HomeMy WebLinkAboutAK Regional Energy Resources Phase 2 Volume 2 Hydro Development 1980I
~'
Alaska Power Authority
LIBRARY COpy
, ,
DEPD 81-001-2
DOE/EV /73002-1
ALASKA REGIONAL ENERGY RESOURCES
PLANNING PROJECT
PHASE 2
COAL, HYDROELECTRIC AND ENERGY ALTERNATIVES
VOLUME II
HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT
ItAS~ --,r----___ '
~/,,~. --r .. ro" : • -----.. -'..AO..ll... -----f) IIONTAIIA !
O"lGO" " \. I --,---_ 10Ait0 --
-"'---L. I :' ---'---i
\. "l~AOA: --r--
.. I UTAH " \' ' COLORADO
CAllFnlt' I ,'\-lilA, J---' ~
'\ \ :J ---t------.L.
, 'i •
o. \ " .... ~ " AltllO"A liE. IIEXICO
,~ : ~~""_ .. l,~S , -.........:.----I:}...-,,----
..... \ ...
Prepared by:
Division of Energy and Power Development
Department of Commerce and Economic Development
State of Alaska
Prepared for:
Regional Impacts Division
Office of Environmental Assessment
U.S. Department of Energy
Under Contract AT06-77EV73002
ALASKA REGIONAL ENERGY RESOURCES
PLANNING PROJECT
PHASE 2
COAL, HYDROELECTRIC AND ENERGY ALTERNATIVES
VOLUME II
HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT
Prepared
by
Gene Rutledge
Darlene Lane
Greg Edb10m
ALASKA DIVISION OF ENERGY AND POWER DEVELOPMENT
Donald Lyon, Project Manager
Clarissa Quinlan, Director
U. S. Department of Energy Contract #AT06-77EV73002
S. P. Mathur, Project Officer
1980
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United
States Government. Neither the United States nor the United States
Department of Energy, nor any of their employees, nor any of their
contractors, subcontractors, or their employees make any warranty,
expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for
the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus,
product, or process disclosed or represents that its use would not
infringe privately-owned rights.
i i
VOLUME I
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
VOLUME II
Chapter 8
Chapter 9
Chapter 10
Chapter 11
VOLUME III
Chapter 12
Chapter 13
Chapter 14
Chapter 15
Chapter 16
Chapter 17
Chapter 18
Chapter 19
Chapter 20
ALASKA REGIONAL ENERGY RESOURCES PLANNING PRoJECT
PHASE 2
COAL, HYDROELECTRIC AND ENERGY ALTERNATIVES
BELUGA COAL DISTRICT ANALYSIS
Introduction
Social Effects and Management Alternatives
Beluga Coal Field Licenses and Permits
Land Tenure
Coal Technology
Transportation
Environmental Assessment of the Beluga Coal Field
HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT
Introduction to Alaskan Hydroelectric Development
Restrictions and Requirements Affecting the Construction
of a Hydroelectric Facility
Hydroelectric Technology
Environmental Impact of Hydroelectric Development
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SYSTEMS
Introduction
Ve~ Small Hydropower
Geothermal
Wind
Fuel Cells
Wood Residues
Waste Heat
Siting Criteria
REGIONAL ASSESSMENT INVENTORY UPDATE
Identification and Assessment Programs
iii
CONTENTS
VOLUME II
HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT
LIST OF FIGURES .............. " .............................................. " .................... "................ viii
LIS T OF TAB L E S .................•.................................. i x
FOR EWO RD •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• x
ACKN OWL EDGEME NTS xi
Chapter
8 INTRODUCTION TO ALASKAN HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT
Introduction .......................................... " .................... "".......... 8-1
Hydroelectric Power for Mid-Range Communities ...... 8-3
Barrow ................................................................................ B-3
Kotzebue ............................................................................ 8-4
Nome ................................................................................... 8-6
Bethel ................................................................................ 8-8
Kodiak ................................................................................ 8-9
Cordova ...... ... ..... .... ... ..... ........ ..... 8-10
Petersburg/Wrangell ........................... 8-17
Appendix 8-A: Alaska's Hydroelectric Resource Inventory
Introduction .................................. 8-19
Division of Energy & Power Development Inventory
of Potential Hydropower Sites .............. 8-19
Sources of Hydroelectric Site Listings ........ 8-58
Alaska Region .................................................................. 8-20
Arctic Region................................. 8-21
Northwest Region .............................• 8-22
Southwest Reg; on ............................................................ 8-24
Interior Region ............................... 8-28
Southcentra1 Region .............•............. 8-31
Southeast Region .............•...............• 8-42
9 RESTRICTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS AFFECTING THE CONSTRUCTION
OF A HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY
Introduction ....................................... 9-1
Federal Licenses and Permits....................... 9-1
Regulations Under the Federal Power Act ....... 9-2
Course and Method of Operation ...•....... 9-2
Pre1 imi nary Permits ................. 9-2
Licenses .•.•................•....... 9-2
Field Inspections and Revocation of
Permits and Licenses by Court
Act ion ........................... 9-2
iv
Detennination of Jurisdictional
Status ...................................................... 9-3
Exportation of Electric Energy...... 9-3
Approved Fonns, Etc. .•....•.....•... 9-3
Determination of Costs of Projects Constructed
Under License •....•.........••....••.•...•• 9-4
I n it i a 1 Cos t S ta teme n t ..••.••..•....•..•. 9-4
Substance ..•.......•.......•.•.••...••... 9-4
Report on Project Cost ...••...........•.• 9-4
Service of Report •••.••.•..••.•.....•...• 9-5
Time for Fil i ng Protest .••.•..•.•........ 9-5
Burden of Proof •••.•.•........•...•..•••• 9-5
Findings and Final Statement ••••••.••.••. 9-5
Detennination of Fair Value of Constructed
Projects ............................................................ 9-5
Valuation Data ..........•.••........•.•.• 9-5
Reports .................................................................... 9-6
Service of Report .......••....•••...•.•.. 9-6
Time for Fil i ng Protest .................. 9-6
Hearing Upon Report •.•••.....•...•..•...• 9-6
Application for License; General Provisions 9-6
Who may F i 1 e ................ '. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 9-6
Acceptance for Filing or Rejection of
Applications .....•..•••••.....•..•.... 9-7
Hearings on Appl ication .................. 9-7
Issuance and Acknowledgements of Acceptance 9-8
Application for License for Proposed Major Project
or Mi nor Part Thereof •••..•..•...•..•....•• 9-8
Contents .................................................................. 9-8
Required Exhibits........................ 9-8
App1 ication for License for Minor Project ..••. 9-8
Contents .................................................................. 9-8
Application for License for Transmission Line
Only .............................................................................. 9-8
Contents ••......•.•••..••.••..••.•...•.•. 9-8
Required Exhibits ..•..........•...•.••... 9-9
Application for Preliminary Pennit and
Amendments Thereof ..........•.••..•..• 9-9
Who May F i 1 e ............................. 9-9
Acceptance for Filing or Rejection of
Applications ..•.....•••....••.•..••..• 9-9
Contents of Application ...•..•.•.••.••..• 9-9
Hearing on Application ••.•.•••••••••••••• 9-9
Amendments .............................................................. 9-9
Issuance and Acknowledgements of Acceptance 9-10
Application for Amendment of License •.••••••.. 9-10
Amendment of License •...••......••.....•. 9-10
Amendment of Plans •.•...•.•.•.••••..•...• 9-10
Surrender or Tennination of License .••.•.•••.. 9-10
Application for Surrender ..•..........••. 9-10
Recreational Opportunities and Development at
Licensed Projects ...•.••......••.••.•.••... 9-11
Publication of License Conditions Relating
to Recreati on ......................... 9-11
v
Appl ication for Transfer of License ........... 9-11
Filing ........... .................... .... 9-11
Annual Charges Under Part I of the Federal
Power Act .................................. 9-12
Cost of Administration................... 9-12
Inspection of Project Works With Respect to
Safe ty of S tru ctu res ....................... 9-12
Appl icabil ity ............................ 9-12
Periodic Inspections ..................... 9-12
Settlements Involving Headwater Benefits ...... 9-12
Settlements Involving Headwater Benefits. 9-12
Functions Under Other Authorizations ............... 9-13
Executive Order 10485 ......................... 9-13
Federal Power Marketing Acts.................. 9-13
U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers Pennit Program .. .... ........ .... 9-13
Regulatory Program of the Corps of Engineers ............ 9-16
Part 321--Pennits for Dams and Dikes in Navigable
Waters of the United States ..................... 9-16
Part 323--Pennits for Discharges of Dredged or Fill
Material into Waters of the United States ....... 9-16
General ....................................... 9-16
Discharge Requiring Pennits ............ ....... 9-16
Discharges Pennitted by this Regulation ....... 9-16
Discharges into Certain Waters of the United
States ........... ..... ...... ....... ......... 9-17
Specific Categories of Discharges ............. 9-17
State Pennits and Licenses Required for the Operating of a
Hydroelectric Facility................. ..... ....... ....... 9-17
Selected Pennits ........................................ 9-18
Access Route Pe nni t ................................ 9-18
Critical Habitat Areas Pennit ...................... 9-18
Discharge into Navigable Water Certificate of
Reasonable Assurance ............................ 9-18
Encroachment Pennit ................................ 9-18
Miscellaneous Land Use Pennit ...................... 9-18
Public Utilities Certificate of Public Convenience
and Necessity................................... 9-18
Special Land Use Pennit ............................ 9-18
Right of Way or Easement Pennit .................... 9-18
Ut'il ity Pennit for Encroachment Within Highway
Rights-af-Way ................................... 9-18
Waste Water Disposal Pennit ........................ 9-18
Wa ter Use Pe nn it. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-18
Local Pennits and Licenses Required for the Construction and
Operation of a Hydroel ectric Facil ity ..................... 9-18
Pennit Summation ............................................. 9-28
Land Classifications, Reserves & Withdrawals ................. 9-28
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) ............. 9-30
References ................................................... 9-34
vi
10 HYDROELECTRIC TECHNOLOGY
I ntroduct ion ••...•...•..•••...•••.•••.•.••...••.••. 10-1
H ; s to ry ........ .......................... '" .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1 0-1
Rivers and Streams ...... eo..... ..... .......... 10-1
Turbine Technology............................ 10-3
Tidal Power ..................................................................... 10-4
Other Ocean Energies .•...••••.......•.•••..•.• 10-5
Low Head Technology................................ 10-9
Vertical-Shaft Tu rbines ....................... 10-9
Tubular Turbines ........................ eo.... 10-10
Bulb Turbine Status in the U. S. ..••••....•... 10-10
Hydro Turbine Application. eo.................. 10-11
Ocean Energy Technology............................ 10-11
Wind Waves •..••.......•..••...... ....••••..•.• 10-11
Tidal Energy ...... III .. .. ........ ......... ....... .... .......... ....... .. ...... 10-21
Oceanic Tides .................................. "................ 10-21
Tidal Technology......................... 10-23
Temperature Gradients ......................... 10-23
Sal ini ty Gradients ............................ 10-31
Ocean Currents ......................................................... 10-31
Applicability to Alaska ............................ 10-34
Low Head Hydro .............................................................. 10-34
Tides .................................................. "......... 10-36
Other Ocean Energy Resources •••.•.•.•.•....... 10-40
Ocean Nutrient Upwelling •••...••••..•••••••••• 10-40
Recommenda t 1 ons ••.•.••••••••.••••••.••••.•••••••••• 10-43
Summa ry .................. "......................... 1 0-45
Key Con tac ts ............................. II • • • • • • • • • 10-46
References ................•....•......... ".......... 10-47
Appendix 10-A: Hydraulic Ram .•••••.•••••••••.••••• 10-50
11 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT
Introduction....................................... 11-1
Problems Associated with the Construction of a
Hydroelectric Faci1 ity ........................... 11-2
Long Term Environmental Effects ..•••......•...••..• 11-4
Indirect Environmental Impacts •••..••.......••...•. 11-8
Experience in Alaska ...•..•.••••....••••...•..•...• 11-9
Alaskan Considerations........................ 11-9
Environmental Monitoring •.•••••.•..••...•.••.. 11-10
References ...............••.....•....•...•..••..•.. 11-13
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
NUMBER PAGE
10-1 Hydro Turbine Application .............. .............. 10-15
10-2 Monthly Averaged Wind-Wave Power per Crest1ength
Striking the Continental United States .•••••.......•• 10-17
10-3 Isaacs Wave-Energy Converter ..•.••.•........••...•.•• 10-18
10-4 Bouchaux-Praceique Wave-Energy Converter •....••••••.• 10-18
10-5 Pneumatic Wave-Energy Converter ..••..••.••••••....••• 10-19
10-6 DeMaree Wave-Energy Converter ....••.•••......•..•••.. 10-19
10-7 Bolding-Alexander Wave-Energy Converter •.•....••••••. 10-20
10-8 Nodding Duck Wave-Energy converter ••...•••.•.......•. 10-20
10-9 Vertical Shaft Turbogenerator Design •.•.....•••.....• 10-25
10-10 Tube Type Turbine Installation with Generator
in, The Dry ....•...................................... 10-26
10-11 Horizontal Shaft Bulb Unit with Generator in
Steel Bulb .•..••.••.••.•••........•..••...•.•.•.•...• 10-27
10-12 Rim Type Turbogenerator .............................. 10-28
10-13 Rankine Cycle ........................................ 10-30
10-14 Thermal Efficiency by Month ••.•••••..•.•..••••....••. 10-30
10-15 Deep Water Salinity-Gradient Energy Converter ...••••• 10-33
10-16 Estuarine Salinity-Gradient Energy Converter .•...•••. 10-33
10-17 Proposed Tidal Projects -Cook Inlet (Projects
A-l, A-2, & A-4) ..................................... 10-37
10-18 Proposed Tidal Projects -Cook Inlet {Project A-3} ..• 10-38
10-19 Proposed Tidal Project -Angoon .••..•..•...•.•••••..• 10-39
10-20 Schematic of Tidal Powered Artificial Upwelling
Sys t811 .......•...........•..•.•.....••...••••.••...•• 10-44
10-A-l Hyd rau 1 ; c Ram ..••.••••••••..•••••••••..•...•.•••••••• 10-51
viii
LIST OF TABLES
NUMBER PAGE
8-1 Potential Hydropower Sites for Cities With
2000-5000 Population ••..•..••..••.•••.•..••..•...•• 8-12
8-A-1 Division of Energy and Power Development Inventory
of Potential Hydroelectric Sites in Alaska .••••• 8-21
9-1 Land Withdrawals for Power Sites .••.....•...•...••. 9-32
10-1 L1sts of Operat1onal and Potential Tidal Power
Projects ..... it. ...• ..••.•.•. ••.. •• •••..••. ••. ••• ••• 10-6
10-2 Listing of Organizations with Low Head Turbine
Design and/or Manufacturing Experience (Finns
contacted by IEC for Idaho Falls Project.) ••••.•••. 10-12
10-3 Comparison of Redevelopment Alternatives for
10-4
10-5
Low Head Hydropower. Idaho Falls. Idaho .••••..••••• 10-13
Turbines for Hydroelectric Power Plants
Turbo Generator Design for Tidal Energy
10-14
10-24
10-6 Recent Hydro Cost Studies ...•••........••...••..... 10-35
10-7 Conventional Econom1c Analyses -Proposed Tidal
Power Projects. State of Alaska ...••.••..••.••..••. 10-41
10-8 Allowable Hydroelectric Investment vs. Fuel
Cost ............................................... 10-42
lx
FOREWORD
This second phase of the Alaska Regional Energy Resources Planning Project
represents an in-depth look at the Bel uga Coal District, hydroel ectric
development and the applicability of alternative energy systems. Specifi-
cally, this phase of the project will deal with the possible development
of the Beluga Coal Fields, the construction and operation of hydroelectric
facil ities 1n Alaska as well as various alternative small scale energy
systems such as geothennal, wind, fuel cell s, small hydroelectric
facilities and thennal application of energy conversion.
Since the beginning of this project in 1977, many important developments
have occurred 1n the fiel d of energy. The impact of the passage of the
Clean Air Act amendments has yet to be felt, and changes in offshore
federal lease sal e schedules have yet to make a final impact within the
economy of either Alaska or the continental United States. In addition,
there is still considerable debate as to the disposition of the 011 from
the Trans-Alaska Pipel ine System (TAPS) as well as the 1 i kelihood of a
Trans-Alaska or Trans-Canada natural gas pi pel ine. Therefore, the reader
must recognize that infonnation and data concerning Alaska's resources,
operations and issues are continually being sLiPplemented and modified by
changes in regulations, technology, economic factors and resource
ava1labl1ity.
Since this report is based to a great extent upon scientific, geological
and engineering work done by others, the reader 1s urged to obtain the
original documentation for greater detail. This report does not attempt
to establish State, Federal or Native corporation pol icies. This report
does provide infonnation which will assist policy makers in making
infonned decisions.
x
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report has benefited fran contributions and input supplied by staff
members fran several state and federal agencies, Native corporations,
util i ties, 1 i braries, industri al corporati ons, national 1 aboratories, and
consultants. A number, but not all, of the energy experts who assisted us
are listed by name in various chapters of the text. Without the help of
the many people who contributed, this report would not have been possible.
It is hoped that all who assisted will al so find this report useful.
The authors wi sh to express thanks to the other secretarial staff members
who assisted in the preparation of this report, Brenda Hviding, Shelly
Lynn, Paula Parker, Arlene Price, Peggy Skeers and Nancy Totten. The
following individuals must be thanked for their support in research and
numerous writing contributions necessary for the successful canpletion of
the project: Carol Bennet, Steven Levi, Randall Montbriand, and
especially Kyle Weaver.
Also, funding fran the Department of Energy (fonnerly Energy Research and
Development Administration) is acknowledged and appreciated. The
continuing assistanc~ of Dr. Paul Gerhardt, Regional Impacts Division, in
the direction of the early stages of this project as well as his interest
in the progress of this study was very helpful.
xi
CHAPTER 8
INTRODUCTION TO ALASKAN HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT
INTRODUCTION
Al aska' s developed hydroel ectric resources are the largest in the nation.
The Alaska Water Study Committee in 1976 estimated that the 76 primary
potential hydroel ectric sites (see Alaska's Energy Resources, Vol. II,
pp. 226-230) represented a potential for approximately 32 million kilo-
watts and 170 billion kilowatt-hours annual energy. Even though these
sites represent only a partial listing from the more than 600 identified
possible development sites, this amount of energy would satisfy the total
electrical demand of the United States for over a month. By contrast the
developed hydroelectric capacity total s only 131 megawatts, less than
one-half of one percent of the identified potential of the primary sites.
Much new interest in hydropower has been noted since the 1973 oil embargo
and the subsequent large increases in costs for fuels. This, combined
with increasing energy demands, points toward the development of planning
scenarios and the possibil ity of an increasing implementation of hydro-
el ectric proj ects.
The total electric energy use in Alaska in 1975 was about 3.5 billion
kilowatt-hours. Various studies indicate sUbstantial future increases in
power demands for most Alaska power systems. From a survey of planned
future generating capaciti es conducted in 1977, the Al aska Power Admini-
stration found, that projected statewide electric energy requirements for
the year 2000 vary from 15 to 58 billion kilowatt-hours.
The work for the Al aska Power Survey fu rther establ i shed that the oppor-
tunity exists to shift Alaska's major power systen from their present
dependency on oil and gas to coal and hydro resources, and that the coal
and hydro was fully adequate to handle demands through the year 2000 and
many years beyond.
Hydroelectric power, like coal, represents a major alternative energy
source. Although hydroelectric power does not represent a potential
Alaska energy export to the rest of the United States at this timet
increased availability and use of hydroelectric power in Alaska can assist
the rest of the nation in meeting energy substitution goal s. First t the
extent to which Alaska hydroelectric power can be used to SUbstitute for
oil and gas consumption in Alaska would release quantities of oil and gas
for availability in the Lower 48. Second, the availability of reliable
and abundant hydroelectric power in Alaska could lead to the establishment
of electric power intensive industries, such as aluminum, 1n Alaska,
thereby lessening the demands on electric power generation in the Lower
48. Finally, from the point of view of quality of life in Alaska, the
po tenti a 1 deve 1 opment of hyd roe1 ectri c power on a smaller scale may rna ke
it possible for many communities in less populated areas of the State to
greatly reduce the costs of thef r power. Hydro rerna ins a long-range
energy alternative in Alaska, particularly for the the Railbelt 1n
Southcentral and in the Southeast Region. It may a1 so be a significant
alternative for the Southwest Region.
Table 8 .. 1 at the end of the chapter lists eight Alaskan communities,
Barrow, Kotzebue, Bethel, Nome, Kodiak, Cordova, Petersburg, and Wrangell,
in the mid-range size with populations from 2,000-5,000 (as of July 1,
1976), and shows their respective potential hydroelectric sites. These
communities were selected because of their present economy and industrial
base and their anticipated growth. The energy needs of these cities will
undoubtedly be increasing and if hydropower is a viable alternative, as it
might be for several communities, then conversion from existing generation
sys terns to hydropower may be warranted.
Summary profiles giving the salient features of each community follow the
table of hydro sites. There are representative cities from each region
except the Interior. As would be expected from a review of the hydrologic
regions, the three Man-in-the-Arttic Program (MAP) regions with the
highest potential for hydropower development are the Southcentral, the
Southwest and the Southeast. The Southeast Region, a scenic area of
fjords and steep walled valleys, glaciers, high ice fields and abundant
water resources, is espeCially rich in hydro resources.
8-2
HYDROELECTRIC POWER FOR MID-RANGE COMMUNITIES
BARROW
The City of Barrow, a first-class city with a council fom of governnent,
;s the northernmost canmunity on the North American Contintent, 330 miles
above the Arctic Circle on the shore of the Arctic Ocean. The average
minimum temperature for the month of January is -21.6 Fahrenheit (F) while
the mean annual temperature is 9.6 F. Annual precipitation averages 4.3
inches, while the mean hourly wind speed is 11 mph. With three months of
continual darkness, and seven winter months of extensive energy needs, the
city's 2,307 predominantly Inupiat Eskimo residents have unique energy
requirements. (Population figures for the eight cities discussed in this
section are fran the State of Alaska, Department of Labor estimates as of
July 1,1976).
Barrow ;s the regional center for villages of the Arctic. The Arctic
Region has two percent of the State's population, and half of this
region's population resides in Barrow.
The area's economy is primarily supported by defense installations and
their contractors, the U.S. Navy Arctic Research Laboratory, petroleum and
natural gas exploration, other government agencies, the headquarters of
the North Slope Borough and the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, the
native corporation representing the region. Canmun1ty facilities and
services incl ude a twel ve bed hospi tal, a medical clinic, educational
facilities, recreation centers, three churches, one library, one financial
institution, two hotels and police and fire protection.
Transportation facilities and services are 1 imited; there is no rail or
truck service into Barrow. Air service, however, is twice daily. In
summer months (July, August and September) ocean barges are able to
navigate in the Chukchi Sea to take bulk freight into Barrow.
8-3
Barrow is supplied with electricity by Barrow Utilities, Inc., a wholly
owned subsidiary of the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation. Electricity is
produced at a 4 Mw gas turbine power plant and is sold to consumers at 15¢
per Kwh for the first 200 Kwh with a scale of decreasing rates for
increasing consumption to 9¢ Kwh for use over 1120 Kwh.
Barrow is located in a region with impressive oil, gas and coal energy
resources, all of which are considered to have excellent recovery
potential. Some estimates place the region's oil resources as high as 35
billion barrels, the gas potential as high as 111 trillion cubic feet and
coal resources possibly as great as 3.4 trillion short tons.
The U.S. Navy supplies inexpensive natural gas to Barrow. The huge
Northern Alaska Coal Fields are also near this city but coal is not
presently used for fuel. Arctic Alaska 1s not faborable for hydroelectric
development. Inventory studies have not revealed any sites with the
necessary canbinations of head, water supply, damsites and reservoir
potential for feasible hydro projects in this Region. Table 8-1 lists
more infonnation on hydrologic characteristics of this, the largest
community in the Arctic Region.
KOTZEBUE
Kotzebue ;s the central city of a vast area of Northwest Alaska.
Located 26 miles above the Arctic Circle on the northwestern shore of the
Baldwin Peninsula, the city is bounded on the west by Kotzebue Sound and
on the east by Hotham Inlet. Kotzebue is only 200 mi 1es from the eastern
tip of the Soviet Union.
During the summer months the tenperature averages between 40-50 degrees
fahrenheit with a prevailing west wind coming out of Kotzebue Sound.
The summer sun does not set for approximately 36 days. During the long
winter months the average tenperature is between 15-20 degrees below zero
with a prevailing wind from the east. The lowest temperature recorded is
8-4
58 degrees below zero. Kotzebue has a mean wi nd speed of 13 mph and the
average annual precipitation is about nine inches, including 40 inches of
snow.
With a population of 2,431 and serving as a regional center for another
2,500, Kotzebue is a second-class city with a city manager form of govern-
ment. There is a 50-bed Public Health Service Hospital and a State-PHS
Cl inic. The Kotzebue Community School serves 630 students. There is a
public radio station, a newspaper and a cable television station. Six
churches, two museums, a library, one financial institution, a community
center, three hotels, police and fire department protection are also
facilities and services available to residents.
There is no rail servi ce in Kotzebue but there are local trucki ng
services. Kotzebue has approximately 11 miles of gravel roads. In the
winter months most of the people use snowmobiles, which have over the last
decade replaced the dog team as a mode of transportation. Kotzebue is a
regional center for air transportation, with daily service. Deep-draft
ocean-going vessel s take fuel, bu il ding materi a 1 s, heavy equi pment and
food suppl i es into Kotzebue Sound in the three ice-free summer months.
Freight then has to be taken the last fifteen miles into Kotzebue by
lightering services. This constitutes one-fourth of the total shipping
costs from Seattle, 3,000 miles away.
