703.5 1707.2 1113.9 1112.4 1109.6 1108.8
1706.3 1706.3 1108.9 1715.0 1113.0 1110.4 1111.1
1106.8 1106.9 1710.8 1115.0 1115.0 1112.6 1115.0
1707.3 1701.6 1114.2 1115.0 1115.0 1115.0 1115.0
1/ Elevations at end of month.
Exhibit 43
I
Oct Nov Dec
1681.9 1681.3 1688.1
1692.2 1693.2 1695.1
1692.5 1693.5 1697.9
1696.3 1697.4 1100.3
1101.6 1704.3 1705.8
1104.5 1106.1 1108.5
1109.4 1109.4 1710.3
1111.5 1113.6 1112.1
1115.0 1114.6 1715.0
1115.0 1115.0 1115.0
1115.0 1115.0 1715.0
1115.0 1115.0 1115.0
1730
1720
1710
;;;
1700 ~
E 1690 ~ I-w w 1680 ~ LL.
Z
z 1670
0
~ 1660
> w
~ 1650 w
1640
1630
1620
1610
1600
J
i.
PMF POOL El.
NORMAL MAX. POOL EL.
MIN. POOL El.
EXISTING LAKE LEVEl
F M A
1--l.AR.z..A Ef'JGINEERING COMPANY MARCH 1981
M J J
MONTH
A S
t
1730
1720
1710
1700
1690
1680
1670
1660
LEGEND:
= 20% EXCEEDANCE 1650
)tw------f()( = 50% EXCEEDANCE
e E> = 80% EXCEEDANCE
1640
o
1630
= INTAKE PORT
ELEVATIONS AT END
OF MONTH
1620
1610
N
1600
D (J)
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
RESERVOIR FLUCTUATIONS
IN 1991, WITH DOWNSTREAM
FLOW CONSTRAINTS !J
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 44
,.
Exceedance
(%) Jan Feb
100 1686.1 1685.0
95 1693.6 1691.2
90 1695.2 1693.0
80 1698.8 1695.4
10 1106.0 1103.6
60 1107.0 1104.5
50 1108.0 1104.8
40 1709.1 1701.2
30 1111.1 1108.9
20 1712.5 1710.1
10 1112.9 1111.1
5 1714.5 1711.2
1 1
EXHIBIT 45
RESERVOIR ELEVATION PERCENT EXCFEDANCE FOR 1991,
WITH DOWNSTREAM FLOW CONSTRAINTS 1/
Mar Apr May Jun Jul ~~ Sep
1685.0 1685.0 1685.8 1692.0 1691.9 1686.9 1685.0
1681.2 1688.5 1694.9 1696.2 1694.1 1688.8 1689. 1
1689.1 1688.1 1695. 1 1691.5 1694.4 1691.4 1690.5
1693.4 1692.9 1695.5 1699.5 1695.0 1693.8 1696.3
1699.8 1699.9 1699.1 1105.1 1100.5 1699.5 1698.6
1101.1 1701.3 1702.3 1708.1 1105.1 1703.0 1103.0
1702.5 1702.7 1106.9 1712.2 1709.5 1105.5 1703.2
1104.0 1704.1 1708.0 1114.2 1111.8 1108.2 1108.1
1106.9 1706.1 1109.1 1115.0 1712.4 1710.3 1110.3
1107.2 1107.5 1110.0 1115.0 1713.7 1112.5 1112.4
1107.7 1708.2 1112.4 1115.0 1115.0 1713.3 1115.0
1108.2 1108.8 1115.0 1115.0 1715.0 1115.0 1115.0
1/ Elevations at end of month.
Exhibit 45
Oct Nov Dec
1690.3 1686.6 1688.3
1691.1 1694.9 1695.6
1692.3 1695.2 1691.3
1698.9 1698.4 1100.6
1103.0 1106.3 1108.4
1701.9 1708.1 1109.4
1109.9 1110.2 1711.1
1713.2 1713.3 1712.4
1115.0 1114. 1 1115.0
1115.0 1115.0 1715.0
1115.0 1115.0 1115.0
1115.0 1115.0 1715.0
-,---,-.------~--------------------
,...,
.-",,,4
"'~ ..