At least half of the Northwest Region's livel ihood is from non-monetary
subsistence income; caribou and moose are most important to the inland
villages. The wage economy is overwhelmingly concentrated in Kotzebue,
which provides governmental services and transportation services. A
commercial fishery provides seasonal employment for Native people. There
is little other manufacturing or natural resource development in the
region, with the exception of some reindeer herding for local consumption
on the Seward Peninsula.
The Kotzebue Electric Association provides electricity from a 3420 Kw
diesel generator at a cost of 26¢ per Kwh for the first 50 Kwh on a
decreasing rate scale to 12.5¢ per Kwh for use over 10,000 Kwh.
8-5
Kotzebue is located in the Hope 011 and Gas Province, and there are
isolated occurrences of coal in the vicinity. Kotzebue is al so near two
identified potential hydro sites, Igichuk (Agashashok) and Mishiguk, both
of which are on the Noatak River (See Table 9-1). The Ig1chuk site
(186 MW installed) has an Index Cost of 8.7 while the Mishiguk site
(174 MW installed) has an Index Cost of 10.8. The index cost, a relative
canparison cost of energy at the power plant bus bar, does not include
substation and transmission costs. When transmission and other costs are
taken into account none of the sites are presently considered likely for
development.
NOME
Nane, on the southwest corner of the Seward Peninsula, is the transpor-
tation and commerce center for Northwest Alaska. The city is situated at
the edge of the southern coastal p1a in and faces the Norton Sound and the
Bering Sea; Name is 510 miles northwest of Anchorage.
With an average minimum January temperature of -2.7 F and an average
maximum July temperature of 54.6 F, Nome has relatively moderate temper-
atures. The annual precipitation averages 17.9 inches, which includes the
equivalent of over 50 inches of snow. The mean hourly wind speed is 11
mph and the prevailing direction is north.
At the time of the Gold Rush, 1n the 1900's, Nome had a population of
30,000; now, Nome has 2,585 residents and serves as a regional center for
another 4,500 people. It is a first-class city with a mayor-council fonn
of government and pol ice and fire protection services. There are two
radio stations, a Cable T.V. systan offering three channels, a Public
Tel evi s ion station, two newspapers, canmunity recreation facilities, a
library, seven churches and a financial institution. Nome has 825
students in the elementary and high school s and a community college
program. There is a 24-bed hospital and a cl inic, a new hospital under
construction, and two hotels in Nome.
8-6
Nane is at the center of three highways: the 87 mile Kougarok River
Highway to the north, the 68 mile Council Highway on the east and the
Teller Highway which extends 72 miles northwest. There is no rail nor bus
service. Local trucking service is available and there is regular air
service into Nane. In water transportation the shallow coastal waters
necess i tate 1 ightering of cargo fran barges anchored a mile offshore. As
is the situation at Kotzebue, this increases freight costs by 25 percent.
Government is the major source of employment, with construction, services
and retail trade providing several hundred jobs. There is some mining and
some manufacturing activity, while transportation, canmunications and
public utilities al so contribute to the econany. Tourism is a growing
industry. Many people depend on the natural resources for a portion of
their subsistence. This includes the hunting of caribou and moose and
fishing. Walrus and seal are also taken near Nome. This contributes to
subsistence living and provides skins and ivory for native craftsmen.
The majori ty of homes in the town are provided electrici ty by Nome Light
and Power Utilities at an average cost of 18t per Kwh. Electricity is
produced by five di esel generators wi th a canbined production capabil ity
of 3,420 Kw. Heating is mostly by fuel oil.
Nome is near the Norton Oil and Gas Province; there are isolated coal
occu rrences; and, a known Geothenna 1 Resou rces Area (KGRA) is located
approximately forty-five miles north in the area surrounding Pilgrim Hot
Springs. Two potential hydro sites are Imruk Basin or Tuksuk Gorge (66 MW
installed) with an Index Cost of 19.0 and Fish River (7 MW prime) with an
Index Cost of 48.0. The Kuzitrin (Bunker Hill) site (14 MW installed)
with an Index Cost of 49.4 is also a possible candidate. Costs are
thought to be very steep. If larger quantities of electricity are
available there is a possibility of extending service to nearby villages
or developing an interchange with the local gold mining canpany.
8-7
BETHEL
Ninety miles inland from the mouth of the Kuskokwim River, the city of
Bethel has become a transportation and communications hub for the many
Eskimo villages of the Kuskokwim-Yukon Delta. With 3,004 residents within
the city limits, this Southwest Region city provides facilities and
services for a greater area population of 20.000 people.
Bethel is a second-class ci ty with a manager-council fonn of government.
There are pol ice and fire protection services. A Comprehensive Health
Care Center maintains health facilities for the City of Bethel and
provides services for fifty villages in the Del ta area. There are twel ve
churches, a radio station, a televi si on station. a newspaper. canmuni ty
recreation facilities and schools providing education for over 500
elementary, over 600 secondary and 700 community college students.
Temperatures range from an average January minimum of -1.5 F to an average
July maximum of 70.0 F. Annual precipitation averages 18.4 inches and the
mean hourly wind speed is 12.9 mph.
Air and water transportation are vitally important. There are two flights
da i1y between Anchorage and Bethel and numerous charter services. Barge
cargo and freight services are extensive with dock and warehouse
facilities available. There is no rail and no truck service available.
Supporting the area IS econany are governnent facil Hies. Of a total
employed work force of 1600. almost 900 are employed by Federal, State of
local government agencies. Transportation, fishing and retail activities
are the other highest employment activities.
Bethel Ut i1 i ty, Incorporated provides el ectricity to residential and
canmercia1 users on a rate scale fran l3¢ per Kwh to 8¢ per Kwh over
25.000 Kwh. Generation is by 9.600 Kw diesel generator.
8-8
Of the two potential hydro sites for the Bethel area. the Crooked Creek
Project (2140 MW installed. 1070 MW prime) appears to be the most
econanic, with an Index Cost of 5.0. Canments on the env1rormenta1
impacts. however. indicate that this site is not likely to be developed.
Rel ative costs for the Ki sare1 i k River site (36 MW installed, 18.2 MW
prime). especially the long transmission distance. indicate that this
project also 1s not feasible.
KODIAK
Kodiak is near the eastern tip of Kodiak Island in the Gulf of Alaska.
south of Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula and east of the Alaska Penin-
sula. It has a moderate climate with temperatures in the mid 20's
(fahrenheit) in January and high 50's in July. The average precipitation
is 54.4 inches per year and the mean hourly wind speed is 8.7 mph.
The 4.960 people who live inside the city limits and the additional 2.500
who live in the surround'ing area are primarily employed in fishing and sea
food processing. Several hundred people are employed by government, while
trade. service and construction activities also enploy significant
numbers.
Kodiak is a home-rule city with a manager-fonn of government. Police and
fire protection services are provided. There is a 45-bed hospital, two
clinics and a Public Health Service facility. The city has numerous
community facilities for recreation. a public library, seventeen churches,
three banki ng institutions. three hotel s. three radio stations, a cable
television station and three newspapers.
There is air, trucking and
Highway System connects
Southcentral Region.
barge service into Kodiak and the Alaska Marine
the city with other communities in the
8-9
The electricity supplier is the Kodiak Electric Association which utilizes
a 21,705 Kw diesel generator to produce electricity in Kodiak.
Twenty-five miles west there is a 985 Kw diesel generator at Port Lyons.
Rates for Kodiak users start at l6.8¢ per Kwh for the fi rst 100 Kwh and
decrease to 8.5¢ per Kwh for use over 1,000 Kwh.
This ci ty is near the Kodiak Oil and Gas Province and there are several
potential hydropower sites, one of which, Terror Lake (18.44 MW installed,
9.2 MW prime), is a very good candidate for future development. With an
Index Cost of 24.9, the Terror Lake project is a "10ca1 interest
powersite" and has several positive factors in favor of its 'implementation
(Table 8-1).
CORDOVA
The Southcentral Alaskan city of Cordova is located at the entrance of the
Copper River Vall~ on the southeast shore of Prince William Sound. A
home-rule city wi th a manager-council fonn of governnent, Cordova has a
population of 2,046.
Supporting the area's econany are the Prince William Sound fishery and
fish processing plants. Government services for the surrounding area
contribute significantly to the work force. Oil developments offshore
enhance the long-range growth potential of this canmunity. An industrial
area is proposed for the harbor area which will be created by reclaimed
acreage fran harbor dredging. In the private sector an industrial zone,
canplete with port fac l1ities, is being ini tiated. This will allow for
the berthing of deep draft vessel s and industrial warehouses. The Ci ty of
Cordova plans to expand the muniCipal dock staging area and dock
facilities. Growth projections for Cordova are moderate unless the Alaska
Highway System 1s extended into the city in which case growth would
probab 1 y be acc e 1 era ted.
Cordova has extensive and frequent air line connections with the rest of
the State and is on Alaska Marine Highway System. There is some truck
service but no rail service. At present there are approximately 20 miles
of highway extending from Cordova east to Alaganik.
8-10
The c1 imate is moderate in temperature wi th high precipitation and light
winds, as follows:
Average Temperature
(Degrees Fahrenheit)
Period Min. Max.
January' 20.6 21.9
July 48.0 61.0
Annual 33.6 46.6
Average Annual Precipitation .......................... 167 in.
Elevation ................................ Sea Level to 400 ft.
Preva il ing Wind 01 recti on •.•..•••••.•••••.•.•••.•••.•.... East
Mean Hourly Speed ...................................... 4.9 mph
There is a weekly newspaper, Cable T.V. and an AM radio station in
Cordova. There are 560 students enrolled in the school system. There are
numerous pubHc services and accomodations inc1 udi ng a 22-bed hospital, a
medical clinic, a public library and recreation areas.
Electricity is produced by a 8150 Kw diesel generator and supplied by
Cordova Public Utilities to residential and commercial users at rates
ranging from $10.00 (minimum charge) for the first 100 Kwh to 3.8S¢ /Kwh
for use over 10,000 Kwh.
The ci ty is near the Bering River Coal Fie1 d and the Gu1 f of Alaska
Tertiary Oil and Gas Region. Sixty miles Southeast of Cordova, in the
Katalla area, the first discovery oil well in Alaska was drilled in 1903.
The first successful commercial oil production in Alaska was at Katal1a
and continued for 30 years.
There are several potential hydropower sites for Cordova, five of which
are shown on Table 8-1. Three are considered possible selections because
of their relative index costs: Wood Canyon (Index Cost 3.2), Tebay Lakes
(Index Cost 23.6) and Power Creek (Index Cost 20.9). Power Creek is
considered a possible site for development as it is a "10ca1 interest"
powersite with the local electric utility having an interest in its
development. At present time it 1s not considered likely for development.
There are adverse environmental conditions surrounding development of the
other two sites.
8-11
<Xl
I
N
Site Name & Location
KOTZEBUE
Iglchuk (Agashashok) RIYer .11es
21 and 26 of Noatak RiYer
Upper Canyon -Noatut River
(Mlshlguk)
NOME
Imuruk Basin (Tuksuk Gorge) -
Tuksuk Channel
Fish River
BETHEL
Kisarallk River -GoldNi t;"te Site
Oamsite at lower Fa11\ on
Kisaralik River
TABLE 8-1 PAGE 1 of 5
POTENTIAL HYDROPOWER SITES FOR
CITIES WITH 2000 -5000 POPULATION
Installed Capacity(r.lW) Transmission Relative Cost
186 installed3
174 installed 3
66 Installed3
7 prime
36 installedl
18.2 prime
18 miles 4
73 mil es 4
20 m; les4
50 mfl e'>
$800 KW3
$18003
4t KW(l975)
$1545 KW 2
(no transmission)
Environmental Conditions
The drainage pattern of the Arctic Slope
comprises a system of closely spaced, nearly
parall~l streams originating on the north
slopes of the Brooks Range and flowing north.
They reach the foothills before intercepting
significant drainage, continue northward In
shallow incised channels and on flat grad-
Ients across wide plains and tundra swamps
to the Arctic Ocean, 50 to 150 .Iles away. A
few rivers in the westerly part of the area
drain low ridges near the coast. The head-
waters and principal tributaries of the
Colville River confonQ to this typical drain-
age pattern. There, streams offer no natural
power head. Reconnaissance disclosed no
damsltes capable of development within tall-
water escape distance to tidewater without
freezing.4
Exploration may r~veal dike aTr~ of right
abutml>nt to ha\l" e>.<ess wate'-lo<;s.J
The vi 11 age of Noatuk and its h"Jlng strlr
woul~ need to be moved.4
Included as lowpst priced hydroelectric site
on Seward Penh"ula.J
CP ,
w
TABLE 8-1 PAGE 2 of 5
POTENTIAL HYDROPOWER SITES FOR
CITIES WITH 2000 -5000 POPULATION
Site Name & location Installed Capacity(MW) Transmission Relative Cost
BETHEl (con.)
Crooked Creek Project -
Kuskokwim River
mOIAK
Terror River -Terror lake
Spiridon lake -Unganik Say
Frazier lake
ll9anik lake -Uganik Bay
COROOVA
Power Creek -discharges Into
[yak lake
2140 ins ta lled
1070 prime
18.44 installed
9.2 prime
2.64 prime
5.36 prime
10.72 installed
10.2 prime
20.4 installed
7.2'> prillll!
1.0 prillll!
Tebay River -near outlet of 30.7 prime
lower Tebay lakes 21.3 pri-e
wI diversion of
Falls Ck.
Bremner River -river mile
13.9
46 prime
20 miles
60 miles
100 mil es
45 lIIiles
7 mil es
100 miles
or 34 miles
Valdez -72
McCarthy -68
100 miles
Valdez -72
McCarthy -76
$500 K'oI3
13.3(1954 )
10.5(1954)
14.5(1954)
25.4(1954)
14 mills (1950)
9 mf1ls (1950)
81111115 (1950)
Environmental Conditions
Excessive environmental impact on fisheries
and wildlife. Economic cost of inundated land
would be unacceptable.
Severe Icing conditions would not be
encountered as in colder areas of the state,
so continuous operations would be more
reliable. Due to rainfall in both SUlllll!!r
and winter, the storage capacity of a
resevoir would be more effective. Trans-
mission would be easy due to gentle terrain.
Transmission terrain difficult.
Transmission terrain difficult. "0 fish runs
would be blocked.
Transmission terrain difficult. The project
as authorized In Report 5, Harbours & Rivers
Study (1954), would completely block fish
from the area. Cos t of dal! very expensive
due to required dam structure.
Access Is difficult; It would require crossing
Copper River and 64 miles of construction to
reach Richardson Hwy at Thompson Pass. If
highway were built to Cordova over abandoned
Copper River and Northwestern Railway grade.
access to site would be only 34 miles.
This site requires crossing Copper River for
access and 48 miles of road construction to
Richardson Highway.
(Xl
I
Site Name & location
CORDOVA (con.)
Copper River -Wood Canyon
Peninsula -Copper River
(Cleave) (river mile 49.5)
PETERSBURG-WRANGEll
Anita
Anita and Kunk lakes
Hill Creek/Virginia lake
Mainland
Sunrise lake
Ruth take -Mainland
Crystal lake Expansion
Cascade Creek Mainland
Cascade Creek II -Mainland
TABLE 8-1 PAGE 3 of 5
POTENTIAL HYDROPOWER SITES FOR
CITIES WITH 2000 -5000 POPULATION
Installed Cap3city(MW) Transmission Relatiye Cost
800 priOlE'
340 orir.le
4 installr!1
2.1 prime
8 installed l
3.83 pri.e l
6 installed l
3 pri.e
4 installedl
2.4 priMe
16 i IIsta lleil1
7.95 prillle
2.5 Installed l
.4 pri.e
15 Installedl
5.1 priMe
36 installed1
17.9 pri.e 1
14 a I r to
Petersburg
15 a I r to
Petersburg
3.1 mills (19!9)
1468 installed1
2796 prime
1141 ins ta 11 ed 1
2383 prime
1178 Ins talled1
2357 prime
1043 installed1
1739 prime
1460 installed1
2938 prime l
1760 Installed1
11000 prime
1530 Ins ta lIed1
4501 primel
593 ins ta 11 ed ]
1192 prime l
Environmental Conditions
Copper River sustains largest runs of salmon
of any stream in area. Provision of fish
facilities would be a major cost of project.
Principal affected settlements would be
Chitna & lower Tonsina. 20 miles from Edger-
ton Hwy would be relocated. A portion of the
abandoned Copper River & tlorthwestern would
be unredeemable.
Reservior area supports growth of small timber
!4inimal potential as agricultural land;
mineral deposits in area are negligible.
A dam would affect fish runs. The abandoned
Copper River & Northwestern Railway would be
inundated so not possible as a road route to
Cordova.
Site Na~ & Location
PETERSBURG-WRANGEll (con.)
Scenery lake -Mainland
Anan lake -Mainland
Tyee Creek -Mainland
ex>
I Aaron Creek -Ma i oland
U'I
Mill Creek -Mainlalld
Ta-Creek -MainlMld
Harding River -Mainland
White River -Mainland
Thoms lake -Wrangell I s land
McHenry lake -Etolin Is land
Knuk lake -Etolin Island
TABLE 8-1 PAGE 4 of 5
POTENTIAL HYDROPOWER SITES FOR
CITIES WITH 2000 -5000 POPULATION
Ins ta 11 ed Capac.i ty (1-1W) Transmission Relative Cost
18 installed 1
9.1 prime l
] ins ta lled I
27 installed l
12 6
1.3 installeds
1.6 installed5
9.8 installed s
2.8 -7.55 installed
1.2 installed s
1.5 installeds
1.4 insta l1ed s
20 air to
Petersburg
29 ai r miles
to Wrangel15
38 air to
Wrangell 5
20 air to
Peters burgS
7 a ir to
Wrangell 5
32 air tg
Wrangell
33 air tg
Wrangell
37 air to
Wrangell
18 air tg
Wrangell
36 air to
Wrangell 5
13 air to
Wrange 11 5
1238 installedl
2452 prime l
$600 1(W3
En.v i ronmen ta 1 Condit ions
lower reaches of the streams are considered
to be good salmon spawning and rearing areas,
but lake is not accessable to salmon. Trans-
mission line distance to Petersburg & Wrangell
(via long water crossings) are 27 & 61 ~iles
respectively & involve water crossings of 4
miles and 1.5 miles. Very difficult terrain fi
for transmission line location exists between
Scenery Creek & Cascade Creek a distance of
about 5 miles.
Run of .. her plaRt wi th inadequate st'Or.l:1je
c:.epabilllf' .$ftewn as ann"81 .prime powr aM
probable 6 month prime power.s
Run of river plant with inadequate storage
capability shown as annual pr~me power and
probably 6 month prime power.
ex>
I
O"l
Site Name & location
PETERSBURG-WRANGEll (con.)
Meneffe lake -Etolin Island
Goat Creek
Thomas Bay (Ca,cade Creek)
Put Creek -limoria Straits
Olive lake
Eagle lake
Spur Mountain lake
Bra.dfield Canal
Sweetheart lakes
(Sweetheart Falls)
TABLE 8-1 PAGE 5 of 5
POTENTIAL HYDROPOWER SITES FOR
CITIES WITH 2000 -5000 POPULATION
Installed Capacity(MW}
2 installed';
20 ins ta II ed 3
38 installed 3
1.5 -2.4 installed6
9.26
29 installed3
Transmission Relative Cost
28 to Wrange11 5
$800 3 KW
Environmental Conditions
I Electric Power in Alaska 1978-1995, Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska. August 1976 Costs are indicated in 1976 dollars.
~ A Re9ion~ Electric Power System for Jhe ~ Kuskokwim Vicinity, Robert W. Retherford Associates. July 1975.
IrSUlTIIlary of lower Priced Hydroelectric PotentIals." Alaska Power Survey 1969.
4 Interim ~eport No.6, Northwestern Alaska. Harbours IlRTVers in Alaska Survey Report, U. S. Corps of Engineers. June I, 1957.
5 Interim ~~. 1 ~outheastern Alaska. Harbours & Rivers in Alaska Survey Report. U. S. Corps of Engineers. Feb. 15. 1952.
6 AJaska 's ~ Resources, Vol.· I. Alaska Division of Energy and Power Development for U. S. Department of Energy, Anchorage. Alaska, OctGber 1977.
PETERSBURG/WRANGELL
Southeast Alaska, a region with thousands of mountain lakes, water falls
and streams and extensive rain forests of hemlock, cedar and spruce t t,as
two mid-range communities, Wrangell and Petersburg. Both are home-rule
cities with a council-manager fom of government. Located 30 miles apart
the cities are similar in population size and economic base. Petersburg,
on Mitkof Island~ has 2,126 residents within the city limits; Wrangell, on
the northwest end of the Wrangell Island, is sl ightly larger with a
population of 3,152.
These coastal ci ties have ice free harbors year round. The climate in
each community is moderate with high precipitation levels. Both cities
are on the Alaska Marine Highway and have routine scheduled air service.
There are truck and water freight-l ine services. Wrangell has a transit
system .
The economy in both communities is based primarily in wood products and
fishing industries, and their supportive services. Petersburg is referred
to as Alaska's "Little Norway" and is famous for its fishing.
Each community has a newspaper and cable television service; there is one
radio station serving both cities.
Wrangell has a twelve bed hospital, medical clinic and eleven bed
long-term care unit. There are community recreation facilities and public
services, ten churches, one public library, two financial institutions and
a museum. Over 550 students are in the elementary and high school s.
There is a twenty five bed hospital in Petersburg, with eight churches,
one library, two banks, one financial institution, and numerous public
services and facilities.
Electricity generation and supply is separate for each canmunity. The
City of Wrangell supplies electricity to its users fran a 7,725 Kw diesel
generati on sys tem. The rates start at a $5.50 minimum for 0-50 Kwh (0-"40
Kwh for canmercia1) and decrease to 3.3¢ per Kwh for use over 201 Kwh for
residential (over 300 Kwh for canmercia1). The city of Petersburg has a
canbined hydroelectric and diesel generation system, with a 4,555 Kw oil
diesel generation system and 2000 Kw hydroelectric generation at the
Crystal Lake site.
Petroleum resources in Southeast are thought to be small; however,
undiscovered recoverable 011 is estimated as high as 2.9 billion barrels
and undiscovered recoverable gas at 17.7 trillion cubic feet. There are
coal resources, predaninant1y lignite, at several locations in Southeast
A1 aska.
The hydroe1 ectric potential of the numerous lakes and streams is the most
significant natural resource for Wrangell and Petersburg. There are many
1 ikely small hydroe1 ectric si tes because of the exi stence of numerous
drainage basins with high run off rates. Three candidate sites, all
IIl oca1 interest powersites," stand out as particularly viable development
possibilities: Cascade Creek (Thomas Bay), the Crystal Lake expansion
program and Virginia Lake. There is also the possibility of utilizing a
reservoir at the City of Petersburg. If development takes place it could
include an inter-tie between Wrangell and Petersburg.
8-18
APPENDIX 8-A
ALASKA'S HYDROELECTRIC RESOURCES INVENTORY
Among the tasks included in Phase 1 of the Alaska Regional Energy Re-
sources Planning Project was one calling for the preparation of an
inventory of Alaska's hydroelectric resources. The inventory which
resulted from this first year's effort by the Division of Energy and Power
Development identified 382 water power sites. The sites are located in
all six Man-in-the-Arctic Program (MAP) regions of Alaska: Arctic,
Northwest, Southwest, Southcentral, Interior and Southeast. This water
power inventory drew upon seven sources of infonnation, which included
inventories and speCial purpose lists of hydrosites previously prepared by
several Federal agencies. For this first state inventory, see Chapter
4, Vol. 2, Alaska Regional Energy Resources Planning Project, Phase 1,
dated October 1977.
As the development of the first inventory progressed, different points of
view on what constituted an "inventory" of hydroelectric sites emerged.
An inventory was construed by some to mean a "barebones" list of
hydropower sites, just those presently bei ng cons idered for development
near the larger communities. Others thought the inventory should be just
the cheapest sites to build, and others thought every possible hydropower
site in the State should be listed, no matter how small or how large. It
was finally decided to define the State's hydroelectric resources
inventory as one which would include all previously inventoried
hydroelectric sites, developed and undeveloped. We concluded that in
order to develop a responsible statewide energy planning program, it would
be necessary to go back to the beginning and identify the hydropower sites
studied by others since the turn of the century. The only seeming gap in
infonnation appears to be in the Southwest Region, where possibly not as
much fiel d work has been done on hydroel ectric sites as has been done in
other regions. Because of the upward spiraling costs of fossil fuels,
many hydro sites not now possible to develop -due to high cost factors or
technological limitations -may well be developable in the future.
8-19
Phase 2 of the Planning Project called for an updated hydropower inven-
tory. This resulted in the cursory review of 28 additional sources of
infonnation which revealed an additional 255 sites names. There is now a
total of 637 names listed (the Phase 2 inventory includes the names listed
in Phase 1). However, some sites have more than one name, consequent1 y
several duplications exist, reducing the actual number of sites to
probably less than 600. A total of 35 bibliographic and map sources were
used in the October 1977 Phase 1 and the March 1978 Phase II Hydropower
Resources Inventories. These sources from other inventories were selected
from approximately 200 citations listed in our hydropower bibliography and
map list and were chosen primarily because of the infonnation in the
annotations of an excellent bibliography prepared for the Alaska Power
Administration by Henry Herfindahl, dated Septanber 1969 and entitled
"Waterpower in Alaska." With only 35 sources reviewed and some 165, or
more, ranaining for review, it would appear possible that a large number
of sites remain to be combed from the literature. This may be the case,
but we suspect that the richest sources of hydropower sites have probably
already been reviewed. Unquestionably, the review was not in depth.
Several Federal agencies provided substantial assistance to the project
team:
United States Department of Energy, Alaska Power
Administration in Juneau, Alaska
United States Department of the Interior, Geological
Survey in Portland, Oregon
United States Department of the Interior, Geological
Survey in Anchorage, Alaska
United States Department of the Interior, Alaska
Resources Library in Anchorage, Alaska
Un ited States Anny Di strict Corps of Eng; neers in
Anchorage, Alaska
Federal Energy Regul a tory Commi ssion in Washington,
D.C.
Also, Carl Steeby, Professional Engineer, of Robert Retherford & Associ-
ates provided substantial assistance toward the project.
8-20
00
I
N
I-" ,
,
ARC'l'I C REG [ON "I. A. P. Sheet 1 of ]7
Power S i tel Strealll
ANUoa River (Wlla River
Chandalar East Fork Chanda-
lar
tal H k fiend Colville River
I(uch.!r Creek Colvi lie River
Pitll\egn River PitmeY3 River
TABLE 8-A-l
DIVISION Of fNERGY & POWER DEVELorMENT
II.VnHORY Of I'OlENlIAL HYDROELECTRIC SITES IN ALASAA
MaLch 15, 1978
U.S.G,S Map Sheet Drainage 'Lu hilum Average
Area ~eQu1ated lIead
(sq. mi.) Water (teet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Lookout Ridge 605 1000 528 -
Arctic 2500 Z025 162
Kill ik River 9780 700 218
Killik River 6240 975 120
------------
•
I ._--. ___ 1 __
Average Percent rinn Installed Index
Annual Re9ula-Energy Capac j tyl Cost
Runoff tion (nlill ion Plant Fac-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ae. ft. ) {-l (%)
230 100 101 21 5S 62.9
680 100 90 19 55 56.0
4100 97 718 148 55 26.6
2600 100 ZS4 53 55 35.4
---------').4 -----
-
.. _ i-___ ._. ____ ._._
Q)
I
N
N
DIVISION Of ENERGY & POWER DEVELOPMENT
INVENTORY Of POTENTIAL HYDROELECTRIC SITES IN ALASKA
J-1arch IS, 1978
NORTHUI::ST REGION M.A.P. Sheet 2 of J7
Power Site/ Stream U.S.G.S Hap Sheet Drainage tldxiRlunl Average
Area Regulated /lead
(sq. 111.) Water (reet)
Sur race
Elevation
-(feet)
Agashashok (Igichuk) Noatak River Noatak 1'.-2 12700 150 132
Anv U:. R i Iter Anvik River Una hk leet B-2,] ---------
Buckland Riyer Buckland Rher Candle 0-5 2410 130 103
Candle KuvaHk Rher ------------
Canyon. Upper (See H1 sheguk ) ------------
Cohi lle Colville Rher -------------
fish Iljyer fish River Solomon 0-3 1120 150 103
19ichak (See Agashashok ) ------------
Igushik Noatak Rher ---12200 ------
Imuruk 8asin esee Tuksuk Gorge) --------. ---
Kisaraltk Rive,' KisaralH Rher Bethel 8-), e-J ---------
Klwalik Uwaltk River ------------
Kobuk River Kobuk Rher 8.11rd Mtn A-I 7840 150 114
Kobuk River. Opper Kobuk River Shungnak 2910 275 62
Kogoluktuk River Koguluktuk River Shungnak 0-2 412 400 129
Koyuk Koyuk River -----------
~
Kruz9a.eP~ (Pilgr1m) ---------------
Kugruk Kugruk RiVer --------. ---
Kukpult Kukpuk Rtver ------------
Kuzltrtn River luzttr1n River Bendleben }\-6 1790 1 SO 95
(Bunker Hill Si tel
Misheguk Noatak River Baird Htll 0-6 8700 550 199
Average Percent rinN I'ls La 11 ed Index
Annual Regula-Energy Capacityl Cost
RUlloff tion (1lI111 ion Plant fac-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ae. ft.} (rw) (I)
7500 100 820 186 50 8.1
------59.5 14 49 ---
930 100 79 16 55 42
---------1.9 -----
--------------.--
---------10.2 -----
720 100 60 13 55 48
-----------------
2210 ------20-90 -----
-----------------.
-----159 36 50 ---
---------13.6 -----
5700 100 526 120 50 15.8
2200 99 114 23 .55 39.5
lSI 100 31 8 55 27 .2
---------16 -----
-----------.~ -----
---------2.2 -----
---------2.7 -----
860 100 67 14 55 49.4
5600 03 760 174 50 I 10.8
.•. _-1----
I
DIVISION Of ENERGY & POWLR OEVUOI'H£NT
INVENTORY Of POTENTIAL HYDROELECTRIC SITES IN ALASKA
March 15, 19711
NORTIIWI::S1' REGION M.A.P. Sheet 3 of 37
Power S i tel Strealll U.S.G.S ~1ap Sheet Drainage l1.lx illlUIII Average
Area Regulated llead
(sq. Inl.) Water ( feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Nlflliuktu~ Noatak River Baird Mtn. 0-6 7000 750 166
Pass Creel:. Kruzgamepa River Sol DIllOn 0-6 ---------
Sa lulOrl lake Kruzgamepa River 50101110" 0-6 107 500 155
SolO11lOo lake ------------
luksu\:' Gorye Tuksuk Channel TeHer 1.-2 4215 190 187
Upper Canyon Unit (See Agashasnok) ------------
I
,~ I
Avel'alje Perc en t firm Installed Inde~
Al1l1ua I Regula-Energy Capael tyl Cost
Runoff UOH (hli II ion Pl'-Ilt Fllc-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ac. ft. ) (II..., ) (%)
4500 100 613 140 50 12.7 I
---------30 -----
267 70 24 5 55 126
-----------------
1680 100 289 66 50 19
----------------
I
J
I
_.~L.--..
ex>
I
N
~
01VISJOfC Of ENERGY & POWER OEVllOI'M[lH
INVENTORY OF POTENTlAl tnDROELECTRIC SITES HI ALASKA
March 1S, 1978
IN'l'ERIOU REGION M.A.P • Sheet 4 of 37 .
Power 5i te/ StI'ealR U,S.G.S H<lp Sheet OrainagE! II.'" imum Average
A,'ea le!)ulated Head
(sq. 1111.) Water (feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Alatna River Alatna River lIughes 2860 125 109
Alatna Rher. Upper Alatna River Survey PaSS 1325 1050 158
Btg Oelta Tanana River Big OeltA 11.-4 15300 1100 99
Btrch Birch Creek ------------
Browne Nenana Rtver Fairbanks A-S 2450 1000 207
Bruskasnd Nenana River Healy 8-4 650 2330 212
CalApbe 11 lhver (See Porcupine) ------------
Carlo Nenana Rtver lIealy C-4 1190 1900 166
Cathedral 81uffs tanana River Tanacross 8-6 8550 1650 146 .
Cathedral Rapids ---------------
Chandalar River E.F. Chandalar Chandalar 5500 1100 169
East-fort. Zl_11IIiI1
Creel<:
Chanda hr Riller E.F. Chandalar Chandalar 5500 900 99
East fork. Afterbay
Chanda lar Rh'er foF. CMnda lar Christian 4200 1600 132
East Fo,-le. L ttle
Rock
Chatantka lIydro Chatantka Rtver llvengood A-I --------
Chatantka River Chatllntka River Livengood .1'-4 710 500 91
Chena River Chena R1ver Bi9 ~lta DoS 950 900 IOI
Chena Slouqh Chen" Slough (3(Jo\i) fairbanks 0-1,2 ---------
Chisna Chisna R1ver ---------. --
.
Average Percent fin. Ills ta lied Index
Annual Regula-Energy Capac i tyl Cost
Runoff tion (1IIlllion Plant fac-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ac. ft.) (IIW) (~)
2000 100 175 36 55 23.1
920 100 123 25 55 64.5
12500 98 91)7 226 50 16.8
---------4 -----
3400 66 385 80 55 58
826 ?J 'lj 40 50 'lj
-----------------
1670 83 840 30 50 10.7
5800 100 693 ISS 50 15.3
-----------------
1500 100 210 44 SS 29.3
1500 100 122 25 55 21.1
1150 85 119 25 55 70.3
---------6 Clos kI 1967
420 99 32 1 55 63
523 99 46 10 55 128
---------0.011 -----
---------4.7 ,.----
CP
I
N
U'1
D 1 V I S I Off Of ENERGY & POWER OfVUOJ'/1DH
INVENrOR~ Of POTENTIAL HYDROELECTRIC S ITfS III ALASKA
March 15, 1978
INTERIUR RFGION MAP . Sheet 5 of 37
Power Silel StreaUI U. S.{~.S Hop Sheet Drainage HJximulH A.enlge Average Percent
Area ~egulateJ Head Annual Regula-
(sq. !IIi.) Water (feet) Runoff t ion
Surface (1000
Elevation ac. ft.)
(feet)
Chisanil River Chlsana Rher Nebesna A-J 732 3250 8t13 1100 100
Oulbi Koyukuk River Kateel River 8-1 25660 225 68 19200 100
Fortymi Ie Riller For tym 1 Ie Eagle B-1 6060 1550 324 3230 84
fortymi Ie IIF North Fork Forty-Eagle B-2 2065 ISOO 249 1400 85
.He
FortYlUi I p Sf South Fork forty-Eagle 1\-2 2800 1775 228 1500 88
mOe
fry Island Koyukuk River Helozitna 0-4 19950 270 54 14000 100
Gerst Ie Tanana River Ht Hayes 0-2 10700 1290 59 9500 ---
Good Pastor Good Pastor RIver ------------------
Healy Nenana River llealy 0-4 1900 1700 291 2675 Y
Hughes Koyukuk Ri ver lIughes A-3 18700 320 49 12300 100
Jack River Jack Rtver ------------------
Jack White Koyukuk River Bettles 4]50 800 136 ]000 ---
Jil11 River-Jim Rher Bettles 0-2 470 975 162 320 100
John Ri v(!r John River Wiseman A-4 2695 800 107 1900 90
Johnson Tanana River "tHayes C-2 10450 1470 149 7830 97
Junct lou Is!ant! Tanana River Kantishna River 42490 400 114 25000 100
Kaltag River Yukon River Nulato 296000 200 117 137000 ---
Kant i shoa River Kanttshna RIver Kant i shna River 5440 500 95 5200 99
Kanutl Koyukuk Hughes 17970 500 166 H900 lOa
l iven!jood Dalll ------15 7500 100 51 -
---------.~.-.---_._\.-.._.
fin. Installed Index
[Iler~ Capacityl Cost
(uri 11 ion PI.nt fac~
Kwh) tor
(II..,) (I)
797 170 55 21.8
lQ70 244 50 14.8
723 166 SO 8.9
245 51 55 17.2
245 51 55 24.9
622 111\ 55 -~-
438 100 50 17
---3 -----
Y 130 50 Y
482 110 50 11.2
---13 -----
J15 65 55 18.1
4] 9 55 42.6
149 31 55 38.8
920 210 SO 16.1
2330 537 50 1 S.I
13100 3000 55 ---
394 82 !i5 22.2
1612 36f\ 5il 12.2
---350 -----
OIVISIOIt OF ENERGY & POWER O[VELOP~IElH
INVENTORY OF POTENTIAL HYDROELECTRIC SITES IN ALASKA
March IS, 1978
INTERIOR RKGION H.A.P. sheet 6 of 31
POl'ler Si Ie/ Strealll U.S.G.S lid., Sheet Drainage t13 x i IIIUIII A.erage
Area ~e9ulilted IIc<ld
(sq. IIi.) \later (feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
McKinley River HcKinley River Ht McKinley B-3 710 IllS 297
Helozitnil Heloli tna River Ruby 0-6 2659 550 210
Helozitn,l Riller HelozHna River MelozHna 0-4 2020 700 129
Moody Hen a 1141 ------------
Habesna ... besna River tlabesna 0-3 2145 2025 191
Nenalla Nenana River ------------
Howl tlla River NowHII4I River Ruby B-2 2570 450 180
Porcupille Porcup1ne River Coleen B-1 23400 975 313
Rompart Yulcon Tanana 8-3 200000 665 445
Rock Lake Ptanalgan Creek fokCarthy 0-1 93 3600 514 ..
Ruby Yukon ---.--466 72
Sa lcha River Salch.1 River 81g Delta C-5 1990 975 136
Shovel Creek (See Chatan1ka ) -----------.
Slagle IlenaIl4l ------------
Tanana \liver hnana River Dig Delta 8-6 16080 900 107
TatJallika Tatl.n1k.· ---------.-.
Teklanikil River Telclan1k. River lIealy 0-6 520 1800 45]
Totatlanika River Totat!anika River fa i rbanks A-4 250 1600 420
Vachon I s I ,Uld Tall<lOa River KanUstma River 44500 350 96
Walker Cl'eel; Henana River Fa Irbanks A-5 23)0 1200 166
Wonder Creek -----------.. . --
---
Average rercent fin" I us taliI'd Index
Annual Regula-Energy Capacity/ Cost
Runoff tlon (_ill\on rlant fac-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ae. ft. ) (DroI) (%)
910 90 201 42 55 42.3
1400 91 282 64 SO 11.2
1100 100 117 13 55 48.5
---------20 -----
2300 88 320 66 55 33.9
---------24 -----
1900 100 280 58 55 16. I
9100 100 2320 530 50 5.0
81000 100 34200 !i040 15 2.0
140 98 58 12 55 56.5
------780 1460 -----
1170 95 123 25 55 69.4
--. --------------
---------30 -----
14500 25 315 65 55 43.1
-----------------
728 100 272 51 55 24.2
320 100 114 2<t 55 33.1
26000 96 2050 426 55 29
3300 35 166 35 55 81.5
---------------
~ ..• ~---
co ,
N -...
DIVISION OF ENERGY & POWER DEVELOr.~NT
INVENTORY OF POTENTIAL IIYOROElECTRIC SITES It! ilLASKA
March 15. 1978
INTRRIOR REGION M.A.P. Sheet 7 or 37
POI.,er Site I Stream U.S.G.S Hap Sheet Drainage Hay.imlllll AlIerilgc
IIn'!iI {cyul.ltetl lIead
(sq.ftli.) Water (feet)
Surfa.:!':
Elevation
(feet)
Woodchol'l)er Yukon Charley River B-~ 122000 1020 )00
Yanert tlo. 2 Nenana River flea I}, C-4 1190 2200 232
Zhllnennal! (See Chandalar, E. F d:.)
\
,
-. .. -
Average Percent F11"l11 Insta1led Index
Anllual Regula-Energy Capacityl Cost
RUlloff tion {million Plant fae-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ac. ft. ) (nw) (t)
57600 100 14200 2160 75 4.5
1670 93 298 62 5S 37.2
__ • __ ., __ ~ L.... ____ ._. :..---•••• -
(Xl
I
N
l»
I
DIVISION OF ENERGY & POH£R DEVllOPt~ENT
INVENTORY OF POTEItTIAl IIYOROELECTRIC S lIES lit IILJ\SIU\
March 1" 1978
SOU1'\JWE$1' REGION H. A. P. Sheet 8 of )7
Powel' Sitel Stream U.S.G.S ~lap Sheet Drainage Ilax imulH liver age
Area ~e9ul il ted lIeild
(sq. mI.) Watel' (feet)
Sudaee
Elevation
(feet)
Aguluwal: Hivel' ---------------
Alagnak River Al.gnak River i I iaRlIla 1\-0 530 775 170
Auleriean Creel:: Merican Creek Ht Katmal \}-4 100 1625 861
8echarof EggegU River Naknek j);.) 1280 70 58
Chignik 1 SfIOIoIbird Creek Chignik 8-2 ---------
Chignik 2 llId;.n Creek Chignik 8-2 ---------
ChUcuminuk Allm River Taylor Htos 286 610 262
Chuilnak River Upper AtctlUtlRk River 110ly Cross 0-5 162 625 103
(Atchuel1nguk)
Contact Creek CDauct Creek Ht I(a tlIIa t A-' 54 1050 274
Crescent lake Crescmt take ------------
Crooked Creek luskolvl. River SleelllUte 0-6 31100 500 352
Elva lake Eln Creek Goodnews ---------
Graut Grant lake ------------
Granl lake 'rlAt Creek ------------
Grechn Rive," Greetan River ------------
Grosvenor GrosftflOr take ------------
Holy Cross Yukon River Holy Cross 320000 131 94
11 tamna lake Kvld1ak River Oi ll1nghalll A-2 6445 150 114
Indian (rclit' ---------------
I ngerso 1 l1jit River lake Clark 6-J 300 1460 H2O
Avel'age Percent flrlll I liS ta 11 ed Index
Annua 1 Regula-Energy Capad tyl Cost
RUlloff tion (.1 It i on Plant fae-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ae. ft.) (lTW) (I) ,
---------42.3 -----
960 15 41 10 55 53.5
180 95 120 25 55 22.7
1600 100 16 16 55 21.3
-------"f-0.015 -----
---------0.06 £Xis s --
800 90 154 32 55 22.8
140 95 11 2 55 422
92 65 13 3 55 354
---------41 -----
32400 100 9400 2140 50 5
------10.8 2.5 49 ---
---------2 -----
---------II -----
---------40 -----
---------9 -----
160000 100 12300 2800 50 9
14600 100 1170 313 50 11.1
-.---------------
695 99 6)0 144 50 14.2
DIVISION Of ENERGY & POWER {l[V[lOl'ItFNT
INVENTORY Of POTENT IAl IlYORO£lEClRIC SITES IN ALASKA
March 15, 1978
. 50U1'III-lE$'1' REGION M.A. P. Sheet 9 of J7
Power S 1 I (' I StretllJ U.S.r..S Map Sheet Drainage H.1>I_ Alo'erage
Area ~egulated lIedd
(sq. 1111.) II. ter-(feet)
Svrf.ce
Elevation
(feet)
Kakhonak Lake Kakhonalc Rher I Hamna 8-4 145 300 200
Kanatak Creek Big' little Kana-Ugashlk C-l -----. ---
talc Creek
Ktjik (See J ngerso 11 ------------
Kontra"hiblllla Tanalan River lake Clark A-4 200 510 226
Kulcaklel:. take Alagnak River iliamna A-7 400 825 326
Kul ik lill:e Wind River Dillingham D-8 236 123 30
Kusicokwilu River Koskokwi. Rher McGrath ,,-1 870 2000 114
South fork
btchak (See lit -.t late) ------------
lad-bulla. lilt.e (See IngersoJ J ------------
Naknek IQlcnel R her Naknek C-2 2720 I~O 124
Newhalen "$/halen River iliamna D-6 3319 325 74
"hhl il:. . "Ishlik late ------------
Honvianuk lake Ho{lll1anuk River II iamna 1>.-7 370 631 IlS
Huyaicuk Lake Huyakulc River Dillin9ham O-E 1510 342 176
Snowbird ---------------
Tanal in ---------------
Tilzilllind Tut.IM River 11 iamna 0-5 345 725 393
Tikchil:: (See Huyakulc late) ------------
Twin Twin Lakes ------------
Ugashik lakes Ugashik River Ugashik C-J IHO <,() 33
Avel"age Percent FlrlJl In"talled Index
Annual Regula-[nel'gy Capacity! Cost
RUlloff lion (lIIiI lion Plant he-
(JOOO . Kwh) tor
ac. ft. ) (aw) (OX)
275 100 45 9 55 53.8
---------0.25 -----
-----------------
461 99 83 17 55 11.6
870 100 232 53 50 10.9
3800 100 95 20 55 40.6
840 60 12 15 35 112
-----------------
--~ --------------
4600 100 473 108 50 \3.2
6675 100 4\1 85 55 11.9
---------1.7 -----
670 100 63 13 55 22.6
4300 90 555 127 50 15.9
--------------
-----------------
724 96 224 51 50 IS
-----~. -----------
-----------------
1100 100 30 6 55 50.2
(Xl
I
W o
DIVISION OF ENERGY 10 POWER DEVELOP/mIT
INVENTORY Of POTENTIAL HYDROELECTRIC SITES IN ALASKA
HarGh 15, 1978
SOU'J·III'~:ST REGION H. A. P. Sheet 10 of 37 ---"
Power Sil,,/ Strea"l U.S.G.S ~\.)p Sheet Drainage ~\.)Xillllllll Average
Area ~e!1111 a le,1 lIead
(sq. mi.) Water ( feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Uhk River Ukak River Hl Ka tmal 8-4 194 375 145
UJlfIuk Late Tlkchik Rlver Taylor Hlns 100 830 170
Average Percent Finn Ins t.llled Index
Annual Regu}a-Energy Capacityl Cost
Runoff tlon (million Plant fac-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ac. ft.) (nw) (I)
JJO 75 30 6 SS 164
280 100 39 8 5S 46.6
co
I
W
--'
DIVISION Of fNERGY & POWER DEV[lOPH(Hr
INV£fITORY OF POTtHTIAl IIYDROEUCTRI( SIHS IN AlAS~
March lS, 1970
SOU'fIlCEtlTMI. REGION M.A. P. Sheet 11 of :)7 -----
PO~II~r S i leI Stream U.S.G.S ~Iar Sheet Ikainaqe fl,lX illlUIII Averdge Ayerage Percent rfrm
Area {egu I a tt'd lIead Annual Regula-Energy
(sq .• i.) Water (feet) RUlloff tion (1110 lion
Surface ( 1000 Kwh)
Eleyation ac. ft. )
(feet)
Alaska Pacific Sa Imn Unnamed Creek'on Seward B-2 ------------------
COlllpany Knight Island
All i SOli (reel; Allison Creek Va Idez A-7 , IJUG 1191 32 !is 18
Archilllyel Creek Archangel Creek Allchorage 0-6 ------------------.
Ayakulik Ayakul1k Y.arluk A-2 181 200 181 3)0 100 49
Bear Cove UnnalIled Seldovia C-l ------------------
Bear lake Bear Creek ---------900 ---------
Oelu9i1 River (See Beluga River ---------------------
Upper I
Beluga. I.owel" Beluga River Tyonek A-] 9!iO 100 49 1190 100 72
Beluga. Upper Beluga River Tyonek 8-4 840 315 142 I BOO 100 210
Big Kltoi lake Hannot Bay ---5 ---30 ---10
Big Rabbi t [aI's ------------------------
Bou I der Creek 1 Boulder Creek Anchorage 0-" 90 2600 1371 82 80 69
Bou I der C,'eelc :t Boulder Creek Healy B-1 42 3575 917 67 10 lS
Bradley lake 8rtldley Creek SeldovIa D-] 88 1195 1155 445 93 410
Brelllller River, li UIe little Bremner Rtver Valdez A-2 182 600 272 50) 62 70
Bremner River,lIorth N. fork Bremner RIver Bering Glacier 156 162S 490 470 87 166
fork
Bremner Rive,', South S. fork Bremner River Cordovil 0-1 148 1150 5~H 470 75 156
fork
BrellUlel" fhver, Sahoon Bremner River Valdez A-I 660 525 166 J 2100 JO 86
*----~. -----'----~--j-.-.----
Ins ta lied Index
Capacityl Cost
Plant fac-
tor
(uw) (%)
--------
4 55 19.5
0.1 -----
10 55 42.6
0.015 Ex sts --
40 -----
--------
IS 55 19.1
4B 50 11.1
0.01 -----
--------
14 55 57
7 55 55.6
94 50 8
15 55 61.8
35 55 56
32 55 32.5
I
18 :'51 46.1
J
0)
I
W
N
DIVISION OF ENERGY & POlflR O£VElOPMUI1
INVEtlTORY OF POTENTIAL IIVOROEllCTRIC SITES Itl AlASKA
March 15, 1978
-sou'rllCENTRAL REGION MAP . Sheet 12 of J7 --
PO~ler Sit 1'/ Strealll U.S.G,S Hdp Sheel Ora inage lux illlulU Jlvl'rage
Area {etlu Id led llead
(sq. 1111.) Water (feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Cache Talkeetna River ---------w __
Campbell Creek (See Ca~bell lake) Anchorage ---------
Caml,be 11 to.lke Dam Campbe I 1 Cree k Anchorage 75 ---12
Canyoll Creek Canyon Creek McCarthy A-4 100 3100 1308
Caribou C,'eek Caribou Creek Anchorage D-2 260 2450 527
Cal"ter lat.e 5ee Crescent Lake) ------------
Ceres lake Ceres lake ---------.--
Chakachatllil Chd:achatna River ---------.--
Ch"kachamlla Chakachamna River Tyonek A-1 1120 1127 793
Chester C,"eek Chester Creek Anchorage 28 ---10
Chit ina ChHina -------_. ---
Chuitna Chui tna River Tyonek A-I 66 800 552
Chultna Creek Chul fna Creek Talkeetna D· 1 240 800 198
Chul i tlla. E. fork E. fork Chulitna Rlv. IIealy A-S 135 2500 180
thu I hila • Hurricane Chulitna River Healy A-6 795 1600 207
Chul i lila. Lower ChuH tna Ri ver Talkeetna 8-1 2600 500 89
Chulitna. West fork W. fork Chulitna Rh. lIealy A-Ii 355 1900 281
Cleavl.' Copper River Valdez A-J 21500 420 165
Coal Chulitna River Ta aeetna Htn D· 985 1450 241
Coal CI"eek Hatanuska River Anchorage fl-~ 1128 1300 291
Average Pel'cent Firm Installed Index
Almual Regula-Energy Capacity/ Cost
Runoff t ion (lilt Ilion Plant Fae-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ole. ft. ) (-) (J;)
---------l7 -----
-----------------
---70 0.07 40 ---
270 45 131 '1.7 55 46.1
220 93 ~O 19 55 21.7
-----------------
---------3,2 -----
---------ISO -----
2460 100 1600 366 50 6.5
---20 0.02 .----
---------140 -----
140 70 45 9 55 83.4
380 40 25 5 55 SO.9
240 60 59 12 55 31.3
1900 50 166 34 55 26.7
6350 84 394 90 50 8.1
640 45 68 14 55 33.4
28000 96 3600 820 55 n.3
2400 40 193 40 55 36.3
1600 130 )07 64 55 78.5
ex>
I
W
W
OIVISIOO Of EN£RGY & POIIER OEVHOPN[NT
INVENTORY OF POTENTIAL IIYOROELEClRIC SITES IN fllASKJI
March 15, 1978
SOUTIICI-:N'l'H/\L REGION M.A. P. Sheet 13 of 31
Powe .. Sitel Stream U.S.G.S HiP Sheet Drainage Il.uimuftl flveraye Average Percent
Area teguhted lIead Annua I Regula-
(sq. mi.) Waler (feet) Runoff tion
Surface ( 1000
Elevation ac. ft. )
(feet)
Coffee Beluga River Tyonek A-4 860 210 109 1800 100
Copper Lake Kenai lake Seward B-8 ---------------
Copper Rivet-1 (See Wood Canyon) ------ ------------
(opper Rivet· ::' {See Cleave I -----------------
Crab Bay Ul1nalllCd Seward A-3 --------------
Craigie,lUllow Creeks Craigie,Willow Creek Anchorage C-7,0-7 ---------------
Crescent lake 1 Crescent River Kenai B-8 200 599 517 454 98
Crescent lake 2 Crescent lake Seward B-1 23 1454 934 38 100
Dayville (See Allison Creek) ---------------
Deadman Creek Deadlllan Creek Talkeetna Htn D-160 3000 962 350 60
]
Dena Ii Susitna Rher Talkeetna Htn 0-1260 2552 ---2310 ---
1
Devil Canyon SusHna RIver h H:ee tna Htn D' 5810 1450 575 6840 1J 5
Devi 1 Canyon IIIgh Susitna Rher Talkeetna Htn D-5750 ---------1J 5
Drier Bay Unnalled (reek ------------------
Dry SI)ruCe Bay Unnallied ~odjak 0-·\ ---------------
Eagle River Eagle River Anchorage B-7 194 450 167 397 82
Eagle River. S. fork s. fork Eagle RIver Anchorage /\-1 ---------------
Eklutna Eklutna lake Anchorage [\--6 ---------------
[klulna Rlvf'r Eklutna River Anchorage B-" ------------I -.--
Emerald Skwentna River Tyonek 0-1 370 1900 366 790 74
-_L.. _____ ~I --------
.-
Firlll I nsta lied Index
Energy Capaci tyl Cost
(lIIil110n Plant fac-
Kwh) tor
(ft-.t ) (%)
)60 37 SO 11.5
---IS Ex sts --
--------
-----------
---0.005 -----
-.-0.49 -----
119 41 SO 9.9
29 6 55 31.4
-----------
165 34 51] n.7
--------1J
1J 738 5( 1J
260 700 --1J
-----------
---0.112 ----
45 9 5~ 2L1
---15 ----
-~--30 [ ~sts--
---U.35 ----
111 )T
i 51 69.7
.--~.-,' I l
co
I
W
.f:'>
DIYISION OF [HERGY & POWEn OEYflOPMlHT
INYENTORY OF POlENTlAl IIYOROHECTRIC SIT(S HI ALASKA
Harch 15, 1978
SOU1'nCf;rn'AAL REGION M.A. P. Sheet 14 of 37
Power Site!