''''e''4
'.
-,
!,.>."",
EXHIBIT 46
PERCENT OF TIME OF WATER WITHDRAWAL AT GIVEN DEPTHS FOR JANUARY,
THREE-PORT INTAKE STRUCTURE II
Range of Max.
Water Surface Invert El. of Withdrawal Percent
El. Range (ft) Port in Use (ft) Depth (ft) of Time
1685-1695 1673 13-21 5
1685-1695 1673 21-22 5
1695-1705 1683 12-16 10
1695-1705 1683 16-22 10
1705-1715 1693 13-14 10
1705-1715 1693 14-15 10
1705-1715 1693 15-16 10
1705-1715 1693 16-18 10
1705-1715 1693 18-19 10
1705-1715 1693 19-20 10
1705-1715 1693 20-21 5
1705-1715 1693 21-22 2
1705-1715 1693 22 with spill 3
!I Based on reservoir elevations in 1991 with downstream flow
constraints.
...
•
EXHIBIT 47
PERCENT OF TIME OF WATER WITHDRAWAL AT GIVEN DEPTHS FOR AUGUST,
THREE-PORT INTAKE STRUCTURE II
Water Surface Invert El. of
El. Range (ft) Port
1685-1695
1685-1695
1685-1695
1695-1705
1695-1705
1695-1705
1705-1715
1705-1715
1705-1715
1705-1715
1705-1715
1705-1715
Based on reservoir
constraints.
in Use (ft)
1673
1673
1673
1683
1683
1683
1693
1693
1693
1693
1693
1693
elevations
Range of Max.
Withdrawal Percent
Depth (ft) of Time
14-16 5
16-18 5
18-21 10
21-17 10
17-20 10
20-22 10
13-15 10
15-17 10
17-19 10
19-20 10
20-22 7
22 with spill 3
in 1991 with downstream flow
1 ,
I "
.'2)~;
--. ,
CUMULATIVE DRAINAGE AREAS
BLACK BEAR LAKE OUTLET (I) = 1.82mi 2
BLACK LAKE INLET (IV) = 6.30mi2
BLACK LAKE OUTLET (V) = 7 ,39mi 2
MOUTH OF STREAM (VI) = 17.46mi 2
..
NORTH
SCALE 0 1 MILE
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
DRAINAGE AREAS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 48
200-,------------------------------------------------------------------------,
190-
180-
170-
160-
150-
140 -
130-
120-
110-
100-
90-
80-
70 -
60-
50-
40-
30-",~;..---------
LEGEND:
1. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
AVERAGE MONTHLY FLOWS
30-vr. PERIOD
2. WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT:
A. OPTIMUM PEAKING REGIME:
~T] RANGE
MAX 2 = (MAXIMUM PROJECT DISCHARGE, PEAK DAY)
+(AVEAAGE MONTHLY 0, UNREGULATED DRAINAGE AREA)
MAX 1 .. (MAXIMUM PROJECT DISCHARGE, AVERAGE WEEKEND DAY)
+(AVEAAGE MONTHLY O. UNREGULATED DRAINAGE AREA)
MIN = (MINIMUM PROJECT DISCHARGE)
+(AVEAAGE MONTHLY a. UNREGULATED DRAINAGE AREA)
B. PROPOSED MODIFIED REGIME
TO REDUCE FISHERY IMPACT:
-200
-190
-180
-170
-160
-150
-140
-130
-120
-110
-100
-90
-80
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
o-~----~----~----~------------------------------------------------------~-o I I I
JAM J J A SON D ( J)
1/ NOT INCLUDING LOCAL INFLOW FROM RUNOFF
BETWEEN DAM AND POWERHOUSE.