Fa"s Creck:
Fun Gold Hine
f 1:>1t lIoot Creek
fleflilling
fox
Frilser take
Gakon. Site
Gold
Granite Gorge
Grant L.ke
Greenstone
Grouse Creek
Gulkana Rlver
Gulkana Rlyer, lower
GuHana River. IJpper
Gulkana River, Vest
FoB.
Gul I Rock
Stream
falls Creek
Archangel Creek
fish Hook Creek and
ltttle Susttn.
fox River
Oog 5al.on Creek
Copper RlYer
Sus Hna River
lilkeetna River
Grant Creek
11 Ikeetna River
Groulle Creek
U.S.C.S ~1ap Sheet
Anchorage D··6
Anchorage c-6. 7
[1-6,7
K.arluk A··l· -
Gultan. B-3
Ora in3'le
AI'ea
(sq, ati.)
30
12
J965
T.Ueetna Htn C-6 6160
Talkeetn. "tn B··5 865
Seward 8-6,7 ---
Talkeetna "tn C-5 790
GultaN Rtv4!r Gulkan. C-4
1.5
515
1850
1170
398
Gulhna River GuHana 8-3
Gulkana River Gulkanil D,3
W. Fork Gulkana River Gulkana c-~
Gu II Rock Creek Seward 0-8
rlaxilllUlII
leguiatell
WaleI'
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
353
1150
850
1500
1575
2475
1700
1350
2375
Avel-age
lIead
( feet)
50
302
266
189
416
304
40
405
232
124
192
Average
Annua 1
Runoff
( 1000
ac, ft,)
130
4400
7327
1160
1150
620
2000
1900
440
Percent
Regula-
tion
100
75
100
87
65
80
1)
23
100
finll
Energy
(Illill Ion
Kwh)
460
32
727
1139
l45
246
50
164
42
45
69
los ta lied
Capacltyl
Plant. fac-
Inde:'(
Cost
tor
(1I'IIf) (1:)
0.276 -----
3
8
7
150
260
72
5.9
51
55 33
55 J5.2
50
55
55
13. I
4J.8
1.5
J8.6
0.OJ3 -----
34
9
9
14
55 27.5
55 84.8
55 86.8
55 58.1
0.003 -----
00 ,
W
(.1l
DIVISION OF EnERGY & POWER UEVflOf'HENT
IHVENroRY OF POTENTIAL HYDROELECTRIC SI1[S Itl ALASKA
March 15. 1918
SOU'!'JlCENTRAL REGION M.A. P. Sheet 15 of )1
Power SHel Stream U.S.Co.S Nap Sheet Drainage tlax i IlIUIII Average
Area legulated llead
(sq. 1Ili.) Wilter ( feet)
Slfrf.ace
Elevation
(feet)
tlanley ------------.--
Happy Rivet' Happy River ------230
Harrison lagoon lagoon Creek Seward D-4 ---------
Hayden lake !layden lake Seward A-l ---------
Hayes Skwentna River Tyonek 0-5 1130 575 107
Hicks Site Hatanush River Anchorage 0-] 956 1675 281
Hunchback ---------------
Iron Creek Iron Creek Ta lkeetna Htn 8-S 210 1750 750
JuneOlu Juneau Creek ------------
Karluk lake Karllfk River Kad uk C-l 165 400 344
Kaslncitna KashwHna River ------------
Kasilof River Kas Hof River Kenai 8-4 738 200 136
Keetna Talkeetna River Talkeetna Htn [_.f> 1260 9!;0 2f16
Kenai lake Kenai River Seward B· J 660 650 341
lena i. lower Kenai River Kenat B-1 1650 160 84
Kenll \ co tt IIhina River ---------70
Keystone Canyon (See lowe ) ------------
Ktagna River t:lagna River McCarthy A -4 185 2500 970
Killey River Killey River Kenai B 2 l6{} 725 358
King Htn Hatanuska Rl ver Anchorage r" , 1635 1050 276
Average Percent Finn Installed Index
Annual Reguh-[nervy Capacityl Cost
Runoff tion (mill on Plant fae-
(1000 Kwh) tOl'
ae. ft. ) (IIPN) (1)
---------0.265 -----
---------7 -----
---------0.12 -----
---------O.O? -----
3500 SO 429 89 55 12.0
1300 90 286 59 55 37.2
--------. --------
400 60 147 31 55 63.9
---------8 -----
300 100 85 18 55 24.9
---------3 -----
1729 100 193 40 55 15.8
1690 82 324 74 56 11. 3
2030 97 552 115 55 22.3
4300 88 263 55 55 18.2
------17 -----
-----------------
490 50 193 40 55 77.9
380 90 100 2t 55 38.1
2300 40 210 44 5~ 37.6
--_. "-----.L.
(
<Xl
I
W
a'I
,..--. '-.~-----
Powe,-SiI,·/
Klutina
Knlk
Kots tna River
I(us~uland River
lake Creek, lower
lake Creek, Upper
lake George
lagoon
lakin a
lane
Lost lakes
lowe
lowell Creek
lucy
McClure RelY
Mclaren IIi ver
HeMei I River
Meals lake
Htll ion Dollar
Hi neral Creek
Honashlt<'l Ilay. lower
-
DIVISION OF ENERGY & Pffi-I£R OEVnOPH[NT
INVENTORY OF POTENTIAL IIYOROELECTRI( SITES IIi ALASKA
March 15, l!na
Sheet 16 of 17
S t ,-earn U.S.G.S ~l3p Sheet Drainage l1.lXimum ",,"(,I'a,)!!
Area tceljulaletl lIeil.!
(sq .• Ii.) \later ( feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Klutlna River Valdez 0-5 670 1800 135
Knlk River ------------
Kotslna River Yaldez C-l 209 2075 524
Kuskulana River McCarthy C-8 260 2050 500
lake Creek Ta lkeetna 1\-'2 335 800 305
lake Creek Talkeetna B-3 85 1400 560
KnH. River ---------320
---------------
l..akina River ------------
SusJtna River Ta 1 keetnil C-l 6280 6(00 169
lost Creek Seward A-7 ---------
LINe River Va ldez A-6 190 800 3H
lowell Creek Seward A-1 ---------
Chulitna River Talkeetna Htn D-t; 1000 noo 166
Hanley Creek Ht. HeK 11\ ley 8-J 710 1715 297
Helaren R her Gulkana 0-0 465 2815 263
HcHe\l River Iliamna 1\-4 }o2 ISO 112
Eccles Creek ---2 ---50
Copper River Cordova C-.l 24200 200 119
Htnera I Creek ------------
Honashka Bay ---2 ---50
1..-.
Average rercent ffra I nsta lied Index
Annual Regula-Energy C"paei tyl Cost
Runoff tion (III'" ion Plant Fae-
(1000 bIl) lor
ae. ft. ) (Illot ) (t.)
950 100 263 54 55 17 .6
---------~O -----
440 70 133 ;~8 55 41.9
550 50 114 24 55 66.9
110 60 105 n 55· 32.6
180 90 74 15 55 20.3
---------200 -----
---------.-------
---------9 -----
7500 100 1052 240 50 8.9
---------3.4 -----
)400 66 254 55 50 11.2
---------0.525 -----
2600 20 11 15 55 19.3
910 90 201 42 55 42.l
1410 85 263 55 50 45.2
180 SO 8 2 55 145
---90 0.09 -----
38000 7J 1927 440 50 14.8
-----------------
---30 0.02 -----
OIVISION Of E"EIlGY & roweR Of.VHOI'M(IH
INVENTORY Of POTENTIAL HYOkOElECTRIC SIT[S IN ALASKA
MaJ:ch 15, 1918
sou'rllCENTRAL REGION H.A.P. Sheet 17 of 37
I'm'I!!I' Site /
1-10 II a shka Oay. Upper
Hoose Creek
Hoose Horn
ttoose Pass
Ne1china River
Nellie Juan lake
Stream
Honashla Bay
HatanusLi RilleI'
Kenai River
Nelchln.1 Iher
(See Nellie Juan Rillel
and Ilptler Nellie
Juan)
Nellie Juan River Nellie Ju.n River
lie I lie Juan River. up. Nellie Juan River
U.S.r..S Hal) Sheet
Anchorage C-6
Gu I kana 1\-6
Seward B-S
Seward O' (,
Dra il)i(JI!
Area
(sq .• i.)
2
2010
1540
820
130
35
Nil ina NtziRa liver ------
No Name Lake
Ohio
Olga Bay
Olle Hile
Orca Creek
I'alnt River
Palmer
Parks Callning-Co.
Peninsula
Pelers Creek
Pill"r Creek, I
/CO Na.el8ear Trap Bay Cordova [)--6 ---
Chu lUna River fa I keetna "tn D-6 916
Olga Narrcvs
One Hile Creek
Orca Creek
Patnt Riyer
Hatl1nusb River
UnnaaJed
lSee Cleave)
Pillar Creel.
Karluk 1\-1
Cordol/a C.:.fi
II iamnil A-4
Anchorage c-(
Kodiak 0-5
335
205
2070
L-_________ ., __ . ___________ t-____________ _
tlax illlURi
~e9ulated
Water
Surfice
Elevation
(feet)
500
275
2250
400
1189
1500
10
150
400
Average
Head
(feet)
50
166
95
285
240
421
224
64
115
166
Average
Annual
Runoff
( 1000
ac. ft.)
2918
4000
940
108
190
2220
710
310
2918
Percent
Regula-
tion
25
93
99
34
90
35
100
80
20
f i I'DI
Energy
(mill lOll
Kwh)
30
100
290
219
41
51
144
37
28
79
Installed
(aVid ty/
Plant fac-
Index
Cost
tor
(IIW) (%)
0.02 -----
21 S5 124.!
60 55 118.1
0 .. 21 -----
45
10
12
34
22
36
8
5S 53.3
55 32
55 11.6
55 21
55 68.6
0.08 -----
0.06 -----
6
16
55 ns-
55 195.5
0.008 -
00
I
W
00
DIVISION Of £NlRGY & POWER DEVELOPMENT
lKVEHTORY OF POTENTIAL HYDROELECTRIC SITES IN ALASKA
March IS. 1978
SOll'I'IICEN'I'RAI, REGION M.A. P. Sheet 18 of 11
Power Site/ Stream U.S.G.S Hap Sheet Ora i nage II.H illlu., A.N·age
Arell !e9ulat f'd llead
(sq. mi.) Water (feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Pillar' Creek. 2 Pillar Creek -_. 6 _ .. SO
Pioneer Packing Co. Flemming Creek.Knlght Cordova ~-S ---_. -...
Island
Po,'l lIolll"on Unnamed lake Kodiak "'-4 ---------
Power C,"eel: Power Creek Cordova C-S 21 560 490
Ptarmigan lake Froj. Ftal'lll19an Creek Seward 8-6.7 ---------
Purinton Creek Malalluska River Anchorage 0-.( 1082 1450 291
Resurrec t ion River Resurrection River Se~lilrd A-7 141 425 2])
Rush lake Boulder Creek AnchOrage 0··4 89 1950 892
Sahl in ---------------
Sandra ---------------
Sanford Copper River Gulkana D-) 3365 1825 118
Sao Juan Sao Juao Creek Seward A-J 1 ---ISO
San Juan lake San Juan Stream Seward A-) ---------
Shear Water Bay UnMilled K<fdiak n-J ---------
Sheep Bay Sanlin Creek Cordova C-6 ---------
Sheep Creek 11 Sheep Creek SeldoviJ \'-2 101 725 J82
Sheep CI·cek. 2 Sheep Creek. Anchorage ---------
Sheep lilver i.akes ~heep RiVer Cordova C-6 ---------
Shell Lake (See Talachulitna) ------------
Ship Creek. Ship Creek /lnr:horaqe 90 ---50
SHver lake Duck River Cordova 0-7 25 390 346
Skt lak lake ---------------
Avel'age Percent flrlll Installed Index
Annual Regula-Energy Capacityl Cost
Runoff t ion (111111 ion Plant fac-
( 1000 Kwh) tor
ac. ft. ) (-) (I)
---go 0,06 -----
---------0.075 -----
---------0.187 -----
182 go 66 14 5S ZO.9
---------1.125 -----
1500 go 324 67 55 1(1:. I
600 15 86 18 5S 19.1
78 79 45 9 SS 92.7
-----------------
-----------------
3100 70 385 80 55 29.3
---100 0.06 -----
---------0.1 -----
---------0.01 -----
--------0.05 -----
460 54 94 20 55 23.8'
-----------------
.-----22 " 63 ---
-----------------
------SOD 0.4 -----
180 95 48 HI 5S 15.6
-----------------
-
00
I
W
\0
DIVISION Of ENERGY & P0l1(R llfVHOPMHH
INVEN10RY OF POTENTIAL IIYDROHfCTRIC SillS IN ALASKA
March 15, 1978
SOUTIlCENTHl\I. REGION M. A. P. Shee t 19 0 f J7
---~~.
Pm.er Si (pi StreaRl U.S.f..S Hdp Sheet Drainage 11.1)( i •• Average
Area legu lilted Jlead
(sq. mi.) Wdter (reel)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Skwentna Skwentna River Tyonek <0-" 9~0 1000 291
Snow Snow River Seward Ii·· 7 8~ )250 653
Sol 0111011 Gulch Unnamed Valdez A-7 18 660 606
Spit idoll Spiridon River ----------
Spi rido.l lake Spiridon Lake -----------
Ste Hel" s Ranch Kenai River Kenai u-\ 849 500 199
Stevens. Creek Stevens Creek Cordova U-5 ---------
Strandl inc Lake Beluga /liver Tyonek 8-6 ~4 1300 852
SURIni t take Guikana River Mt lIayes .\-4 83 3210 500
Sunrise lilke Sidtle Creek Seward U-7 238 450 327
Sunrise Creek (iee Sunr i Sf lake) ------------
Suryan late Chip Creek Karluk f1-1 ---------
Sus HoG.. Little ---------------
To hchu 1 itna Skwentna River Tyonek 0-<\ 2250 350 124
Talachlliitna R\ver fa lachu 1 Hna River Tyonek (:.," 360 700 231
Ta lkee lila ISee Keetna) -.----------
TalkeellliS River Ta lkeetna River Ta lkeetna Htn il-(, 1790 605 91
(Sheep)
Tazl ina Tazl1na Rtver Gulkana 1\-5 1970 1875 273
1 eba . ." lakes Tebay lakes Valdez ,\-1 105 1375 1007
Terror lake UnnalllE'd Kodiak C-4 15 1325 1057
.--~---+----~~ -.. -----~.,...-. -.-------.-------
/lve.-age Percent r it-DI Ins ta lled Index
Annual Regula-Energy Capac! tyl Cost
Runoff tion (1111 11 ion Plant fac-
( 1000 Kwh) tor
ac. ft. ) (1IJIoI ) (2.)
1900 lJ )j 98 50 )j
533 91 278 63 50 11.2
100 20 11 2 55 27
---------10 -----
---------2 -----
2600 97 403 84 55 11.9
--------0,035 -----
115 100 ~1 11 55 30.8
88 100 36 8 55 19.9
350 55 ~2 11 55 122.2
--------. --------
---------O.Ol§ ---.-
-----------------
4500 79 1390 -75 50 10.0
720 100 137 28 5S 41.6
-----------------
4400 SO 149 31 55 40.4
2300 100 50) 104 55 15.6
240 95 193 W f.S 23_6
12. 1-=-_L-~_-~._~l 2'L9
1
.
OIVISION Of (N[RGY & room ll[VHOI'I'lHn
INV(N10RY OF POT(KliAl IIYORO~l[CTRIC SITfS IN I\LASKA
March 15, 1978
SOU'l'lIcr';WTHA L REG 1 ON H. J\ P . . sheet 20 of 37
r--'--.-.
"UtH!'-Si h'i Str-ealll U.S.G.S Hal) Shee l Ol'ainage Ilnililtlill "",'l'r-aye
AI-ea {egu 1 a t(',1 liNd
(sq. 1IIi.) Woller (reet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Thl'ee Hi Ie Canyon BrelMer R her Cordova D-l 526 725 228
ThUllib noy Unnamed Creek Seward A-3 ---------
Tidel RIve,' Tt eke I Rher Va 1 dez 1\-3 421 590 400
ToUchitna Chulitna River Ia I keetna 0-1 2560 725 186
101 Sond Cl'eel( Tolsona Creek Gulkana 1\_ ,1 174 2025 460
Ira i 1 lake, Upper 1 Unnamed Seward (;-7 ---------
ird i 1 take. Upper 2 Grant Creek Seward 8-ft,7 ---------
Trilt'IH'I-Talkeetna River Talkeetna Ittn C-5 160 1700 245
Isina Tsina valdez 1\-5 104 1150 360
1 us t UAlCllii Tustumena Glacier Kenai 1\-2 57 1496 \100
Uganik nilY One Mile/One-Half Kodiak C-4 ---------
Mile Creek/HE Arm
Uganik 8ay
Ugdnik Ray. NE Arm Unnamed KodIak 0-4 ---------
Ugdnik Fislu~rte5. Inc; . Cra ter Creek Kodiak U-5 ---------
Uk-ilk Bay Unnamed Creek ------------
Ukak-Rive,' Ukak River Ht Katllla t 8-4 194 375 145
Unnclmed Cr(!ek at ---------------
Bedr Cove
Unnamed Creek. Dry ---------------
Sl'ruce Bay
VdO Cleve Unnamed Cordova C-l 17 1450 475
Vee Sus I tlla R her lalkeetna "to c-4140 2355 430
Average Percent fir .. I n'ila 11 ed Indell
Annual Regula-, Energy Calla..: I ty I Cost
Runoff tion ( .. it lion Plant hc-
(1000 Kwh) lor
ac. ft. ) (Dill ) (I)
1660 41 121 26 55 51.5
---------0.051 -----
900 35 105 n 55 37.8
6200 85 806 184 SO 8.8
200 10 53 11 S5 52.5
---------0.015 -----
---------10 -----
\140 94 216 45 55 68.6
220 90 58 12 55 64.2
133 85 102 21 S5 17 .1
---------0.05 ----
---------0.05 ----
---------0.05 ----
----------------
330 15 30 6 55 164.0
----------------
----------------
95 25 10 2 5S 234,0
4730 11 1I JI.l6 50 11
DIVISION OF ENERGY & rOWER DEVElOPHun
INVENTORY OF POTENTIAL HYDROElECTRIC SI1[S Itl ALI\SKA
Max-ch 15, 1978
SOUTliCEN'J'RJ\L REGION M.A.P. Sheet 21 of 37
.------,
Powe.· S i tr'l Strealft U.S.G.S Hap Sheet Ora inage Itlx i mum '\"cJ"age
Area ,egulilled !lead
(sq .• Ii.) Water ( feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Vatana Susitna River Talkeetna tltn [}-4 5180 1905 425
Whiskers Sus Hna Rher Talkeetna 0-1 6320 490 59
VhHe River-White River 8ering Glacier 1\-4 29 375 282
Wood Canyon Copper River Valdez 0-2 20600 1400 950
Yentna Yentna R i vcr lyonek C-2 6400 150 82
Young Creek Young Creek HcCarlhy 1\.-4 40 3475 2017
,'-
J\verage Percent f I rill Installed rndel(
Annual Regu!a-Energy Capac! tYI (.ost
Runoff tlon (Illillion Plant fac-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ac. ft. ) (-) (I) ..
6040 100 11 7000 11 418 SO 6.3 1
7500 100 368 84 SO 11.5
210 80 39 8 55 51.3
267000 100 21900 3600 69.4 3.2
12750 !I !I 145 SO !I
110 45 82 17 55 60.3
--,----'---.
'---
OIYISIO" Of ENERGY & POWER O[YELOrHlNr
IHYENIORY Of POWHIAL IlYOROElECTRIC SITES IN ALASKA
March 15, 1918
SOU'!'III:l\ST REGION M.A.P. Sheet 22 of )7
---
POI-IeI' 5 it!'! Strea. U.S.r..S Hap Sheet Orain3qe 11.1 X jlllll'" Average
Areil rleyulatcu !lead
(sq. mi.) Waler ( fee.t)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
AaI'OIl Aaron Creek BradfIeld Canal 81 300 183
Abyss Abyss lake --------. ---
Aiken lake (See Moira Sound. -.-J.7 -.. 1000
Aiken Creek'
Alscl<:. River Alset Rtver Yakuta t 8-1 11000 450 166
Anan Creek Anan Creek Bradfield Canal A-27 325 230
6
Anan lake (See Anan Creel. -.---. ------
Andeall la~c Andean Creel --2 --. 1100
Anita & Kunk ZiIllOY ia Strait Petersburg 8-2 9.8 ---270
Anil .. Lake Z11110yia Strait Petersburg Ii-:.! ---------
AllIIIer Cascade Anmer Cascade .--2.9 -_. 680
Anltex treek Annex Creek Juneau 8-1 8 -.----
Antler RiYer Antler River Juneau 0-1 5 1950 1813
Badger nay lake Badger Bay lake ---8.4 ---330
6ahovec WanD Springs Bay ---_.-------
Bakewell Ana Bakewell Arm t;1te ---20 ---'65
Banks Lake Unnamed Creek ---4.6 ---110
Banller ldKes Banner Creek ---7.9 ---200
Barallof Lake Baranof River Sitka 1\-) 32 145 108
Baturin take 8alur1n Creek ---2.4 ---1100
Bear Creek Bear Creek ---3 ---850
----
Average Percellt Firm Ills ta ned 1000Iex
Annual Regula-Energy Capacl tyl CDst
Runoff UOIl (11111;on Plilnt he-
( 1000 Kwh) tor
ae. ft. } (.w) (1)
652 56 58 12 55 86.0
----.--." J.4 .----
.. --.-----------.
12000 90 1490 310 55 17 ,9
200 89 J3 7 55 34.4
-----------------
----.. .----------
------U.5 8 48 ---
------18 4 53 ---
----------.-----.
--. ._----1.5 Exht ---
29 100 43 9 55 17.8
-_. ------J.3 .----
---------O.ooJ -----
---------J.3 -----
-----------------
---------\.35 -----
316 42 " 2 55 19.1
.--.-------------
-----------. -----
----
co
I
~
W
DIVISION OF ENERGY & POI~ER IlEVrLOPHENT
INVEHTORY OF POTENTIAL HYDROELECTRIC SITES iN ALASKA
Barch 15. ] 978
SOU'jllEJ\Sl' REGION H.A.P. Sheet 23 of J1 -
Power S il el Strealll U.S.G.S Hap Sheet Drainaqe H.\Ximum Average
Area tegulal!'<\ Head
(sq. mi. ) Wilter (feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Beil"ds 1 ee Beardslee Creek ---" .J ---530
Beaver (reek ---------------
Deal/er Fall s (See Silvis Lake) ------------
Deal/et' fa lis C,'eek (See Silvis lake) ------------
Beaye,' Pond -----, ---------
Beal' Cl-eek Bear Creek ---3 ---8S0
BenZClItdll lake Benlelll3fl River ---32 ---104
Betly Betty & Jetty lake ------------
Big Branch Big Branch RIYer ------------
Big Loke & Mirror lake fish Creek Ketchikan 8-4 ---------
Bill [) Short Baranof River Sitka A-l.,A-J ---------
Black Bear lake ---Craig C-J 2.25 1680 1440
Blanchdrd Lake 81 ancha rd Creek --J.J ---J90
BI ind Slough ---Petersburg C-J ---------
Blue take Hedvetcha Riller Sitka -J\-] ---------
Bluff RilY Red Bluff Creek Port Alexander .,; ... -------
D-)
Bollilllza ----------_. ----
Bonanzil & Canyon Creeks Teus Creek, W fork -----------
BotCodi 110 (See Ilorodlno Lake) -----------
RorodillO Lalce Big Port Wal ter, ---3.3 ---4"0
fa 11 s Creek ---------~,-
AYerage Percent f·irlll installed Index
Annual Regula-Energy Capacltyl Cost
Runoff tion ( .. i Ilion Plant fac-
( 1000 Kwh) tor
ac. ft. ) (11M) (I)
-----------------
---------4,3 -----
-----------------
-----------------
-------.---------
-----------------
-----------------
---------2 -----
---------5 -----
---------14.25 -----
--------. 0.003 -----
16 100 21 5 48 ---
-----------------
---------2.4 Exht. ---
---------6.0 Exist ---
---------0.139 -----
----------------
-----------------
-------""'" 1--------
0_' ----0-1--------
.. -
CD
I
~
L.---
DIVISION Of EHERGY & POWER OEVElOPHUn
INVENTORY Of POTENTIAL HYDROFIFr.TRIC SITES IN ALASKA
March IS, 1978
SOU'J'IIEI\ST REGION M. A. P. Sheet 24 of 37
Powel' S i lei Strealll U.S.G.S Hap Sheet Drainage ILnilllum Avel'age
Area !egu la ted lIead
(sq. mI.) Wilter (feet)
SUI'hce
Elevation
(feet)
Boundary la!:e Boundary Creek Taku Rtver C-6 23 925 795
80x Canyon ---------------
Bradf ie Irl Rive". North N Bradfield River Bradfield Canal 150 250 157
8-5
Brentwood (,-eek Brentwood Creek Port Alexander 7 950 655
C-3
Brentwood lake (See Brent-ood Creek) ------._----
Burnett lake Burnett Creek ---6.] ---230
Carbon lake Unnamed/Coal Creek Sitka A-l 27 300 260
Carl ilna lilkE: Carlana Creek ---1.5 ---350
C~rl son Cre!:k Carlson Creek Juneau 8-1 24 450 344
Cascade Creek Cascade/Rosa ---J ---190
Cascade C,'eek Tongass "arrow~ ------------
Cascade Creek (See Swan lake) Sitka A-5 ---------
CascadeCreelt (See ThoIIIa 5 Bay) ------------
Checats Checats lake ---IS ---340
Chester lake Nichols ---2 ---750
CbieltUlill River, CMcltam1n River Bradfield Canal 562 325 228
1\-2
ChOkilt CMlIta t R her Skagway C-3 190 600 320
ChilkoOl Chllkoot River Skagway B-2 130 175 136
Chomly (See ChoIIIonde lilY J ------------
Sound
Chomondeley Sound ChOmly Creel:. Craig A-I ,1\-2 1.6 ---154
,------
I\.verage Percent Fi,.. Ins t;11) ed Index
Annual Regula-Energy Capac i tyl Cost
Runoff tion 1-1 Ilion Plant fae-
(1000 KMh) tor
ac. ft. ) (~) (t)
170 85 ~ 20 55 22.2
-----------------
1200 61 131 27 55 71.0
98 71 38 8 55 Z7 .7
-----------------
-----------------
350 65 49 10 55 24.8
---530 0.424 -----
246 66 46 10 55 27.5
-------.--.------
------.. ---------
-----------------
------------.-.--
-----"----3.7 -----
---1490 1.192 -----
4800 82 727 150 S5 26.1
870 80 180 41 50 10.6
780 90 78 lfl 5S 35.8
-----------------
------.--0.04 ----
-
~-
DIVISION OF EHERGY & POWER DEVElOI'HHH
INVENTORY OF POTENTIAl IIYDROELECTRIC SITES IN ALASKA
Karch 15, 1978
sou'rm:l\S'I' REGION H.A. P. Sheet 25 of 37
POrJer Site! StreaU! U.S.G.S Hdp Sheet Drainage tl.lximum Averlage
ReYlon/ Al'ea ~egu lated lIead
Footnote (sq. mi.) Water (feet)
Sudilee
Elevation
(feet)
Claude lake Clau<le Creek ---7.9 ---535
Clay ldke (See Karten lake ) ------------
Cli ff I. .. ke UnnaIIIed Port Alexander c-6.1 ---1211
Clover Creek Clover Creek ---14.5 ---440
, Col I illson Creek tSee Hoira Sound) -----------
Concl us Ion ---------------
COllclu51011 Creek ( 'iee Port Conclusion ------------
Bay)
CO\,lee Creek Cowee Creek ---46 ---480
Crater lake Crilter Creek. See ---11.9 ---980
Also Speel Rh.
Dh !Soe tt j sham
Project
Crescent ldke --------------
Crittenden Creek Crittenden Creek ---10 ---200
CryHal lake See Blind Slough) ------------
Crystal lake Expanston ---Petersburg Co) ---------
Dahl Creek See Hood Bay) ------------
Oavjdof lake Davldof Creek ---8 --275
Oavitlsoll Creek Davidson Creek --J!) ---90
Davies Creek Oavies Creek ---18 ---305
Davis ,See Davis River) ----------
-----'-------
Average Percent firlll Insta Iled Index
Annual Regula-Energy CapacHy! Cost
Runoff tion (Nnlion Plallt fae-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ae. ft. ) (nlW ) (%)
-----------------
I I -----------------
---------0.07 -----
-----------------
-----------------
-----------------
-----------------
-----------------
-----------------
---------3.7 -----
-----------------
-----------------
------J.5 2.5 16 ---
-----------------
------------
------------... ~ ---
~' --------------, -I
---------.~------I
----L-____ ---1
DIVISION Of ENERGY & POWER DEV[LOPMENT
INVENTORY Of POTENTIAL IfYDROEL[CfRIC SITES IN ALASKA
Harch 15, 1978
SOUTIIEAS'J' REGION HAP . . . Sheet 26 of ]7 --
Power-Site/ Str-ealll U.S.G.S Hap Sheet Dninaqe H.lX iDlum Average
Area \eglilateJ Head
(sq .• 1.) Water (feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Davis River Davis River KetehH.an 0-1 78 450 361
Deep lake Deep Creel. ---6.7 ---265
Deer lake Unnamed Port Ale~ander C-. 7 374 3J9
Del ta Creek t)ee Ruth lake) ------------
Dewey C.'eel: (See Skagway Pro----8.2 ---440
jectl
Diana lake ---Port Alexander 0----------
4
Diane lake Diane ------------
Didrickso" Bay Oldrlckson lakes Sitka C-7 34.4 ---119
Dor-olh), lake Oor-othy Creel. Taku River 1\-6 11 2422 2246
Drake lake Drake lake ---9 ---77
. ,
hgle Eagle lal.e ------------
E Hendahl lake ---------------
[lfioCove ---------------
Eliza lake Eltza Creel. ---14.4 ---300
Ella ---------------
Endicott River Endkott River Juneau 0-5 56 800 483
falls Creek hl1s Creel. ---15.4 ---JOO
farragut River farragut Rher Sumdum .11.-] 64 S25 493
Fiddle lake fiddle Creek ---I.I ---4SS
finger' lake finger Creel. ---1.5 ---740
Aver-age Percent fh"m Ins ltl lied Index
Annual Regula-Energy Capaci ty/ Cost
Runoff tion (mllHon Plant fae-
(1000 Kwh) tor
at. ft. ) (aw) (1)
661 67 131 26 55 11.4
-----------------
114 96 31 7 SO 14.6
-----------------
-----------------
------40 10 46 ---
------. --3.1 -----
---------O.l -----
81 100 150 34 SO 14.8
-----------------
---------9.2 -----
---------I.II -----
-----------------
---------1.6 -----
-----------------
210 97 105 21 55 25.9
---------1.2 -----
~80 S6 163 37 51l 13.6
---------0.75 -----
---------l.8 -----
DIVISIOH OF ENERGY & pm-l[R DEYElOPMENT
INVEN10R'( OF POTENTIAL IIYDRO[UCTRIC SlTfS III ALASKA
Mar:ch 15, 1978
SOUTm:I\ST REGION M.A. P • Sheet 27 of 37 . . " --
PO~ler Site! Strealll U.S.C.S Hap Sheet Drainage !-I,IX imum flverage
Area leyulilled Jlead
(sq. nIl. ) Waler (feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet) ,
Fish C"eek: Fish Creel: Kelchikan 0-1 34 ---295
Four Fd II s lake Unnamed SHka 1\-3 1.8 --1200
Furuhelm Furuhelll River ---------
Gilrt-llee-lie Creek Gart-Hee-fle Creek ---12 ---60
Gart'i nil Creek Gart 1 na Creek Juneau A-5 10.4 ------
G101"y Creek (See Farragut) ------------
Glory lake ---------------
Goat Goat Creek Bradfield Canal 14 1298 1056
Goat Lake Pitchfork falls Skagway C-l /I 2915 2017
GoeQle,-e Creel: (See Washington Bay) ------------
Gokachin River Gokach1n River ---23 ---330
Gold Creek Gold Creek ---10.1 -.-220
Goodro Lake Goodro Creek ---0.6 ------
Goulding lakes Gouldina Creek ---52.3 ---Varies
Goulding Upper/lower ---------------
Grace Lake Grace Creel: Ketchikan C-3 29 500 456
Granite Creek Gran1 te Creek Ketchikan c-] 9 945 863
Granite lake (See Granite Cr.eek ) ------------
Green lake Vodepad R1ver Port Alexander D-29 400 353
Grindstone Creek Rhine Creek 30 ---90
GUIIIlOCk. Creek GunflOcI: Creek Petersburg \)-6 11.5 ------C---..-___
Average Percent firm Illsta lied Index
Annual Regula-Energy Capacity/ Cost
RUlloff tion (1111 lion Plant rac-
(1000 Kwh~ tor
ac. ft. ) (..,) (I)
---------0.75 -----
------26 6 50 ---
---------1.5 -----
---------.04-0.2 -----
58 ------0.75 -----
-----------------
-----------------
112 90 81 20 50 13.9
30 95 46 10 55 • 16.5
-----------------.
---------2.7-2.8 -----
---------.313-3.7 -----
---------0.05 -----
---------4 -----
-------.. --------
281 90 99 20 50 to.1
82 67 )9 8 55 11.Z
---. -------------
212 84 52 II 50 12.4
---------.126-; 3 ,----
---------~.~-------.-~. -~-
I
(
DIVISION OF ENERGY .. POWER O[v[lOPtIUH
INVENTORY Of POTENTIAL HYDROEl[CTRIC SIT[S IN ALASKA
March 15, 1978
SOUTIIEJ\ST ItEGION M.A.P. Sheet 28 of 37
Power Site/ StrealR U.S. u.S Hap Sheet Drainage !'tl)( imum Average
Area ~e!llllated Head
(sq, mi. ) Wilter (feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Ha llbut OilY lakes lIa I t but Bay --19 ------
Hami 1 tOil Creek ---------------
HarcJi ')9 R i vel' Harding Rher 8radfle ld Cana 1 68 250 207
c-s
Harl ey ---------------
lIarl ey C.'e!'k (See Tenakee Inletl ------------
H<tn'ls ---------------
Harris River (See Kasaan Bay I --. ---------
Harrison lake Harrison lake ---6 ------
Hasselbo"g Cn~el: Hasse)borg Creek Sitka C-l 83 331 306
lIi1ssler lake HaSS 1 er Creek ---S.l ---440
lIetta lake ---------------
Hidden Fa lis lakes Unnamed Creek .--8.2 ---170-820
IUdden Falls, Upper ---------------
Hidden Inlet Waterfall Creek ---Z) ------
llood nay Dahl Creek Sitka 8-2 0.8 ------
lioughton Unnamed SUlltdl1lll D-J 39 SSO 457
HUIIlPbdcK Creek HUlllpback Creek Juneau 11.-5,1\-6 ---------
Indian River Indian River ---11 ---30
J dna lilke ---Port Aleunder ---------
o-t
January January lake _. ----------
Josephine -_. ------------
Average Percent . firlll Ins ta lled Index
Annual Regula-. Energy Capacl tyl Cost
Runoff tlon {mlllion Plant Fac-
(1000 Kwh) lor
ac. ft. ) (-l (1)
-----------------
-------.. --------
548 92 85 III 5; 22.3
-----------------
-----------------
-----------------
-----------------
-----------------
341 90 71 16 5; 22.3
------18 4 Sl ---
---------0.9 -----
---------28 -----
-----------------
---------0.075 -----
---------0.004 -----
)70 98 136 II 50 11
---------O.IZ -----
---------.02-0.2 -----
------15.6 J 6( ---
---. ------1 -" ---
------.----------
(
DIVISION OF ENERGY & POWER IIEVElOPI1ENT
INVENTORY Of POTENTIAl IIYDRO£L£CTRIC SITES IN AlASIU\
March 15, 1970
SOU'l'lft::I\ST REGION MAP Sheet 29 of 37
Power 51 leI
kake
Karta River
Kasaan Bay
Kasaan Bay
K .. snyku Day
Katete Riyer
Ka th 1 een Creek
Keg"," Creek
Kekur luke
Kelp
Ketchikan lakes
Klawal: lake
Kook lake
Kugel luke
Kunk
lace Rher
lagoon
lake j\yoss
lake COlllle 11 Oil.
Lake Hatedna
lake [Yil
. Stream
Gunnock Creek
Karta River
lIarrls Rher
U nklM! Creek
Hidden falls Creek
Katete Rher
~thleen Creek
Kegan Creek
Kekuf Creek
Ketchikan Creek
r::lawak Creek
Kook Creek
Kugel Creek
(See An t ta & Kunk
Lakes)
lace Riyer
Ayoss Cascade
lilke Connell
Unnamed
[va Creek
U.S.G.S tldp Sheet
Petersburg 0-'
Craig C-2
Craig C-]
Craig c-2
Sitka A-J
Brad fie 1 d CaMI
C-G
Sitka
S1tka 8-4
Ketchikan 8-5
JUIleau 0-1
Ora inage
Area
(sq. mi.)
49.5
1
4.6
13
29
8.5
4.1
21
14
18
24.8
9.4
363
3.9
13.4
15
15.3
11aximUIlI
~e9u 1 ated
Water
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
650
525
675
200
Average
Head
(feet)
SIO
249
502
950
]40
612
256
25
60
560
166
700
150
AYerage
Annual
Ruooff
( 1000
ac. ft.)
594
126
161
2300
Percent
Regula-
tion
82
94
02
97
. firlll
Energy
(mt n Ion
Kwh)
99
48
'.66
,
298
1990
Insta lled
Capaci tyt
Plant Fac~
tor
(IIIW) (I)
Indel(
Cost
0.038 -----
5.625 .---~
0.15 -----
0.017 ~~ ~--
0.3
21
10
55 18.1
55 33.7
2.2-2.9 --~~-
0 .. 6 -----
16 50 15.1
4.2 hlst ---
0.2] -----
.. 5-.7 -~ ---
2.8-].4 ---~-
62 55 SI.8
2.2
2.388 --~--
I
CD
I
U1 o
DIVISION OF [N[RGY & POI4[R IIEVELOf'MENT
INVENTORY OF POTENTIAL HYDROELECTRIC SIT[S IN ALASKA
March 15, 1910
SOU'rIlElIS'!' REGION M.1\.P. Sheet)O of 37
Powel' Site! Strealll U.S.G.S MapSheel Drainage ~lJx illllJlII Average
Area leguiatp" lIead
(sq. mi.) Water (feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Lake florence Florence Creek ---38.7 ---110
Lake (athleen C>ee Ka th I een Creek) ------------
lake Surpri se Unl\llllled ---1.4 ---190
Ledge Lak.! ledge Creek ---4.2 ---180
leduc leduc River Ketchikan 1 IJB4 1241
lemon C,'eel; Lemon Creek Juneau B-2 25.3 ---240
lllli.c.-(See Kasaan Bay) ------------
long Creel: ---------------
long l .. le ---------------
loog Rivel' long River Juneau Area ---------.
lower IIldden falls -.-. -----------
ltaga Lat.e Unnallied ---\.8 ---150
Mahoney Lake. Upper Mahoney lake/George KetchHan B~S 5.6 ---fl9
Inlet
MaksoLilof River Maksoutof River Port Alexander 24 600 570
c-)
Manzillll ta Lake Manzanita & Ella Ketchikan C-4 6l 300 269
Margaret Creek Margaret Creek ---J.9 ------
tlarten 1\1111 Lake Harten lake ---5 ------
f1arten Cree~ Harten Creek ---19 ------
Marys l"l.e Brown & Johnson Crk ---26.5 ---120
r1cllenry Ldke Hellenry Creek ---13.4 ---lOO
,.
Average Pel'cent Flnu Ins talled Index
Annual Regula': ; Energy Capacity/ Cost
Runoff ticn (AI. 11 ion Plant fac-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ac. ft. ) (-) (%)
------1.6-2.2 -----
-----------------
---------0.4 -----
---------0.4 -----
61 100 62 14 50 14.5
---------5.025 -----
-----------------
-----------------
--------------
---------J) -----
---------21 -----
---------.2-.4 -----
------41 10 47 ---
272 93 117 24 50 12.6
620 91 124 26 55 17 .5
---------.06-.3 -----
---------.7-I.S -----
--------. 2.3-3 -----
------. -..... 1. 3-I.B -----
---------2.2-3.2 -----
ex>
I
U'1
--'
DIVISION Of [NERGY & POW[R OEVElOPJ.tUH
INVENTORY OF POTUH IAl HYDRO£LECTRIC SITES IN AlAS.:A
March 15, J978
SOIl1'IIEJ\S'r REGION M,A. P. Sheet 31 of 31
Powe,' Sitel Strealll U.S.r..S Hap Sheet DI'af nage tlax ]~_1111 Average
Area ~e9ulated lIead
(sq. mi. ) Waler (reet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Medvejia lake Unnamed ---7 ---ZIQ
Kedvelcha Medvetcha Rher Sitka .\-3 39 ---305
Melansun Lake Melanson Creek ---1.9 --Z40
l!ellen -.-------. -. -..
f!enef e lake Hellere Cascade ---3.5 ... 135
Hilk lake Milk. (reek Port Alexander II 700 666
0-]
Hi \I Cn:!ck ( See Virginia lake, --------. -_.
Hirror ----_. .. -. ----.
Hi rror lake Mirror lake -_. --------.
Haira Sound Unnamed Craig A-I -_. ------
Haunt .. ]n Point -.. . --I --. 100
ftyrtle Creek foIyrt1 e Creek 3.95 ---Vades
(Niblack lake)
ladzaheen La!:e Nadzanheen lake ---6.2 ---190
Haha River Naha Rher -.. 54.6 --. 205
lIakYassin lake Nakvasstn Creek . _-3.5 --. 175
.... ", lake Navy Creek ---7 .--220
Neck Island lake Heck Island lake ---18 ---180
Nelson lakes --. -----.-. ---
Niblack See Myrtle Creek) --. --. ------
HooYi CI'l;ek/lake See Rudyerd -----. .-----
Average Percent . firm J ns tailed Index
Annua 1 Regula-'Energy Capacity/ Cost
Runoff tion (~fllion Plant fac-
(1000 Kwh) tor
ac. ft. ) (11101 I (I)
.-----~--0.8 --.-.
---------0.9 -----
--. .-. ---0.29 ----.
--. ... -------. ._-
.. ----.--2 _. ---
167 36 33 7 55 19
-----------------
----'-.----------
.--..-.--2 -----
----" ---0.019 -----
---100 0.08 -----
----_. ---2.4 -. ---
-----. ---0.7 -----
-.---. -,..--3-3.5 .. ---
---------0.7 -----
--. .-----.8-1. , .-.--
_.--.----L' -----
--. -----. 4 -----
-------------" ---
-----------------
(Xl
I
U'I
N
'---
OIVISION OF ENERGY & POYER DlVElOPMfNT
IIlVENTORY OF POTENTIAL HYDROEUClRIC SITES IN ALASKA
1'1ar.ch 15, 1978
SOU'/'IIEJ\s'r HEGION Ii.A.P. Sheet J2 0 f 37
Power SHe! Strealll U.S.C.S Hap Sheet Ora i Ililge Hdxilllum Average
Area legulated tlead
(sq. mi.) W"fer (feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Nourse ---------------
Nugget Creek Nugget Creelt Juneau 8-2 16 725 601
01 tve lake 01 lve Creek ---3.8 ---210
O.·chard Creel<. Orchard Creek KelchHan o-~ 60 200 110
Osprey lake New Port Walter Port Alexander 2.1 ---252
Creek B-2,J,4
Parry Lake Parry Creelt ---6.1 ---315
Pa t Cl'et!k ---------------
Patterson Patterson lake ------------
Paul lake Tunnel Creek Craig A-I ---------
Pavlor laJ:e UnRallled Cascade ---23 ---24
Pelican Pelican Cove Creek Sitka 0-7 12.5 ---120
Pllrsevcrancelake Ward Cowe Creek Ketchikan 8-6 2.94 ---Varies
Pelersburg Reservoir Frederick Sound ------------
Peterson lake Petersofl lake ---5.8 ---610
Plotnikof lake' Unna-ed Port Alexander 20 350 315 . C-3 Porcupine Creek Porcupine Creek ---15.8 ---Varies
Port III thorp Margaret Creelt Mt Fa i rwea ther ---------
A-2
Port AnRstrong Sheckie), Creek Port Alexander 1 ---270
B-3,4
Port Conc1us ion Bay Conclusion Creek Port Alexilll.l"r ---------
1\-)
Porl Ft-ederlck Unnamed Sitka 0-5 -_. ------
-
Average I'ercent . Firat Ins ta lied Index
Annual Reyula-EJlergy Capacityl Cost
RUlloff tion (IlIttlion Plant Fac-
(1000 ~) tor
ac. ft. ) (aw) (I)
-----------------
151 40 30 6 55 52.9
---------1.5-2.4 -----
420 15 44 9 55 17.8
---------0.5 -----
---------, .6-3 -----
--------. ._------
---------2 -----
---------0.30 -----
---------.07-.2 -----
---------0.5 Exist ---
---------0.724 -----
-----------------
------1.1-2.8 -----
224 16 44 9 55 17.7
---------4 -----
---------0.047 -----
---------0.066 -----
----.----0.044 -----, ---------U .. oo1 -----
.-____ 1---_ --
Q)
I
(.TI
W
DIVISION OF ENERGY & POWER O(VElOPHENT
INVENTORY OF POTENTIAL IIYORO[LECTRIC SITES IN ALASKA
March 15, 1978
SOtlTlIl::AST REGION HAP . . Sheet. 3J of ]7 .---
Power ~itel Stream U.S.G.S Map Sheet DI-ainage Maximwu Average
Area legulated lIead
(sq. IIIL) Watel-(feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet) .