MONTH
en
Yo
0
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
STREAM FLOW AT PROJECT
TAILRACE (I) IN 1986
(WITH SPILL) Y
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 49
1
200--200
190--190
180--180
170--170
160--160
150--150
140--140
130--130
120--120
110--110
100--100
90--90
80--80
70--70
60--60
50--50
-40
o-~----~----------------~----------------~--------------------------~-o I I I I I
J F M A M J J A SON D (n
MONTH
en
IL. u
LEGEND:
SEE EXHIBIT 49
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
STREAM FLOW IMMEDIATELY
UPSTREAM OF SOUTHWEST
TRIBUTARY (II) IN 1986
(WITH SPI LL)
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 50
200-r----
190-
180-
170-
160-
150-
140-
130-
120-
110-
100-
90-
80-
70-
60-
50-
40-
30 ....
20-
10-
O-
J
J
J
F
I
M
I
A
l
-200
-190
-180
-170
160
-150
-140
-130
-120
-110
LEGEND:
SEE EXHIBIT 49
-100 ~ u
-90
-80
-30
::!T~~_-20 M!' -10
J A I I
MONTH S 0 ~ I .-0 D (J)
BLACK B
HYDROELEC:RAR LAKE IC PROJECT
STREAM F ALASKA DOWNSTRE~~W IMMEDIATELY
IN ~~~~UTA~~ S~~ITHWEST
ALASKA ~:ITH SPILL) ER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 51
l • ,
200--200
190--190
180--180
170--170
160 --160 LEGEND:
150 --150 SEE EXHIBIT 49
140--140
130--130
120--120
-110
-100
en
-90
II. u
-80
-70
-40
-30 BLACK BEAR LAKE
20--20 HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
10 --10 STREAM FLOW AT
0-1 I BLACK LAt<E INLET (IV)
I I I I I I I 0 IN 1986 (WITH SPILL)
J F M A M J J A S 0 N D ( J) ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
MONTH
EXHIBIT 52
• i. I
2oo-r-----------------~--------------------------------------------------~-200
190-
180-
170-
160-
150 -
140 -
130-
120-
110 -
100 -
90-
80-
30-
20-
-190
-180
-170
-160
-150
-140
-130
-120
-110
-100
-90
-80
-60
-40
-30
-20
10--10
o ~!----~----~I----~I-----I~--~I----.-----~--~----~I----~I----~--~~-O
J F M A M J J A SON D (Jt
MONTH
en
~
(.)
,
l
LEGEND:
SEE EXHIBIT 49
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
STREAM FLOW AT
BLACK LAKE OUTLET (V)
IN 1986 (WITH SPILL)
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 53
400-,-----------------------------------------------------------------------,-4oo
380-
360-
340-
320-
300-
280-
260-
240-
220-
200-
180-
160-
140-
100-
80-
60-
40-
405
417
460
-380
-360
-340
-320
-300
-280
-260
-240
-220
-200 en u.
U
-180
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
20--20
o-~I--~--~--~--~--~--~------~--~--~------~I-o I I
J F M A M J J A SON D ( J)
MONTH
,
i
LEGEND:
SEE EXHIBIT 49
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
STREAM FLOW AT
CREEK MOUTH (VI)
IN 1986 (WITH SPILL)
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 54
1 1 1 ~ ~
200--200
90--190
180--180
170--170
160--160
150--150
140--140
130--130
120--120
110--110
100--100
90--90
80--SO
70 --70
60--60
50--60
40 --40
O-~I~--~----~I~--~~---'----~-----'----~I~---'----~----~----~----~I-O
J F M A M J J A SON D ( J)
1/ NOT INCLUDING LOCAL INFLOW FROM RUNOFF
BETWEEN DAM AND POWERHOUSE,
MONTH
j,
rn u.
U
i
LEGEND:
SEE EXHIBIT 49
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
STREAM FLOW AT
PROJECT TAl LRACE (I)
IN 1991 (NO SPILL) Y
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 55
200-r---------------------------------------------------------------------~
190-
180-
170-
160-
150-
140 -
130-
120-
110-
100-
90-
80-
70-
60-
50-
30-
10-
=r MIN
-200
-190
-180
-170
-160
-150
-140
-130
-120
-110
-100
-90
-80
-70
-60
-60
-10
O-rl-----.----II-----.----~----~----.-----.-----.-----r----..---~----~I-O
J F M A M J J A SON D ( J'
MONTH
en
IL
U
LEGEND:
SEE EXHIBIT 49
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
STREAM FLOW IMMEDIATELY
UPSTREAM OF SOUTHWEST
TRIBUTARY (II)
IN 1991 (NO SPILL)
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 56
i
~O-~------------------------------------------------------------------------,
190-
180-
170-
160 -
150 -
140-
130-
120-
110-
100-
90-
80-
70-
60-
50-
40-
20-
10-
,.--I
I
I
I
I •
I I I I I O-~I----------~----~~----~----~----~----------~----------~----------~
-200
-190
-180
-170
-160
-150
-140
-130
-120
-110
-100
-90
-80
-70
-30
-~
-10
-0
J F M A M J J A S 0 N D ( J'
MONTH
LEGEND:
SEE EXHIBIT 49
en u.