Port Sullivan Lake lkInamed ---0.S5 1650
Port Walter Bay lig Port Valter falls Port Alexander ---------
Creek D-],4
Pulp Mill (See ~dvetcha ) ------------
PunchbOl·,l (reek Punchbowl Creek Ketchikan c-] 14 650 622
Punchbowl I PI.I1lC hbow I lake. (See ---3 ---1200
Punchbowl Creek)
Punchbowl 2 Punchbowl .lake. (See ---12 ---608
Punchbowl Creek)
Purcle lake ---KetchU:.an 1\-5 6.8 ---320
ehabilitation
Quadra Lakes Qu;adra lake ---6.2 ------
Red lake led River Ketchikan A-2 44 400 347
Redoubt lake UMaIIed Cascade ---40 ---20
Reef Point Jftf Point lake ---. 7 ------
Reflection lake ---------------
Reynolds Creek Re}'llOlds Creek Cral 9 A-2 7 ------
Rhine Crf~ek Rbine Creek ---30 ---90
"
Rosttslof lake Rest h lof Creek ---4 ---550
Roza Creek ---------------
Rudyerd Unn.1Med Ketchikan C-2 8 1175 1600
Rust lake Sillmons Creek StU.a e-G 12.4 ---690
Ruth lake De I ta Creek Petersburg J)-J 8 1550 1449
-
Average Percent fh'll Ins ta lled Index
Annual Re!JUla-Energy Capacityl Cost
Runoff tion (.l111on Plant fac-
(1000 'Kwh) tor
ac_ ft. } (1IIot) (I) ,
;
---------I -----
------,---0.OS4 .----
-_. --. -----------
126 99 64 15 50 10.6
-----. ---] -----
-_. -----. 6.3 -----
------22 J 85 ---
--------------
410 89 104 24 50 12.2
" ------, . 0.4 -----
-----------------
------, ,--" --------
54 99 . , 54 11 55 19.7
------, ---1.2-1.7 -----,
---------J -----
------. ---" --------
63 100 83 19 50 10.6
--. -.-0.005 -----
59 90 63 13 55 18.1
DIVISION Of [NERGY & POWfR OEVHOP!iENT
INVENTORY Of POTENTIAL HYDROELECTRIC SITES IN ALASKA
March IS, 1978
SOUTHEAST REGION H.A.P. Sheet H of J7
Powel' Site/ St.'eilm U.S.G.S Hap Sheet Oratnaqe IlaxilllUIII Average
Area lleguJated Head
(sq. 1IIi.) Water . (feet)
Surface
Eleyation
(feet)
Saks (ove Siks Creek Ketchikan 0.-4 22 61S 621
Salrron Creek. 1 & 2 Sal.an Creek Juneau O-J. II ---388
Salrron lake (See Karta River I ------... ------
Salrron River Sal_ River Bradfield Canal 6S ---60
1\-1
Sashin lilkp. Sashtn Creek ---3 ---4010
SawlQi J J Creek SalllatlJ Creek ---1 ---340
Scenery Creek Scenery Creek SUlIidUlll A-] 21 9S7 620
Scenery Lake «See Scenery Creek I ------------
Sheck ley lakes (See Port Arastrong ) ------------
Sheep C.'eek Sheep Cree" ---6.1 ---ns
Shelokum take ---------------
Shenuan Creek Sberllil" Creek ---4.3 ---390
Shipley lake --------. ------
Shotter Creek ShoUer Creek ---0.6 ------
Short Short Creek ---24 ---280
Silvas lake Beayer failS Creek Kelchikan 8-5 S.85 ---1S0
Sttkoh lake Sitka Creek ---9.3 ---18S
Skag\'/ay Project Dewey.lcy & Snyder Skilgway a-l,e-l 149 --lS00
Skagway River --------------
Sl ide Slide Lake ------------
Average Percent firm Installed Index
Annual Regula-[ne,'gy Capac! tyl Cost
RUlloff tion (II!tllion Plant fac-
(1000 lwfl) tor
ac. ft. ) (...,) (1;)
1 SO 93 72 IS 55 18.7
---------5.6 Exist ---
-----------------
---------1.125 -----
---------.8-1.6 -----
------.7-1.4 -----
147 90 61 15 50 19.8
-----------------
-----------------
---------2.4 -----
---------1.2 -----
---------.2-.S -----
---------2.1 -----
---------.007-.03 -----
---------4-5.5 -----
---------6.S Exist ---
---------1 -----
---------0.52 -----
(0.] Exists
------_ .. '---------
---------.-------
00
I
(J'1
(J'1
DIVISION Of ENERGY & POWER UEVflOl'I·\UIT
INVENTORY OF POTENTIAL tlYllRO[lECTRIC SITES IN ALASKA
March 15, 1978
SOO'l'lIt;AS'f RBGIOH H.A.P. Sheet 35 of 37
--"".---~
I'lltl(!l' Site/ S trl'aPi U.S.!;.S Hap Sheet Drainage fLu ill~I'" A~'eragc
1I,'ea iegul,ltcd \lead
(sq. Hli.) Wa If'" (reet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Soul~ Glacier River
,
Soule Glacier River Ketchikan 0-1 ---------
SnetUshalII Speel River Taku River A-S----------
SnipP. Lake Unnamed Creek ---1.9 ---J45
Speel River Division Speel River Taku Rlvl'r A-S 194 32S 273
Snetlishalll Proj.
Spruce ---------------
Spruce Creek Spruce Creek ---3.5 ---680
Spur Unnamed Bradfield Canal 10 1889 1776
A-4
Steve Kane Creek Steve Kane Creek ---0.3 ------
Sttkine Riyer Stlk1ne RI ver Petersburg Col 20000 3S0 291
Suklcwan lake Sukkwan lake ---7 ---410
Suloia lake Sulola Creek ---8.8 ---20S
Sulora lake -------_. ------
SUllmit S-it lake ------------
Sunrise ---Petersburg a-:' ---------
Swan lake 1 Cascade Creek Sitka 11.-5 ---------
Swan lake ."! Cascade Creek. Sumdum A-J ---------
Swan lake J Fa11s Creek Ketchikan C-4 36 326 275
SW"fI lake, lower (See Swan lake I -----------
Sweetheart falls Sweetheart Falls SunKlulII D-5 35 684 612
Creek
Takatz Creek Yakatl Creek Sitka 11.-3 11 1040 991
Ave"agl' Percent ._ f1nu Insta lied Index
Annual Regula--Energy Capacity/ Cost
Runoff tion (_I II ion Plant fac-
(1000 Kwh) tor
lIC. ft. ) (1111>1) (I)
---------1.12S -----
---------47.2 Exist ---
O.S -----
------Z7S 63 SO 8.1
-----------------
---------. S-1.4 -----
83 87 lOS 24 SO 10.7
---------.007-.0J -----
15000 90 -9900 2260 50 9 .-
---------1.2-2 -----
, ---._. 1.4 ----.
-----------------
---------I.I -----
------21 4 60 ---
---------21. 7S -----
---------48 -----
336 91 69 15 St 12.8
----------------
250 100 125 29 S( 9.6
129 87 97 to 5i '2.5
~~-
(
ex>
I
01 en .
OIVISloo OF EKERGY & rOWER O[V[lOl'HfNT
IINENTORY OF POTENTIAL IIYIlROHECTRiC Sins IN ALASM
SOUTIIF.AST REGION H.A.P. Sheet )(, of 37 H.. rCh 15, 1978
P0I1fT Silt'; Stl'NII! US.G.S ~liIJl Sheet [l,"aillilgc 11.1 X ill~IRI Avcra9c
A,"ea !e1lulaled lIead
(sq. mi. ) Watt"" (feet)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
Takall lake {See Takatz (reek ) ------------
T illll9a s la ke Taegas Creek ---7.J ---70
Tease C"eel Tease (reek Taku River 1\-5 11 1100 1034
Tease lake (See Tease Creek ) _. ----------
Tenatee Inlet Harley Creek Sitka D-4 3.7 ---163
Thayer Creek Thayer Creek Sitka C-3 61 407 317
Thomas 8ay Cascade Creek SUllldWII 1\-3 19 1514 1442
Tholl:f\ lake Tholis Creek ---13.2 ---230
HIOI"ne Thorne River (.-aig C-2 166 125 103
Thumb Creek 1 .Thullib Creek Ketchikan 0-1 ---------
Thumb Creek 2 Sall110A River -.-18 --. ---
TOIl (,'eel. TOIl Creek ---17 ---380
Towers Creek Towers Creek Petersburg D-!"' SI 275 259
Treadwell Ditch Treadwell Diteh ---. 14.4 ---420
T rout Creek Trout Creek ---10.3 ---75
TUillakof lake TlINkof Creek ---3.S ---135
Tunnel Creek ------1.5 ---590
Turner Creek/lake Turner Creek ---52 ---118
Tyee Creek Tyee Creek Bradfield (alia I 15 1387 1275
A-5
Tyee lake lSee Tyee Creek ) ------------
Unllamed lake, Hear Unnamed Juneau D-3 3 J160 300J
laee RiYer
AI/eragt' rt'rccnt fiflll Instil J It'd Index
Annual Regula:: Energy Capacityl Cost
RUlloff tion (_i II ion Plant fae-
( 1000 Kwh) tor
ae. ft. ) (nlW ) (%)
------' -----------
---------0.3 -----
110 75 70 15 50 14.9
-----------------
---------0.07 -----
252 100 78 16 55 22 .1
160 B8 166 38 55 6.1
---------1.8-?6 -----
1100 85 80 17 55 11.6 ------. ---0.15 -----
--------------.. ---------2.3-5.2 -----
300 100 64 13 55 108.7
---------.5-11 -----
---------0.4 -----
---------0.4 -----
---------.2-.5 --.. -
--.-------" -----
12J 93 120 21 50 8.9
----------.------
20 100 .. 48 10 SCi \9.4
00
I
(.J1 ......
SOUTII ~;l\ST nC;GION
Power <; iI ('/
Virg,"ia Lake
Wi:ll!>h Cn~ek
Wat'd Co\/e
Wdshington Bay
Walcdilll lake
Walel'ing Place Creek
Wa XlIld II
Weigle
West CI"eek
White Rive"
Wh i lnlilll lake
Wilson lake
"\1 son River
Winstanley
Urn lIellry Bay
Wood
Wr angel1 Resevoir.
lower
Wrangel Resevolr.
Upper
Yehrin9 Creel:
Yukol) -Tatya
DIVISION OF EHERGY " POtIER [)(VHomUIl
IHVUHORV OF POiEHTIAl IIVIlROEl£CIRIC SillS IH ALASKA
March 15, 1978
1.A.P. Sheet J1 of 37 ----
StJ'ed~1 U, 5.1~,S "IiI,l ShE'el Ora ina':)€' Itl>:illllllll I\verage
A"ea :e"ul iI tl'" lIead
(sq. 111 i , ) Woller (feel)
Surface
Elevation
(feet)
HHI Creek/East Pass Petersburg £!-l --------
(See ward Cove) ------------
Wa led n9 P I ace Crk. Ketchikan D-6 ---------
Unnamed Port A 1 ex .. IIllc r ---------
C-2
Waterrall Lake ---],3 -. -500
--. ------------
WaXlllan Creek ---2.5 ---430
Weigle lake ------------
West Creek Skagway C-2 40 800 625
White River ---43 ------
Cue Creek KelchHan loS 4.75 ---380
(See Wilson River ) ------------
Wilson River Kelchikan B-2 10 400 166
Winstanley Creek -.-13.4 ---345
Beardslee River Juneau C-1 ---------
Wood lake ------.. ----
Unnamed ---2 --. ISO
Unnaliled ---I --. 50
Yehring Creek Taku River fl-6 16 1100 1077
Upper Yukon ---25700 2200 19lJ
.--.. ~--.
Part of System, See Talachulitna foc System Data
!'art of Nenana River S!~tem, See (',)r10 fo, syst~11I Oata , ,
Average Percent :. , nnll Installed Index
Annual Re9ula., Energy Capac! tIl Cost
Runoff tion (1Ii11ion Plant fac-
(1000 Kwh) lor
ac. H. ) (,,,w) (S)
------33 6 63 ---
"
--------------
---------0.008 -----
---------0.073 -----
...
------I.] -----
-----------------
---------.5-.9 -----
---------1.2 -----
268 75 105 21 55 25.9
---------2-U -----
---------4.05 -----
--------. --------
560 93 71 15 55 ]0.7
._-------5.4 -----
---------0.75 -----
---------1.3 .----
---250 0.2 -----
---40 0.032 -----
112 26 26 5 55 29.0
13500 100 21000 3200 7~ 3.3 _. -
.'. .; ' ... '
SOURCES OF HYDROELECTRIC SITE LISTINGS
.... ". '. "' .. " .' '. . . ,. ; . " ' ,
1; .. .. ·s~a:ryo~· !\.laska Lower' Priced. Hydroelectric Potentials
. 2S0o.'·KW:· (Continuous Power)' and Larger. !' ·January·: 1968.',
. Alaska Power Survey 1969 •
2 "Inventory of Potential Hydroelectric Sites in Alaska."
Prepared by the Alaska Power Administration -April, 1977.
First published in Alaska's Ener Resources, Volume II:
Inventor of Oil, Gas, Coa , H roelectr~c and Uranium
Resources. State of A aska. Department 0 Commerce.
Division of Energy and Power Development. October 1977.
3 "Capacity and Cost of Key Hydroelectric Projects."
.. ~. ,,~ .
University of Alaska. Institute of Social and Economic
Research. Electric Power in Alaska, a report for the
House Finance Committee, Second Session, Ninth Legislature.
State of Alaska. August 1976.
4 "projects Presently Under License or Which Have Appli-
cation for License Pending." Federal Power Commission.
Division of Licensed Projects. Bureau of Power.
Washington, D.C. Personal correspondence from Paul
Carrier, Engineer. 1977.
5 "Alaska Hydropower Projects At One Time Licensed But
Now Expired. 1920 through 1977." Federal Power
Commission. Division of Licensed Projects. Bureau of
Power. Washington, D.C. Personal correspondence from
Paul Carrier, Engineer. 1977.
6 "Hydropower in Alaska. Projects Which Had Applications
Applied for But Never Licensed." Federal Power
Commission. Division of Licensed Projects. Bureau
of Power. Washington, D.C. Personal correspondence
from Paul Carrier, Engineer. 1977.
7 "Potential Hydropower sites Near Angoon, Craig, Hoonah,
Hydaburg, Kake, Kasaan, Klawock, Kukwan, Pelican, ,and
Yakutat." Preliminary Aepraisal Report, Hydro-I
electric Potential for Angoon, Craig, Hoonah, Hydaburg,
Kake, Kasaan, Klawock, Kllkwan, Pellcan, and Yakutat. ""T
A report for the Alaska Power Xu€hor~ty. preparedSy' ' .. '
Robert Retherford & Assoc. 1977.
8-58
...
8. "Hydropower Sites & Land Withdrawals in Tongass
National Forest (as of June 1974)." Map and list
. prepared by the Alaska Power Administration. U.S.
Departmen~ of Interior.
9
'., t
IIPotential Power Projects
Rivers in Alaska Surve Re
Southwest Alaska. Corps 0
January 20, 1954.
-Mainland." Harbors and
ort. Interim Re ort No.5.
Eng~neers, Alaska Distr~ct.
10 "Powersite Land Withdrawals and Better Hydropower
Potentials. II Compiled 1970, Updated to 1976.
Prepared by the Alaska Power Administration. U.S.
Department of Interior. List and map obtained from
Don Gotschall of the Alaska Power Administration.
Juneau, Alaska.
11 "Water Power 'Projects in Southeast Alaska Showing
Location and the Potential Capacity in Horsepower:1I
Water Powers Southeast Alaska -1947. Federal
Power Commission ana Forest Serivce. U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture, 1947.
12. "Summary -Potential Power Sites, Alaska", and "Water-
power Inventory", Unpublished data, prepared circa
1960-1965. List of 274 sites. U.S. : Geological Survey.
Dept. of Interior. Obtained from Jesse L. Colbert, Portland,QreQon.
13 "Unclassified Potential Power Sites, Alaska (not
a total of sites)." Unpublished data, prepared
circa 1960-1965. U.S. Geological Survey. Depart-
ment of Interior. Obtained from Jesse L. Colbert, Port1and, Oregon.
14 IIInventory of Dams in the United States.1I National
Program of Inspection of Dams -Volume III.
15
U.S. Department 015 the Army. Corps of Engineers.
May, 1975.
Harbors
Inter~m
Corps 0
8-59
16 "Hydropower Sites & Land Withdrawals in the Chugach
National Forest, as of June 1974." Map and list
prepared by the Alaska Power Administration. U.S.
Department of Interior.
1:7::,ItT..tn,develQped ayw.oelect,iio: ,Power':Sites in:; ~+agx.a:.'
Federal Power Commission'. 'Alaska Power Market
Survey".' October 22, 1959. This listing appears
in the following publications:
-Hydroelectric Power Resources of the U.S.-
Developed and Undeveloped, 1960. Federal
Power Commission.
-Alaska Power Market Surve
San Franc~sco Re9~ona 0
Power Commission.
-Water Resources Development, January 1967.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in Alaska,
North Pacific Division.
18 "Potential Hydropower Sites in Alaska -Individual
Developed and Undeveloped By Major Drainages and
River Basins and By Geographic Divisions and States."
Hydroelectric Power Resources of the U.S. -Developed
and Undeveloped, January 1,,1969. Federal Power
Commission. u.s. Department of Interior.
19 "Potential Hydroelectric Power Plants.". List of
72 sites published in Alaska: A Reconnaissance
Report on the Potential Development of Water Resources
in the Territor of Alaska for Irri ation, Power
Pro uct~on an Ot er Bene ~c~a Uses. House
Document 197. U.s. Department of Interior. January
1952.
20 "Potential Hydroelectric Power Plants, Alaska."
Alaska River Basins, Planning Status Report,
Water Resource A raisals for H droelectric Licensin ,
6. Fe era Power Commiss~on. Bureau 0 Power.
21 "Reservoirs Under 100 Foot Dam and or Storage
Capacity Under 10,000 Acre Feet. It This list developed
by the Alaska Power Administration from list
entitled "Inventory of Dams in the United States"
prepared by the Corps of Engineers. Received from
Mr. Mac Wheeler of the Alaska Power Administration.
December, 1977.
8-60
22 "Southeastern Alaska Water Power Projects -February
15, 1952." Harbors and Rivers
Re ort. Southeastern Alaska.
U. S. Corps 0 Eng~neers, rrort
February 15~ 1952 •. . . . .
1.
23 "Existing Power Developments and Potential Power
Projects in Southeastern Alaska." Harbors and
Rivers in Alaska Survey Report. Southeastern Alaska.
Interim Re~ort No.1. U.S. Corps of Engineers,
North Paci ic Division. February 15, 1952.
24 "Potential Hydropower Developments -Cook Inlet
Area." Harbors and Rivers in Alaska
Cook Inlet and Tributaries. Interim
Alaska D~str~ct, Corps of Eng~neers. 0,
1950.
25 "Potential Hydropower Projects -Copper River and
Gulf Coast." Harbors and Rivers in Alaska Survey
Report. Co per River and Gulf Coast, Alaska. Interim
Report NO.3. A aska D1str1ct, Corps of Engineers.
October 30, 1950.
26 "Potential Hydropower Projects -Tanana River Basin."
Harbors and Rivers in Alaska Survey Report. Tanana
River Basin. Interim Report No.4. North Pacific
Division, Corps of Engineers. May 1, 1951.
27 "Potential Power Projects." Harbors and Rivers in
Alaska Survey Report. Yukon and Kuskokwim River
Basins. Interim Report No.7. U.S. Army Engineer
District, Alaska. Corps of Engineers. December 1,
1959.
28 Summar
Corps 0
Alaska.
of Potential H droelectric Power in Alaska.
Engineers. U.S. Army Eng1neer District
Revised September 1961.
29 "Hydroelectric Reservoirs in the Alaska Region."
Water Availibility, Quality and Use in Alaska, by
G.O. Bald1ng'. Open FIle Report 76-513. Geological
Survey. U.S. Department of Interior .. \t~'::'\.15t 1~):-6.
8-61
30 "Developed Hydroelectric Projects in Alaska. January
1, 1960." Hydropower of the United States -Developed
and Undeveloped, 1960. Federal Power Commission.
31' :"summaryof the· More F'avorablePotential' Hydroelectric
Sites in Alaska -February 1976.» Th~ 1976 Alaska
Power Survey, Volume 1. Federal Power Commission.
32 "Existing Hydroelectric Plants -January 1976."
The 1976 Alaska Power Survey, Volume 1. Federal
Power Commission.
33 "Hydroelectric Developments Existing and Under Con-
struction, February 1973", and "Key Hydroelectric
Resources of Alaska". 1974 Alaska Power Survey.
Resources and Electric Power Generation, A Report
of the Technical Advisory Committee. The Alaska
Power Survey and the Federal Power Commission.
May 1974.
34 "Alaska Water Assessment Map Showing Undeveloped
Hydroelectric Resources." Alaska Water
State-Regional Future Water and Related
Problems. Alaska Water Study Committee.
List of 76 sites.
Assessment
Land
June 1976.
35 "USGS Power Site Reserves and Classifications -March
3, 1978." Received in correspondence from Vernon
C. Indermuhle of the U.S. Department of Interior.
Geological Survey. 9277 West Alameda Avenue,
Lakewood, Colorado 80226. March 1978.
8-62
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 9
RESTRICTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS AFFECTING THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY
This chapter has been divided into six basic sections. Section one deals
exclusively with the pennits and licenses required under Federal statute
for the construction of a hydroelectric facility. Sect10n two briefly
discusses the U.S. Anny Corps of Eng1neers penn1tt1ng process. Sect10n
three deals w1th the State licenses and penn1ts required for the
construction of a hydroelectric facility as well as the distribution of
electricity from the built hydroelectric facility. Sections four and five
are concerned with selected pennits and with local statutes, certificates
or regulation which affect the distribution of electriCity from a
hydroelectric facility. Section six details Land Classification in regard
to Reserves and Wi thd rawa 1 s.
It must be stressed that the purpose of the chapter is to provide an
overview of the legal restrictions affecting hydroelectric projects. For
more detailed, current infonnation, 1t 1s suggested that interested
parties contact the various agencies directly.
FEDERAL LICENSES AND PERMITS
The principle opinion from which the first section is taken is Volume 18
of the Code of Federal Regulations, Conservation of Power and Water
Resources, Part 1 to 149 (revised as of April 1, 1977). In accordance
with the juri sdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC),
the following 1s a compend1um of regulations and pennits requ1red by FERC
in the construct10n of a hydroelectric faci11ty.
(It should be noted that the listed identification numbers are the section
numbers to the various chapters of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commi ss ion.)
REGULATIONS UNDER THE FEDERAL POWER ACT
Course and Method of Operation
3.113 Preliminary Permits
Applications for pre11m1nary perm1ts to ma1nta1n pr10rity of applicat10ns
for license. under section 4(f) of the act are referred to the PWR (Bureau
of Power) and the OGC (Offi ce of the General Cou nse 1) for s tudi es and
recommendations. Notice of an appl ication filed by any person,
association, or corporation is published in the FEDERAL REGISTER and in
local newspapers, in the vicinity of the proposed project and is given to
States and municipal Hies li kely to be affected, pursuant to section 4(f)
of the act. After notice, a hearing may be held.
3.114 Licenses.
(a) Formal procedures relating to the following applications are set out
in Parts 4, 5, 6. 16. and 131 of this chapter.
(b) Applications under the Federal Power Act for license authorizing
construction of major projects; for license for constructed major pro-
jects; and for renewal of licenses for major projects are processed in the
manner stated in § 3.113. except that those for substantial alteration or
surrender of licenses pursuant to section 6 of the Act may be acted on by
FERC after thirty (30) days' public notice by publication once in local
newspapers and in the FEDERAL REGISTER. and except that a hearing wi 11 be
held on applications for license authorizing construction of major
projects; for license for constructed major projects; for renewal of
1 icenses for major projects; and for substantial alteration to 1 icenses
for major projects.
3.119 Field inspections and revocation of permits and licenses by
court action.
9-2
Compliance with the terms of licenses and with the approved plans in con-
struction, operation, and maintenance of licensed projects, and with the
terms of prel iminary permits, is enforced by periodic inspections by the
PWR, principally through the Regional Offices, or through designated
Federal agenci es.
3.131 Determination of jurisdictional status.
In the course of the administration and enforcement of the requirements of
Parts II and III of the act, persons owning or operating electric power
facilities may initially be classified as to jurisdictional status under
the terms of section 201 of the act. These classifications, which are
tentative and not binding on the persons or the Commission, are made on
the basis of data reported to the Commission by such persons, supplemented
when necessary by staff investigation of the facilities and their
operations.
3.133 Exportation of electric energy.
(a) Applications for authorization to transmit electric energy fran the
United States to a foreign country pursuant to section 202{e) of the act
and for Presidential Permits under Executive Order 10485 (3 CFR, 1949-53
Comp., p. 970), are studied, and recommendations are made by the PWR and
the OGC. After notice, a hearing may be held. Such authorizations are
issued simultaneously with the requisite Presidential Permits.
3.142 Approved fonns, etc.
(a) The following is a list of approved forms, statements, and reports
under the Federal Power Act, descriptions of which have been published in
the indicated sections of Parts 131 and 141 of this chapter.
9-3
Detennination Of Cost Of Projects Constructed Under License
4.1 Initial cost statement.
When a project is constructed under a license issued under the act, the
licensee shall file within 1 year after the original project is ready for
service, an initial statement, under oath, with four additional confonned
copies thereof, showing the amount claimed by the 1 icensee as the actual
legitimate cost of construction of the original project and the price paid
for water rights, right-of-ways, lands or interests in lands, in such
detail and on such forms as the Canmission may prescribe or approve for
that purpose. Similar statements with respect to additions and
betterments to the original projects, as of December 31, shall be filed
annually 1n the same manner, before April 1 of the following year, unless
the Canmision shall otherwise direct.
4.2 Substance.
Each statement so filed shall give full, adequate, and complete infor-
mation with respect to the cost of the original project or addition and
bettennent, as the case may be. Any statement which does not contain
sufficient information will be returned to the 1 icensee for such
additional infonnation as the Canmission may deem necessary.
4.3 Report on project cost.
When a statement in satisfactory form shall have been filed wi th the
Commission, its representatives will make an audit of the accounts, will
examine and analyze the books, cost records, engineering reports, and
other records supporting such statement or pertaining to the project, will
inspect the project works, and will prepare a report setting forth their
findings and recommendations with respect to the cost as claimed.
9-4
4.4 Service of report.
Copies of such report will be served by registered mail upon said
1 icensees, and copies will al so be sent to the State publ ic service
commission, or if the State has no regulatory agency, to the governor of
the State where such project is located, and to such other parti es as the
COOlmission shall prescribe, and the report will be made available for
public inspection at the time of service upon the licensee.
4.5 Time for filing protest.
Thirty days after service thereof will be allowed to such licensee within
which to file a protest to such reports. If no protest is filed within
the time allowed, the COOlmission will issue such order as may be
appropriate.
4.6 Burden of proof.
The burden of proof to sustain each item of the statement of claimed cost
as filed shall be upon the 1 icensee and only such items as are in the
opinion of FERC supported by satisfactory proof may be entered in the
electric plant accounts of the licensee.
4.7 Findings and final statement.
Final action by FERC will be in the form of a finding and order entered
upon its minutes and served upon all parties to the proceeding.
Determination of Fair Value Of Constructed Projects, Under Section 23
(a) Of The Act
4.10 Valuation data.
In every case arising under Section 23 (a) of the act requiring the
determination of fair value of a project already constructed, the licensee
9-5
shall, within 6 months after the date of issuance of license, file with
the COO1mission an inventory and appraisal in detail, as of the effective
date of the license, of all property subject thereto and to be valued.
4.11 Reports.
Representatives of the Commission wi 11 inspect the project works, engin-
eering reports, and other records of the project, check the inventory and
make an appraisal of the property and an audit of the books, records, and
accounts of the 1 icensee relating to the property to be valued, and will
prepare a report of their findings with respect to the inventory,
appraisal, orginial cost, accrued depreciation, and fair value of the
property.
4.12 Service of report.
The report will be made available for public inspection at the time of
service upon the license.
4.13 Time for filing protest.
Thirty days after service thereof will be allowed to the licensee within
which to file a protest to such report.
4.14 Hearing upon report.
After the expiration of the time within which a protest may be filed, a
public hearing will be ordered in accordance with § 1.20 of this chapter.
Application For License; General Provisions
4.30 Who may file.
An application for license may be filed by any citizen, association of
citizens, corporations, State, or municipal ity desirous of obtaining a
1 icense pursuant to the act: Provided, however, That if a pre1 iminary
9-6
pennit has been issued, no action on applications by others than the
pennittee covering in whole or in part the same reach of stream or streams
shall be taken that might infringe on the rights of the penni ttee under
sections 5 and 7 of the Federal Power Act. (Order 175, 19 F.R. 5213, Aug.
18, 1954)
4.31 Acceptance for filing or rejection of applications.
(a) When an appl ication which confonns to the requi rements of § 1.15 of
this chapter is received, it will be given a filing number. Notice of
receipt thereof and flling number given thereto will be furnished appl i-
cant. When the application is found acceptable for processing by the
Secretary, notices will be given in accordance with the requirements of
section 4 of the Act (49 Stat. 839; 16 U.S.C. 797), § 1.37 of this
chapter, and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 48 Stat. 401, as
amended 16 U.S.C. 611 et. seq. Notice will also be given to the appropri-
ate office of the Department of the Interior as the the pub1 ic lands
affected, if any, so that withdrawals from entry may be recorded, unless
such action has been taken in connection with a prel iminary penni t. An
appl ication in order to be acceptable for processing must contain the
infonnation required pursuant to § 4.40 through 4.51, inclusive, as well
as any additional infonnation required, as appropriate,
4.32 Hearings on application.
(a) A hearing upon an application may be ordered by FERC in its
discretion, either upon its own motion or upon the motion of any party in
interest, except that in regard to those applications so designated
in § 3.114(b) of this chapter, FERC will schedule each appl ication for
hearing at the earliest possible date giving due consideration of
statutory requirements and other matters pending, with notice thereof as
provided by § 1.19(b) of this chapter. The hearing shall be limited to
the issues specified by order or orders of FERC.
9-7
4.33 'Issuance and acknowledgements of acceptance.
When FERC shall have issued a license or an amendment thereof, the same
shall be forwarded to the appl icant for acknowledgement of acceptance.
Application For License For Proposed MaJor Project or Minor Part Thereof
4.40 Contents.
Each application for license for a complete project of more than 2,000
horse power installed capacity to be constructed, or for a minor part of
such project, shall be verified, shall conform to § 131.2'of this chapter,
shall be filed in accordance with § 4.31, and shall set forth in
appropriate detail the following information in the order indicated.
4.41 Required exhibits.
[Details of Exhibits are listed.]
Application For License For Minor Project
4.60 Contents.
Each appl ication for ali cense for a complete project having installed
capacity of 2,000 horsepower or less, or for part of such project, whether
constructed or to be constructed shall conform to § 131.6 of this chapter
and shall be filed in accordance with § 4.31.
Application For License For Transmission Line Only
4.70 Contents.
Each application for license for transmission line only shall be verified,
shall conform to 131.5 of this chapter, shall be filed in accordance
with § 4.31, shall set forth in appropriate detail the following
information in the order indicated.
9-8
4.71 Required exhibits.
Application For Preliminary Permit And Amendments Thereof
4.80 Who may file.
Any citizen, association of citizens, corporation, State, or municipality
desirous of obtaining a license pursuant to the act for a project of more
than 2,000 horsepower installed capacity may make application for the
issuance of a prel iminary permit for the purpose of enabl ing appl icant to
secure the data and preform the acts required by law for fil ing an
application for the issuance of a license.
4.81 Acceptance for filing or rejection of applications.
When an application which conforms to the requirements of § 1.15 of this
chapter is received, it will be given a filing number; receipt thereof and
fil ing number given thereto will be furnished appl icant, and notices wi 11
be given in accordance with the requirements of section 4 of the act {49
Stat. 830; 16 U. S. C. 797} and § 1.37 of this chapter.
4.82 Contents of application.
[Contents of Application are listed.]
4.83 Hearing on application.
A hearing upon an appl ication may be ordered by the Canmission, in its
di scretion, ei ther upon its own motion or upon the motion of any party in
interest. The hearing shall be 1 imited to the issues specified by order
or orders of the Commission.
4.84 Amendments.
Appl ications for amendments of prel iminary permits shall follow the form
prescribed for original applications, as far as appl icable, and shall be
9-9
filed in accordance with § 4.31. If an application for an amendment em-
braces sites or areas not covered by the original pennit, notice of such
application will be given in the manner required for the original
application.
4.85 Issuance and acknowledgement of acceptance.
When FERC shall have issued a pre 1 imi nary penni t or an amendment thereof,
the same shall be forwarded to the appl icant for acknowledgement of
acceptance.
Application For Amendment of License
5.1 Amendment of license.
Where a licensee desires to make a change in the physical features of the
project or its boundary, and/or make an addition or bettennent and/or
abandonment or conversion, of such character as to constitute an
al teration of the 1 icense, appl ication for an amendment of the 1 icense
shall be filed with the Canmission, fully describing the changes licensee
desires to make.
5.2 Amendment of plans.
Appl ication for amendment of plans for a project under 1 icense shall be
filed with the Commission, fully describing the changes 1 icensee proposes
to make.
Surrender or Termination of License
6.1 Application for surrender.
Every appl icati on for su rrender of a license shall state the reason
therefor; and, except in the case of an appl ication for surrender of a
license for a minor project, or for a transmission line only, shall be
9-10
executed by the licensee and filed in the same fonn and manner as the
appl ication for the 1 icense; and be accompanied by the 1 icense and all
amendments thereof.
Recreational Opportunities and Development at Licensed Projects
8.1 Publication of license conditions relating to recreation.
Following the issuance or amendment of a license, the licensee shall make
reasonable efforts to keep the public infonned of the availability of
project lands and waters for recreational purposes, and of the license
conditions of interest to persons who may be interested in the
recreational aspects of the project or who may wish to acquire lands in
its vicinity. Such efforts shall include but not be 1 imited to: the
publication of notice in a local newspaper once each week for 4 weeks of
the project's 1 icense conditions which relate to publ ic access to and the
use of the project waters and lands for recreational purposes,
recreational plans, installation of recreation and fish and wildlife
facilities, reservoir water surface elevations, minimum water releases or
rates of change of water releases and such other conditions of general
public interest as FERC may designate in the order issuing or amending the
license.
Application For Transfer Of License
9.1 Filing.
Any licensee desiring to transfer a license or rights thereunder granted,
and the person, association, corporation, State, or municipality desiring
to acquire the same, shall jointly or severally file an application for
approval of such transfer and acquistion.
9-11
Annual Charges Under Part I of The Federal Power Act
11.20 Cost of administration.
Reasonable annual charges will be assessed by FERC against each licensee
to reimburse the United States for the costs of administration of Part I
of the Federal Power Act as follows:
Inspection of Project Works With Respect to Safety of Structures
12.1 Applicability.
Unl ess otherwi se ordered by FERC, the provl Slons of this part shall apply
with respect to projects licensed under Part I of the Federal Power Act
having a dam exceeding 35 feet in height above stream bed or having a
gross storage capacity in excess of 2000 acre feet.
12.2 Periodic inspections.
Notwithstanding any other terms and conditions of the license, the
licensee shall cause a complete inspection of the projects works,
excluding transmission lines and generating equipment, to be made at least
every 5 years, in order to determine whether there are any deficiencies or
potential deficiencies in the condition of project structures, quality and
adequacy of rna 1ntenance or methods of operation which might endanger
public safety.
Settlements Involving Headwater Benefits
13.1 Settlements involving headwater benefits.
Henceforth, licensees and permittees with headwater improvements providing
power benefits to downstream non-Federal power developers may file
contracts entered into with such parties so benefited agreeing to the
amount of annual payments for headwater benefits.
9-12
Functions Under Other Authorizations
3.181 Executive Order 10485.
(a) Applications for construction, operation, maintenance, or connection
of facilities for the transmission of electric energy between the United
States and foreign countries, under Executive Order 10485 (3 eFR 1949-53
Canp., p. 970), are referred to the PWR and to the OGC for studies and
recommendations. The FERC thereafter acts upon the basis of the
application, staff studies, recommendations of the Secretaries of State,
Defense, and Treasury and other pertinent data.
3.183 Federal power marketing acts.
The Bonnefil1e Projects Act (16 U.S.C. 832), the Eklutna Project Act
(64 Stat. 382), the Falcon Dam Act, as amended (68 Stat. 255, 77 Stat.
475), and the Flood Control Act of 1944 (58 Stat. 887, 890) provide that
the Commission review and, if satisfactory, confirm and approve rates
proposed for the sale of power geerated at projects constructed under
these and other acts.
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT PROGRAM
Another aspect of the Federal permitting process is the United States Army
Corps of Engi neers permit prog ram. The Corps of Engi neers permit, rather
than being an ancillary procedure, is a crucial step which must be
satisfactorily passed before any construction may be begun.
When the Corps permit program began in 1899, its purpose was principally
to avoid obstructions in navigable waters. Over the years this outlook
has broadened to take into account factors which affect the quality of the
water as well as those which determine the navigabil ity of the water of
the United States.
9-13
A pennit is required (see following example) if a hydroelectric facility
is to be built; the specific rules of the permits may be found in Section
322.4 and 323.4 of Title 33 of the Code of the Federal Regulations. (A
truncated version of Part 323 is included in this Chapter.)
Sane of the specific canponents of the Corps of Engineer pennit program
are defined below:
Navigable Waters of the Waters of the United States that are
United States subject to the ebb and flow of the tide,
and/or are presently used, or have been used
in the past, or may be susceptible to use to
transport interstate or foreign canmerce.
Waters of the United States The territorial seas.
Wetlands
Coastal and inland waters, lakes, rivers,
and streams that are navigable waters of the
United States, including adjacent wetlands.
Tributaries to navigable waters of the
United States, including adjacent wetlands.
Manmade nontidal drainage and irrigation
ditches excavated on dry land are not
considered to be tributaries.
Interstate waters and their tributaries,
including adjacent wetlands.
All other waters of the United States such
as isolated wetlands and lakes, intermittent
streams, prairie potholes, and other waters
that are not part of a tributary system to
interstate waters or to navigable waters of
the United States, the degradation or
destruction of which could' effect interstate
commerce.
Those areas that are inundated or saturated
by surface or ground water at a frequency
and duration sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically adapted
for 1 He in saturated so11 condi tions.
Wetlands generally incl ude swarnps, marshes,
bogs, and similar areas.
9-14
Dredge Material
Fill Material
Material that is excavated or dredged fran
waters of the United States.
Any material used for the primary purpose of
replacing an aquatic area with dry land or
of changing the bottan elevation of a water-
body.
Prior to the initiation of construction, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers
requires the approval of form 4345 (ENG Form 4345, 1 October 1977).
Specifically, applicants must furnish the Corp of Engineers the following
five ( 5 ) i terns:
1) A detailed description of the proposed activity, 'including the
purpose, use, type of structures, types of vessels that will use
the facility, facilities for handling wastes and the type,
canposition and quantity of dredged or fill material.
2) Names and addresses of adjoining property owners and others, on
the opposite side of streams or lakes or whose property fronts
on a cove, who may have a direct interest because they could
possibly be affected by your project.
3) COO1p1ete information about the location, including street
number, tax assessors description, political jursidiction and
name of waterway in enough detail so that the site can be easily
located during a field visit.
4) A list of the status of all approvals and certifications
required by other federal, state, and local governmental
agencies. This information is important because review time is
often reduced by jOint or simultaneous processing.
5) Reasons that explain denial of any approvals or certifications
required by other government agencies. When other approvals or
authorizations are denied, application for a Corps pennit may
not be approved.
9-15
Specifically, a sample of some sections appropriate to the construction of
a hydroelectric facility are listed below:
Regulatory Program of The Corps of Engineers
Part 32l-Permits for Dams and Dikes in Navigable Waters of the United
States
Part 323-Pennits for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material Into Waters
of The United States
323.1 General.
This regulation prescribes, in addition to the general policies of 33 CFR
320.4 and procedures to be followed by the Corps of Engineers in
connection with the review of applications for Depar1lllent of the Army
permits to authorize the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters
of the United States pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1344) (hereinafter
referred to as Section 404).
323.3 Discharge requiring permits.
(a) General Depar1lllent of the Army permits will be required for the
d1 scharge of dredged or fill materi a1 into waters of the United States.
Certain discharges specified in §§ 232.4-1, 323.4-2 and 323.4-3 are
permitted by this regulation.
323.4 Discharges permitted by this regulation.
(a) General. Discharges of dredged or fill material specified in
§§ 323.41, 323.4-2 and 323.4-3, below, are hereby permitted for purposes
of Section 404 without further processing under this regulation
(individual applications are not needed), except as provided in § 323.4-4
9-16
below. Permits may, however, be required under Section 10 of the River
and Harbor Act of 1899 (see 33 CFR 322). Sections 323.4-1, 323.4-2 t
323.4-3 do not obviate the requirenent to obtain State or local assent
required by law for the activities permitted there in.
323.4-2 Di scharges into certain waters of the United States.
(a) Discharges of dredged or fill material into the following waters of
the United States are hereby permitted for purposes of Section 404,
provided the conditions in paragraph (b) below are met:
323.4-3 Specific categories of discharges.
(a) The following discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of
the United States are hereby permitted for puposes of Section 404,
provided the conditions specified in this paragraph and paragraph (b)
below are met.
STATE PERMITS AND LICENSES REQUIRED FOR THE OPERATNG OF A
HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY
In addition to Federal permits and licenses, a number of State permits and
certHicates will be required. Ti tle 42, Publ ic Utilities and Carriers
Regulations require the following:
No pub11c utility may operate and rece1ve compensation for providing
a commodity or service after January I, 1971 without first having
obtained from the Commission [Alaska Public Utilities Commission]
under this chapter a certificate declaring that publ ic convenience
and necessity require or will require the service. (FEC. 42.05.221.)
The specific requirenents regarding who must file for a certificate of
public conveience and necessity and what the filing must consist of may be
found in the Alaska Administrative Code 3 AAC 48.010 through 3 AAC 52.130.
9-17
Additionally other certificates may be required. The following is an
index of selected State of Alaska permits for the construction of a
hydroelectric facility and the transmission of electricity. This listing,
however, is not complete and all interested parties should consult the
State of Alaska Di rectory of Permi ts as well as all appropriate agencies.
SELECTED PERMITS
Access Route Permit
Critical Habitat Areas Permit
Discharge into Navigable Waters Certificate of Reasonable Assurance
Encroachment Permit
Miscellaneous Land Use Permit
Public Utilities Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
Special Land Use Permit
Right-of-Way or Easement Permit
Utility Permit for Encroachment Within Highway Rights-of-Way
Waste Water Disposal Permit
Water Use Permit
LOCAL PERMITS AND LICENSES REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION
OF A HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY
The construction and operation of a hydroelectric facility will also
require local permits and 1 icenses. If, for instance, a hydroelectric
facility was located in both the Kenai Peninsula Borough and the
Matanuska-Susitna Borough, these local jurisdictions would have to be
consul ted.
9-18
\D •
ACCESS ROUTE PERMIT
DESCRIPTION
A permit is required of any person t:) ~in an easement across State park lands or waters to
Pl"ivately owned property wholly Of" ~ially within a State park. The permit must be ob-
tained from the Director of the Onrsion of Parks. Department of Natural Resources
(DNA).
REQUIREMENTS
An application letter must be SUbrn.l:;!C to the director of Parks An explanation citing the
reasons for the necessary access n>_l": through a State park and a map of the proposed
route should be included with the leni!!"
There is no application fee. Public no: =-= and pub)ic hearings are not required.
The director will determine if there are ~o other reasonable al ternate routes to the appli-
cant's property _ If it is determined mat '10 other route is available. that park values would
not be irreparably damaged and that trle area in question is not a subject of dedication lor
grant funding purposes. the Access Perm,! '1lay be issued,
The permit is issued for a duration :;€!e!"I'T1ined by the director, Any part of an access route
constructed under this permit:
1_ Is to be constructed and 'T\iio:1tained by the permittee in accordance with spec'-
fications provided by the :,'ec:or.
2, Is the property of the Stat~ cf Alaska,
3. May be used by the genera :l\.>~'ic when permitted by the director.
If prior regulations are met the perm.; "'.ay be issued,
AUTHORITY
AS 41.20.020, Duties of the Depar:ment of Natural Resources,
AS 41.20,040. Division within the ::>epartment of Natural Resources,
11 AAC 18,020, Access Routes.
CONTACTS
Director
Division of Parks
Department of Natural Resources
619 Warehouse Avenue. No. 210
Anchorage. Alaska 99501 Telephone: 274-4676
CRITICAL HABITAT AREAS PERMIT
DESCRIPTION
Any persons proposing any work or development within any State Fish and Game Critical
Habitat Areas must obtain a permit from the Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)
before starting such operartions, For the purposes of this permit. "Critical Habitat Areas"
are those designated in AS 16,20,230, The permit requirements insure that development
within critical habitat areas is compatible with the perpetuation of area fish and wildlife
resources.
REQUIREMENTS
The applicant should submit to ADF&G full plans for the anticipated use. sPeCifications
or proposed construction work. plans and specifications for the proper protection of fish
and game, the approximate time schedule of work. and a map with the proposed activity
site marked. No application forms or fees are required, Public notices or public hearings
are not necessary, ADF&G will act on application within 30 days of their receipt.
The permit issued is a temporary permit valid for one year, Renewals are made on specific
request only. No fee is required for issued permits,
AUTHORITY
AS 16.20,230. F ish and Game Critical Habitat Areas,
CONTACTS
Habitat Protection
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Subport Building
Juneau. Alaska 99801
Regional Offices:
Regional Habitat Protection Supervisor
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
210 Ferry Way
Juneau. Alaska 99801
Regional Habitat Protection Supervisor
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
333 Raspberry Road
Anchorage. Alaska 99501
Regional Habitat Protection Supervisor
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
1300 College Road
Fairbanks. Alaska 99701
T~ephone:4654105
Telephone 586-6630
Te!ephone 344-0541
Telepno"e.452-1513
\0
I
N o
DISCHARGE INTO NAVIGABLE WATERS
CERTIfiCATE Of REASONABLE ASSURANCE
OESCR IPTION
Any applicant for a federal license or permit for a proposed activity which may result
in a discharge into n~igable waters of Alaska needs to obtain a Certificate of Reasonable
Assurance from the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) stating that the
proposed activity will comply with the requirements of section 401 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 as modified by the Clean Water Act of 1977.
Certification obtained relative to the construction of a facility is valid for a federal per-
mit or license subse::luently required for the operation of the facility.
REQUIREMENTS
Application for the Certificate of Reasonable Assurance is made by submi tting to DEC a
letter requesting the certificate accompanied by a copy of the permit application being
submitted to the permitting federal agency. Form 18-100, which IS provided by DEC,
may also be used as the application for the certificate. There is no application fee. Upon
receipt of a proper application, DEC shall have published notice of the application in a
newspaper in the project area. Public comments will be received until 30 days after the
publication of the notice. Public hearings may be held if deemed necessary by DEC. If a
public hearing is held it shall be held no sooner than 30 days after tne publication of the
public notice.
The completion of the federal permit is pending upon the Certification of Reasonable
Assurance.
The certification rray be issued for a period not to exceed five years and is effective
upon issuance. Renewals must be applied for as initial applications.
AUTHORITY
PL 92-500. Fea8!"aI W2ter Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Section 401.
18 AAC 15. Admin;Strative Procedures.
18 AAC 70.081-085. Certificate of Reasonable Assurance.
CONTACTS
Permit Coordinator
Department of Env;ronmental Conservation
Pouch 0
Juneau, Alaska 99811
Regional Offices
Regional Environmental Supen/isor
Southeast Regional Office
Departme~t 0: Environmental Conservation
Pouch OA
Juneau, Alaska 99811
Telephone: 465-2670
Telephone: 364-2148
Regional Environmental Supervisor
Southcentral Regional Office
Department of Environmental Conservation
MacKay Building, 12th Floor
338 Denal i Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Regional Environrre;raI Supervisor
Northern Regional Office
Department of Environmental Conservation
P_O. Box 1601
fairbanks, Alaska 99707
Regional Environmental Supervisor
Prince William Sound Ragona! Office
Department of Envirorvnental Conservation
Pouch E
Valdez, Alaska 995B6
Telephone: 274-5527
Telephone: 452-1714
Telephone: 835-4098
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
DESCRIPTION
This permit applies to persons wishing to construct. place, change or maintain an encroach-
ment across or along a public highway or right-ot-way, This also applies to encroachments
on all highways acquired or constructed in whole, or in part, with federal-aid funds, in
accordance with the federal regulations governing the future use and occupation of such
highways. No encroachment will be allowed unless it is authorized by a written permit
issued by the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities.
REQUIREMENTS
An applicant for an Encroachment Permit should submit a plan sheet or sketch of the pro-
posed encroachment, a right-of-way map. or other suitable plat showing each encroach-
ment to the appropriate regional Right-of-Way and land Acquisition Agent. Department
of Transportation and Public Facilities. (There is no specific application form for this
permit.)
The planned encroachment is reviewed to ensure that it will not interfere with the con-
struction, maintenance, free flow of traffic or aesthetics of the highway and will not de-
crease the safety. convenience or pleasure of highway users. There are no fees for the
Encroachment Permit. If the encroachment is for a parking area or parking platform turn-
outs in the right-of-way. the maintenance costs and liability are the responsibility of the
permittee. Applicants are not required to post notices or hold public hearings concerning
their desire to acquire an encroachment permit.
Once authorized. the permit remains in effect until terminated by the State. or until the
authorized encroachment is destroyed, removed or rebuilt, in which case another permit is
required.
The department asks the approval of the Federa! Highway Administration when the en-
croachment is on the federal-aid system. .
AUTHORITY
AS 19.25.200. Encroachment Permits.
17 AAC 10.010. Encroachments.
CONTACT
Right-of-Way and Land Acquisition Agent
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
Pouch 6900
Aviation Building
Anchorage. Alaska 99502 Telephone: 337-1511
Right·of-Wa·{ and land Acquisition Agent
Deparlffiem oi Transportation & Public Facilities
2301 Peger Road
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
Right-of-Wa'( and Land Acquisition Agent
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
P.O. Box 507
Valdez, Alaslca 99686
Right-of-Way and Land Acquisition Agent
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
P.O. Box 1048
Nome. Alaska 99762
Right-of-Wa', and Land Acquisition Agent
Department Of Transportation & Public Facilities
PO. Box 3-1000
Juneau, AlasJca 99802
Telephone: 452-1911
Telephone: 835-4322
Telephone: 443-5255
Telephone: 789-0841
\0
I
N
N
MISCELLANEOUS LAND USE PERMIT
DESCRIPTION
The Miscellaneous Land Use Pe,mi t is required for surface actiVities (designated in
11 AAC 96.010) and the usage of equipment (unless excluded by 11 AAC 96.020i on
State-owned land. If the land has previously been designated "Special Use Lands"
because it has special scenic, historic, archaeologic, scientific, biological, recreationoi. or
other special resource values, any activity on that land requires a permit. A list of activities
for which the permit is not required is maintained in each district office of the Division of
Lands (ADL). Each permit includes stipulations for the protection of the natural environ-
ment and fish and game habitat.
RECUIflEMENTS
Applications for the permit are to be filed with the ADL district office on forms DL-285
and DL-286 Each application must contain the following information in sufficient detail
to allow evaluation of the planned activities' eHect on the land.
1. A map showing the general location of all actiVities and routes of travel for all
equipment for which the permit is required
2. A description of each proposed activity and type of equipment that will be
used.
There is no filing fee. Public notices and hearings are nOt required"
Within 30 days of receipt of a proper application, the director may give notice to an ap-
plicant that a personal or corporate surety bond is required. The value of the bond varies
from $1,000.00 to $100,000.00 and ;s based on the type of activity. A schedule of the
amOUnt for specified activities is available at aU offices of AD L. The bond must be filed
before the proposed activity commences.
Final action will be taken within 30 days of receipt of the application. A permit may be
issued for a period not to exceed one year and may be renewed for any number of con-
secutive per;ods. The effective date of the permit is the first day of the month fo/low'r,g
the date the permi t is signed. I f final action IS not taken by an ADL office within ,he
allotted 30 days. an applicant may proceed with his operation.
Activities which require this permit may also require permits from the following state
and federal agencies.
1. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation.
2. Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
3. U S Department of the Army. Corps of Engineers.
4. U.S Er;v,ronmental Protection Agency
AUTHORITY
AS 38.05.035. Powers and Duties of the DlrEcctor
AS 38.05.330. Permits.
11 AAC 96. Misceiid/1eous Land Use Regulations.
CONTACTS
Director
Division of Lands
Department of Natural Resources
323 E. Fourth Avenue
Anchorage. Alaslca 99501
Director
Division of Land and Water Management.
Department of Natural Resources
323 E. Fourth Aven..;e
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Director
Division of Minerals and Energy Management
Department oi Natural Resources
323 E. Fourth Avenloe
Anchorage, Alas;':a 99501
District Offices
Southeasterr, D,strict Office
Division 0: Lands
Pouch M
Juneau, Alasi<.a 99811
Southcentr3' ~'strlct Office
DiVision of i..a:-.cs
323 E. FO'_"" ~"enue
Anchorage. Aaska 99501
Northern Distrlc! Office
Division of Lands
State of Alaska Building. Rm 116
Fairbanks, A!asl(a 99701
Tele;:hc.,-e 465-:415
..0
I
N
W
PUBLIC UTILITIES
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY
DESCRIPTION
Every corporation. company. individual or assoc;ation who owns. operates, manages. or-
controls a "public utility" must obtain a Certi'icate of Public Convenience and Necessity
from the Alaska Public Utilities Commission, Department of Commerce and Economic
Development. The holder of a certificate is aultlorized to own. operate. manage. or control
.. electric. telecommunication. gas. water. seNef. steam or refuse public utility.