U
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
STREAM FLOW IMMEDIATELY
DOWNSTREAM OF SOUTHWEST
TRIBUTARY (III)
IN 1991 (NO SPI LL)
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 57
200-
190-
180 -
170-
160 -
150-
140 -
130-
120 -
110-
100 -
90-
80-
60-
50 -
30-
20-
10-
0-1
I
J F M
t i
I
A M J J A. S 0 N D
MONTH
'r t -1 4 ':0.
-200
190
-180
-170
LEGEND:
-160
SEE EXHIBIT 49
-150
-140
-130
-120
-110
-100 en u-
0
-90
-30 BLACK BEAR LAKE
-20 HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
-10 STREAM FLOW AT
BLACK LAKE INLET (IV)
'-0 IN 1991 (NO SPILL)
I
( J) ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 58
200-r--------------------------------------------------------------------
190 -
180 -
170 -
160-
150-
140 -
130 -
120-
110
100 -
90-
80-
70 -
60·
50 -
40-
30-
20-
-200
-190
-180
-170
-180
-150
-140
-130
-120
-110 ff o
-100
-90
-40
-30
-20
10 --10
0 1 ~----.----.----.------~---~---~---.----~---~---~---------~I I I ,-0
J F M A M J J A SON D (J'
MONTH
,
l
LEGEND:
SEE EXHIBIT 49
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
STREAM FLOW AT
BLACK LAK E OUTLET (V)
IN 1991 (NO SPILL)
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 59
400-
380-
360-
340-
320-
300-
280-
260-
240-
220-
200-
180-
80-
60-
40-
20 -
0 4
41
-400
-380
-360
-340.
-320
-300
280
-260
-240
-220
-200 :e u
-180
-140
-120
-100
-80
-80
-40
-20
Lo
I I o .LI ---------------------------------------------------------------------~---~---~ I I I I I I
J F M A M J J A S 0 N D (Jt
MONTH
LEGEND:
SEE EXHIBIT 49
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROelECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
STREAM FLOW AT
CREEK MOUTH (VI)
IN 1991 (NO SPILL)
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 60
..
..
EXHIBIT 61
PERCENT OF TIME OF WATER WITHDRAWAL AT GIVEN DEPTHS FOR JANUARY,
Water Surface
El. Range (ft)
1685-1700
1685-1700
1685-1700
1685-1700
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
TWO-PORT INTAKE STRUCTURE II
Invert El. of
Port in Use (ft)
1673
1673
1673
1673
1688
1688
1688
1688
1688
1688
1688
1688
1688
1688
Range of Max.
Withdrawal
Depth (ft)
13-21
21-22
22-26
26-27
12-18
18-19
19-20
20-21
21-23
23-24
24-25
25-26
26-27
22 with spill
Percent
of Time
5
5
10
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
2
3
II Based on reservoir elevations in 1991 with downstream flow
constraints.
-
..... ,.
......
.....
0Ih'4
-
cd'
.. ~".
, .. ~
'c'"
~ ....
EXHIBIT 62
PERCENT OF TIME OF WATER WITHDRAWAL AT GIVEN DEPTHS FOR AUGUST,
TWO-PORT INTAKE STRUCTURE II
Water Surface Invert Elo of
Elo Range (ft) Port
1685-1700
1685-1700
1685-1700
1685-1700
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
1700-1715
Based on reservoir
constraints.
in Use (ft)
1673
1673
1673
1673
1688
1688
1688
1688
1688
1688
1688
1688
elevations
Range of Max.
Withdrawal Percent
Depth (ft) of Time
14-16 5
16-18 5
18-21 10
21-27 10
12-15 10
15-18 10
18-21 10
21-23 10
23-25 10
25-26 10
26-27 7
27 with spill 3
in 1991 with downstream flow
LEGEND
• SWITCHYARD
~.",-ALTERNATIVE A
...... -....... ALTERNATIVE B , ..
~ '-ALTERNATIVE A & B
SUBSTATION ALTERNATIVES
• FOR A
[) FOR B
SCALE 0
I
1
I
2
I
3 MILES
I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR
AL TERNATIVES
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 63
LEGEND
D 0-500 FEET
n\i\;0;t~;;] 500 -1000 FEET
1000 -1500 FEET
> 1500 FEET
SCALE 0
I
1 2
I
3 MILES
I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
Transmission Corridor Study
ELEVATION CONSTRAINTS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 64
LEGEND
1:::::::::1 FOREST & MUSKEG
fi;\:i~~ttfi'.l HIGHLAND AREA (OVER 1500 feet)
LAKE/STREAM CORRIDOR
SHORELINE/INLET
* IDENTIFIED EAGLE NEST (1970)
SCALE 0
I
1
I
2
I
3 MILES
I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
Transmission Corridor Study
WI LOll FE CONSTRAINTS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 65
~I
I -
LEGEND
r:0':l1 -WILDERNESS (DESIGNATED Ld ROADLESS AREAS)
(:":"111 -RETENTION
[ <1111 -PARTIAL RETENTION
IV -MODIFICATION
V -MAXIMUM MODIFICATION-
REHABILITATION
SCALE 0
I
1
I
2
I
3 MILES
I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
VISUAL RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT CLASSES
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 66
11 ~ I -
LEGEND
r <:::::::::::] ROAD CORRIDOR, <»< COMMERCIAL! RESIDENTIAL
-.... _-'-' .,-.... _-
UNDEVELOPED OR LOGGED
POTENTIAL LOGGING
RECREATION! CU L TURAL -
HISTORIC SITES
PLANNED FOR LOGGING
FUTURE ROAD CORRIDOR
SCALE 0
I
1
I
2
I
3 MILES
I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
Transmission Corridor Study
LAND USE CONSTRAINTS
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 67
EXHIBIT 68
TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR COMPARISON
Length (miles) 43.1
Elevation Traverses 1000 -1500 foot elevation range
for approximately two miles.
wildlife Impacts approximately 10.5 miles of shore-
line corridor and 18 miles of stream/lake
corridor.
Visual Creates overall moderate visual impact.
Impacts 4 miles of Class II visual
area and 1 mile of Class III visual area.
Land Use Does not presently conflict with
logging operations.
Exhibit 68
_______________ ~!~~~B~!!Y~_~ ______________ _
50
Remains within 0 -500 foot elevation ranqe.
Impacts approximately 14 miles of sh~reline
corridor and 22.5 miles of stream/lake
corridor.
Creates overall moderate visual impact.
Impacts 3 miles of Class II visual area and
8 miles of Class III visual area.
Will require less clearing and allow easier
and more efficient maintenance. Possible
conflict with logging operations.
LEGEND
• SWITCHYARD, POWERHOUSE
ft REFINEMENT AREA
j-INITIAL ROUTE
..,.'
SCALE 0
I
1
I
2
I
3 MILES
I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
PREFERRED
TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 69
LEGEND
SEALASKA S.A.
S.S.
S.T.
SHAAN . SEET CORPORATION
STATE LAND
H. HAIDA CORPORATION
N.F. NATIONAL FOREST LANDS
K./H. KLAWOCK/HEENYA CORPORATION
8?'?J POSSIBLE CONVEYANCE TO KLAWOCK/HEENYA
OR SEALASKA FROM NATIONAL FOREST LANDS
SUBJECTTO REVISION
SCALE 0
I
1
I
2
I
3 MILES
I
BLACK BEAR LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA
PROJECT AREA OWNERSHIP
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
EXHIBIT 70