In the event of competing applications. the Commission will determine which proposal
best satisfies the requirements of public co'lYEflience and necessity and which of the appli-
cents is the most fit. willing, and able to furns> the service.
RiQUIREMENTS
Application forms (Form 101 for non-m"r.!c.'t)ai applicants or Form 107 for municipal
applicants) are available from the Commiss;oo When requesting forms, an applicant should
indicate the type of utility service and whether me applicant is a municipality. A corporate
applicant (excluding municipalities) should a:tacn
1. Certificate of Incorporation (Fore'g~::;c~!lcl
2. Articles of Incorporation.
3. Bylaws.
A partnership should attach a copy of the partr'EfS'ip agreement. Public notice of an appli-
cation is published at the applicant's expenser. each geographical area of interest. (The
Commission prepares the notice.) A pUblic hea< "'1 may be held if there are protests or
upon the Commission's own motion. The apc~~: .s responsible for a $50 filing fee. and
for hearing and investigation costs if public ~:i.' -';5 a'e required. Separate applications are
reQUired for each type of proposed utility.
The Certificate of Public Convenience and Ne:es :is in effect until it is revoked by the
Commission. Therefore, renewals are not neces.sar·, A Certificate may not be sold. leased.
rented. transferred or inherited without the pr-=:' ;; .. pro",,,1 of the Commission.
AUTHORITY
AS 42.05. Alaska Public Utilities Commission .1.::
3 AAC 48. Alaska Public Utilities CommissiOf' :;e;;...ations.
CONTACT
Utilities Engineer
Alaska Public Utilities Commission
1100 MacKay Building
338 Denali Street
Anchorage. Alaska 99501 Telephone: 276-6222
SPECIAL LAND USE PERMIT
DESCR IPTION
Any activity that involves the placing of :emoorary improvements or equipment on State
owned land requires a Special land Use Permit The permit is issued by the Director of
Ihe Division of land and Water Management, Department of Natural Resources.
REQUI R EMENTS
Applications are to be filed with the Divis;on of land and Water Management on form
10-135 and must include a $10.00 non-ren..:ndcole filing fee. Public notice and hearings
are not required.
The permit may be issued for a period not to exceed five years and may be renewed by
reapplication. Final action on an application wili be taken by the director.
A fee may be charged for use of the land. The rate ranges from $100.00 to $250.00
annually and is based on the activity.
AUTHORITY
AS 38.05.035. Powers and Duties of the DlreclOr
AS 38.05.330. Permits.
II AAC 58.210. Special land Use Permits.
CONTACTS
Director
DI',islon of Land and Water Management
Department of Natural Resources
323 E. Fourth Avenue
Anchorage. Alaska 99501
D.stflct Offices:
Southeastern District Office
Division of Lands
Pouch M
Juneau. AlaSka 9981 I
Southcentral District Office
DiviSIon of lands
3327 Fairbanks Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Northcentral District Office
Division of Lands
4420 Airport Way
Fairbanks, Alaska 9~701
Telephone 279-5577
Telephone 465-2415
Telephone: 279-7696
Telephone 479-2243
RIGHT-OF-WAY OR EASEMENT PERMIT
DESCRIPTION
The Right-of-Way Easement Permit is required for the construction of a road, trail, ditch,
pipeline. drill site, log storage site, telephone line, or similar use of improvement on State
land. The permit is issued by the Director of the Division of lar,d and Water Management.
Department of Natural Resources.
REQUIREMENTS
App:icatians for the permit must be submined to the Division of land and Water Manage-
ment Oli form 1 () 112. Each application must be accompanied by a non-refundable $10.00
filing fee and a preliminary plat.
TenM_ duration, and final approval are at the discretion of the director or his appointed
~tative_ If the proposed' construction is approved, a letter of entry is issued, author-
izing the construction. The Right-of-Way Permit is not issued until the as-builts, according
to specificatiOns, are approved by the department.
If !he proposed construction may impact waters of the State. permits from the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game and the U_S. Army. Corps of Engineers may be required
atso
AUTHORITY
AS 3805035. Powers and Duties of the Director,
AS 35.05.330. Permits.
11 Me 58.200. Ri~_'lt-of-Way or Easement Permit.
OOHTACTS
Director
DMsion of Land and Water Management
Department of Natural Resources
323 E. Fourth Avenue
Anc"lor age. AI aska 9950 1
Disuict Offices
Southeastern District Office
Division of Lands
Pouch M
Juneau. Alaska 9981 1
Southcentral District Office
;)r,ision of lands
3327 Fairbands Street
Anchorage. Alaska 99503
Telephone: 279-5577
Telephone: 465-2415
Telephone: 279-7696
NOrthcentral District Office
DiVision of Lands
4420 Airport Way
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 Telephone 479-2243
DESCRIPTION
UTILITY PERMIT FOR ENCROACHMENT WITHIN
HIGHWAY RIGHTS-OF·WAY
Persons, po::tic:ai subdivisions, or cooperatives wishing to construct, place, or maintain
utilities undec. on, in, or over the highway rights-of-way must contact the Department of
TranspOf'tation ~ Public Facilities to obtain a Utility Permit. Utilities include railroads
and all publicly, privately, or cooperatively owned lines, facilities and systems for pro-
ducing, tr~ittir"J or distributing communications, telecommunications. power, electri-
city. light, "'1. gas. oil, crude products, water. steam, waste, storm water not connectlilQ
with highway drainage, and other similar commodities, including publicly owned fire and
police signa! sys':ems, and street lighting systems. A Utility Permit is also necessary to
improve, aad to, relocate, or change the operating conditions of existing facilities. A single
Utility Permit shali authorize only such activities as are reasonably required for the con-
struction and routine maintenance of a separate utility facility upon or within highway
rights-of-way.
REQUIREMENTS
Application form DH 205A, "Application for Utility Permit on Highway Rights-of-Way,"
and instl1..lC1:icns for preparation, including sample applications, plan sheets and permits,
may be o~ from the local Highway Maintenance Foreman or the Regional Utilitie1
Engineer. T:~ aDC1ication must be accompanied by plans, specifications, description of
work, met:bcx::s to be employed. and other pertinent data to provide the department with
all informat'on necessary to evaluate the engineering design, location, and other aspects
of the pre>;:>osed :nstallation. The plans shall also show the location of all existing
facilities in tie immediate vicinity of applicant's proposed facility. In the case of a con-
flict with an o:stng facility. the applicant must obtain a "letter of non-objection" from
the owner of me existing facility and submit it with the permit application.
The Department of Transportation and Public Facilities works with other agencies, such as
the Federal A~an Administration and Department of Environmental Conservation,
when the ~<llIIld facility comes under regulations by these agencies. I f an applicant
wishes to iocate a facility upon land obtained by the department from another government
agency, the ~::cant must obtain a Special Use Permit or a "'etter of non-objection" from
the owning ~t agency and submit it with the permit application.
Since the permit preparation. approval and execution process involves the applicant, the
department. 00W0erS of affected utilities and possibly other agencies. the application for a
Utility Permit st1QuId be submitted well in advance of the anticipated date for beginning
work to be ~ by the permit to allow adequate time for completion of this process.
The comptr..e::: ilP?lication should be submitted to the Regional Engineer. Upon approval
of the applicnicn, the department will prepare the Utility Permit, including stipulations
and special C::r.(!ilioos, and send the original and three copies of the permit to the permit-
tee for his ~a".;rl! and return to the Regional Engineer for execution.
The department will execute the Utility Permit and return two copies to the permittee.
The permittee or his contractor is required to have one copy of the fully execuled Utility
Permit at the work site during construction of the facility.
The permittee must give the department advanced notice of the proposed date upon which
the permittee intends to enter upon the highway right-of-way to commence construction
or major maintenance on the facility covered by the Utility Permit.
The department may require the permittee to furnish a bond or assurance to protect the
highway and appurtenances. Also, the department may require inspection of the construc-
tion of the facility by a representative of the department. The permittee shall agree to
reimburse the department for the actual costs of such inspection as stated in the special
conditions of the Utility Permit.
Th4/ permit is valid for as long as the facility exists. A new or modified permit must be
obtained prior to alteration or relocation of the facility.
A utility company must have Articles of Incorporation, obtained through the Corporations
Section of the Alaska Department of Commerce and Economic Development, prior to
receiving a permit.
AtJTHORITY
AS 19.25.010. Use of Rights-of-Way for Utilities.
17 AAC 15. Engineering-Utility Permits.
CONTACT
Regional Utilities Engineer
Department of Transportation and Public Faciltties
4111 Aviation Avenue. Pouch 6900
Anchorage, Alaska 99502
Regional Utilities Engineer
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
23)1 Peger Road
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
Regional Utilities Engineer
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
P.O. Box 3-1000
Juneau, Alaska 99802
Regional Engineer
Department of Transporation and Public Facilities
P.O. Box 220
Nome, Alaska 99762
Regional Utilities Engineer
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
PO. Box 506
Valdez, Alaska 99686
Telephone: 243--1111
Telephone: 452-1911
Telephone : 789-0841
Telephone 443--5266
Telephone 835-4322
\0
I
N
0"1
WASTE WATER DISPOSAL PERMIT
DESCRIPTION
Any person conducting an operation which results ;r the josposal of wastewater into or
upon the waters or surface of the land of the State of A.aska or into a publically operated
sewerage system must procure a permit from the Depa!'trllent of Environmental Conserva·
tion (DEC) before the operation begins. This permit is r,ot required for discharging only
domestic sewage into a sewerage system.
"Wastewater" means sewage. waterborne industrial waste, laundry liquid effluent, shower
or sink water. or other wastes which are waterborne or in a ;iquid state.
REQUIREMENTS
An applicant is required to submit a completed applicati()'". Form 18·100, which is provid-
ed by DEC. in duplicate with descriptions of the process of treatment used and the di$-
posaI site. Specific information on operations is detailean rhe permit application. Any
Idditional data on the environment and the facility rna .. oe required if requested by the
Department. Instructions for filling out the "Waste Water Disposal Permit Application"
... also included with the application form. No applicat.Ql" 'ee is required.
Applications are to be submitted 60 days prior to :he :::::m-nencement of operations.
Upon receipt of the application DEC will issue a pub"c "oroCe ,n two consecutive issues
of. newspaper in the area of the proposed activities P...oi>C comments are accepted up
to 30 days after the final public notice. Public hear;ngs are not necessary but they may
be held if demanded by public interest. Notification :J' :lie proposed discharge must be
given to the Alaska Departments of Fish and Game, Hea::C! atXl Social Services, Commerce
and Economic Development. and Natural Resources for !t'.e.r re·new and comment.
DEC may require that industrial liquid wastes or other wastes which are discharged into
pUblic sewerage systems Of' treatment works be treated and equalized to prevent QVe(.
loading or damaging effects upon the public sewerage SyStenS.
The permit may be issued for a period not to exceec ":ve years. Renewal of the permit
must be on request by the permittee 30 days prior to !he permit expiration. Waste Water
Disposal Permit renewal applications must be submined Of' the same manner as an initial
application.
No person may deposit the sludge from septic tanks. holding tanks, cesspools, privies,
sewerage treatment works. water treatment works. industrial or commercial facilities. or
sludges from other wastes to the waters or land without a Solid Waste Disposal Permit
from DEC. Sludge may otherwise be disposed of to a propel1y permitted facility de·
signed to handle solid waste.
Since the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency muSt !SSJ€ the National Pollutant Dis-
ch~rge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for wastewater discharge, the state may
waive the procedural requirements for issuing a state permit and may adopt the NPDES
permit as the required State permit.
AUTHORITY
AS 46.03.100. Waste Disposal Permit.
AS 46.03.090. Plans for Pollution Disposal.
AS 46.03.110 and J..20. Waste Disposal Permit Procedure.
18 AAC 15. Administrative Procedures.
18 AAC 10. Water Quality Standards.
18 AAC 12. Wastewater Disposal.
CONTACTS
Permit Coordinator
Department of Environmental Conset'Vlltion
Pouch 0
Juneau, Alaska 99811
Regional Off'lCes:
Regional Environmental Supervisor
Southeast Regional Office
Department of Environmental Conservation
Pouch OA
Juneat. Alaska 99811
Regional Environmental Supervisor
Southcentral Regional Office
Department of El1IIironmental Conservation
MacKay Building, 12th Floor
338 Denali Street
AnchOf'8ge. Alaska 99501
Regional Environmental Supervisor
Northern Regional Office
Department of Environmental Conservation
P.O. Box 1601
615 Seventh Avenue
Fairbanks. Alaska 99101
Regional El1IIironmental Supervisor
Prince William Sound Regional Office
Department of Environmental Conservation
Pouch E
Valdez, Alaska 99686
Telephone: 465-2670
Telephone: 364-2148
Telephone: 214-5627
Telephone: 452·1714
Telephone: 835-4698
\
WATER USE PERMIT
DESCRIPTION
Any person who desires to appropriate waters of the State must get a Water Use Permit
from the Director of the Division of Land and Water Management, Department of Natural
Resources prior to taking any unappropriated water. ThIs permit authorizes the holder to
construct the necessary works for appropriating water and to commence his appropriation;
however, it does not secure rights to the water.
When the permit holder has commenced to use the appropriated water, he may notify the
..QU:ector who shall issue a Certificate of Appropriation. The Certificate secures the holder's
rights to the water.
R EOUI REMENTS
ApplicatiOflS for the permit must be submitted to the Division of Land and Water Manage-
ment on form 10-102 and must include the following information:
1. Location of the source from which the water is to be appropriated,
2. Description of the proposed means of appropriation.
3. Ouantity of water to be appropriated.
4. Location of the place where the water will be used.
5, Explanation of the proposed use of the water,
A non-refundable $20.00 filing fee must accompany the application.
An application to appropriate water must include plans and specifications for any dam
that may be built. If the proposed dam may endanger the public health and safety or may
endanger anadromous fish. the director may request modifications of the plans and spec·
ifications and an independent appraisal of the plans by a Qualified engineer,
Public notice of the application for water appropriation must be PUblis.~ed once in a local
paper and must allow for a fifteen-day comment period, Also, notice of the application
and the fiheen-day comment period must be sent to the following:
1. All prior appropriators.
2. Local gOllernments.
3. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation.
4, Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
Hearings are not required; however. they may be held if objections to the proposed appro-
priation are received,
The permit is issued for a period determined by the director.
If the water is 01' will be devoted to a public water supply and there is insufficient unappro-
priated water to SUpply all water rights holders. the appropriator may apply for preferred
use status on form 188. This application for preferred status must be accompanied by a
$20.00 filing fee. 7'1e application must also contain the following:
1. The name and address of all holders of existing water rights. permits to appro-
priate. or certificates of appropriation whose rights to water would be reduced,
or in times of scarce water, could be reduced by the diversion of water to the
preferred use .
2. Certified copies of executed agreements between the hOlder of preferred use
status and atl other persons named in the application,
The director will grant preferred use status to the designated user.
Depending on the source of water and the nature of the proposed use. permits may be
required from the following state and federaJ agencies:
1, Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
2. Alaska [)epan:ment of Environmental Conservation.
3. U.S. Army. Corps of Engineers.
4. U.S. Env'ronmental Protection Agency,
AUTHORITY
AS 46.15.030-185. Appropriation and Use of Water.
11 AAC 72. Water Use.
CONTACTS
Director Division of WInd and Water Management
Department of Natural Resources
323 E, Fourth A'Iel"IUe
Anchorage. Alaska 99501
Oistrict Offices'
Southeastern District Office
Division of Lands
Pouch M
Juneau. AliII5ka 99611
Sou thcentral District Of flee
Division of Lands
3327 Fairbanks Street
Anchorage. AlasKa 99503
Northcentral Discrict Office
Division of l..anas
4420 Airport WilY
Fairbanks. Alaska 99701
Telephone 279·5577
Telephone: 465·2415
Telephone: 279-7696
Telephone: 479-2243
Under the planning authority of the Kenai Peninsula Borough the Borough
has been charged with land use planning, zoning, and platting. Any
subdivision of private land must be approved by the Borough, but the
subdivision ordnance has few requinnents for subdivision improvements· in
rural areas. Any alteration of the coastal zone will require the pennis-
sion of the Coastal Zone Management (CZM).
In regard to the Matanuska-Susitna Borough any development of land which
falls within their jurisdiction or the establishment of transmission lines
which cross their jurisdiction are subject to approval of the Matanuska
Sus i tna Borough.
Furthennore, the Matanuska-Susitna Borough has been involved with develop-
ing several district plans of community use of lands. Hydroelectr;c
facilities would be expected to conform with the overall development plans
established by the Matanuska Susitna Borough.
PERMIT SUMMATION
In summary it should be noted that the five preceding sections present a
selected compendium of those Federal, State and Local 1 icenses, certifi-
cates and statutes of procedures which must be followed in the development
of a hydroelectric facility. This, however, is not a complete compendium.
For further information, developers are urged to consult the appropriate
Federal, State and Local agenCies prior to the construction of any part of
a hydroelectric facility. This material is to be viewed as an overview on
the general theme of the construction of a hydroelectric facil ity and any
specifics relating to the actual construction of the facil ity or the
dissemination of electricity after the completion of the facility, should
be addressed to the specifiC agency under whose authorHy it rests.
LAND CLASSIFICATIONS, RESERVES & WITHDRAWALS
Power site withdrawal s are made under three authorities in Alaska: The
Pickett Act of June 25, 1910. for Power Site Reserves; Power Site Class
9-28
f'
ifications. made under the Authority of the Geological Survey Organic Act
of March 3, 1979. and Federal Power Project Withdrawal s, made under the
authority of the Federal Power Act of 1920. Power Site Reserves (PSR)
were made by the U.S.G.S. between 1910 and 1920. Power Site
Classifications (PSC) were made by U.S.G.S. after 1920. An appl ication
for project licensing works as a method of withdrawing land for potential
power sites. All of the above are power site classifications, whether or
not the sites are developed.
All lands withdrawn for power purposes, regardless of authority, are sub-
ject to Section 24 of the Federal Power Act of 1920. Most Power Site Re-
serves are set aside by an Executive Order or Secretarial Order. Many of
the Power Site Classifications are withdrawn by "Notices of Classifi-
cation" signed by the Director of the Geological Survey. However, most
Power Site Classifications are prepared as Public Land Orders and signed
by the Secretary of Interior. Four or five fit into this latter category.
For projects built by the Federal Government (nonnally by the Corps of
Engineers), the Corps withdraws land under its own authority . .However,
some of the lands involved could have previously been classified by the
U.S. Geol ogi cal Survey as Power Sites. This waul d result in dupl icate
withdrawals of the lands. The Corps of Engineers would use a Reclamation
Withdrawal. There are two types of reclamation withdrawal s for Water
Resource Projects.
At the time Congress authorizes a specific power project. carried with it
is the necessity to acquire the lands needed. Thus Congress gives the
Corps of Engineers the authority to withdraw land at the time the projects
are authorized.
When an application is made for a Federal Power Project, the land is auto-
matically withdrawn (as of the date the application is made). However, in
some instances (perhaps a year or two later) the applicant for the project
will find that financing is not available or for some reason the project
9-29
has been abandoned. Then another applicant may file for the same project
or a similar project in the same area. This second filing puts another
withdrawal on the same lands which accounts for overlapping Federal
Project Withdrawals for the same lands. Additionally. many of these areas
were classified for their power values by the U.S. Geological Survey
before any appl icants appl ied under the Federal Power Act. This can
result in having two, three, or even more overlapping withdrawals for
power purposes on the same. land.
The U.S. Geological Survey in their 1963 revision of Circular 400,
HistorY of Land Classification Relating To Waterpower and Storage Sites,
present a summary of past and present laws and di rectives implementing
withdrawal and classification of public lands for the development of water
resources. While this document addresses activities in the entire United
States, specific categories and actions pertinent to Alaska are discussed
and clarified.
ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT (ANCSA)
The following extract is fran a U.S. Department of the Interior document
of March 3, 1978, pertaining to ANCSA implementation:
ANCSA ISSUE 10
Issue:
How are conveyances to corporations affected by power si te classifi-
cations and reserves and power projects?
Decision:
Lands involved in power sites were withdrawn by sections l1(a) (1)
and 16(a)( (except Klukwan special provisions) except when a deter-
mination under section 3(e) (1) is made concerning a Federal develop-
ment. Such lands are selectable by Native corporations without the
section 24 Federal Power Act reservation. Lands involved in the Cook
Inlet situation involving Power Site Classification No. 443 are
subject to the Section 24 reservation (P.L. 94-204, as amended).
9-30
Existing private developments (FPC licenses), if any, are considered
valid existing rights under Section 14(g).
Lands involved in power sites were not withdrawn by Secretarial
action under sections 11(a)(3), 14(h), or the Klukwan provisions of
section 16(a) since those sections require the lands to be un-
appropriated and unreserved. For these sections, power site lands are
either or both reserved and appropriated.
An unofficial opinion of the FERC (formerly Federal Power Commission, FPC)
is as follows. On a Power Site Reserve or Power Site Classification, (1)
in the case of a village withdrawal (that is, the land surrounding the
Native Village) set aside by the Secretary of Interior, under Section
l1(a)(l) of ANCSA, the 25 township withdrawal would take precedence over
the Power Site Reserve or Classification; and, (2) the Power Site
Classification or Reserve would take precedence over the Native selection
of a deficiency withdrawal under Section 1l(a)(3) of ANCSA. Another
unofficial opinion is that on an active Federal Power Project licensed by
FERC or FPCO, the power project takes precedence over all other interests.
In the case of a Federal project (one owned or developed by the Federal
government, such as a Corps of Engineers project), Congress would have to
sort out the effects of the power project, as it impacts on land tenure.
The Susitna Hydroelectric Project was originally thought of as a Corps
project. There may be both a U.S.G.S. Power Site Reserve or Classification
on it, as well as havi ng a FPC Number. Th i s will have to be resol ved.
Susitna is in Village deficiency lands of Cook Inlet Region, Inc. It was
also involved in the three way swap (Between CIRI, 001 & State of Alaska)
to the extent that the amount of land that was in that particular
deficiency withdrawal, surrounding the Susitna River, would be limited by
agreement as to selection by the villages and by Cook Inlet Region, Inc.
Table 9-1 lists conveyance numbers and cites authority for withdrawals.
9-31
Convelance Number
PLO 2961
PLO 2489
PLO 3520
PP 2138
PP 2215
PP 1230
PP 2656
PP 1207
PP 2742
PP 0138
PP 2033
PP 0439
PP 1315
PP 0132
PP 1082
pp 0783
PP 2264
PP 2227
PP 0218
PP 2171
PP 2262
PP 0119
PP 2170
PP 2405
PP 0350
PP 0207
PP 0599
PP 0402
PP 1880
PP 0404
PP 1702
PP 0807
PP 1032
PP 1196
TABLE 9-1
LAND WITHDRAWALS FOR POWER SITES
Codes: PLO -Public Land Order (Lands subject
to Section 24 of Federal Power Act)
PP -Power Project
PC -Power Site Classification
PS -Power Site Reserve
CL -Clear List
Authoritl
(Section 24, FPA)
Rampart
Federal Power Withdrawal
Federal Power Withdrawal
9-32
23 CFR 4400
23 CFR 5106
23 CFR 5110
23 CFR 5110
~
. \
PP 0297
PP 1947
PP 3953
PP 4056
PP 2434
PP 1432
PP 1909
PP 2026
PP 1299
PP 1429
PP 1577
PP 0398
PP 0620
PP 1098 Federal Power Withdrawal 23 CFR 5110
PP 2013
PP 2251
PP 1949
PC 0443 Power Site Classification 23 CFR 5182
PC 0403
PC 0439
PC 0395
PC 039'6
PC 0221
PC 0192
PC 0436
PC 0445
PC 0463
PC 0107
PC 0399
PC 0405
PC 0409
PC 0456
PS 0726 Power Site Reserve 23 CFR 5128
PS 0485
PLO 2691 Public Land Order 23 CFR 5182
PLO 3665
CL 0456 Power Site -Inactive 23 CFR 5182
9-33
REFERENCES
Alaska Statutes. Title 42. Public Utilities and Carriers.
Department of the Anny, Engineers Corps. Regulatory Program of the
Corps of Engineers. Part II, Jul Y 19, 1977.
Kenai Peninsula Borough Handout.
Matanuska Susitna Borough. Comprehensive Planning Program Directions.
September 1978.
State of Alaska, Department of Commerce and Econoolic Development and
Department of Environmental Conservation. Directory of Pennits.
March 1978.
U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers. Pennit Program, A Guide For Applic~nt~.
November 1, 1977.
U.s. Code of Federal Regulations, Conservation of Power and Water
Resources. Volume 18, Parts 1 to 149. April 1, 1977.
9-34
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 10
HYDROELECTRIC TECHNOLOGY
Alaska is a state rich in water energy resources -both inland and
oceanic. There are many rivers and streams suitable for large hydro-
electric projects, small hydro systems, and perhaps run-of-the-river low
head units. Much of the low head hydro technology woul d be very appl i-
cable in the conversion of the outstanding tidal energy in Cook Inlet to
electrical power.
The State also has exceptional wind wave energy potential. The heat of
the Arctic Ocean offers the poss ibili ty of energy convers ion. Perhaps
even ocean current and sal inity gradient energy may find appl ication in
the future.
This presentation examines the low head and ocean energy system and their
applicability to Alaska. For the purposes of this report, low head is
defined as 3 to 45m (10 to 150 ft), the range used by International
Engineering Company, Inc. (Carson, 1978). Other chapters have addressed
large hydro systems and very small hydro systems.
HISTORY
RIVERS AND STREAMS
Falling water was first used to generate electricity in the United States
almost a century ago. From the authorization of a hydroelectric plant in
1884 until the establ ishment of the Federal Power Commission in 1920, a
special act of Congress was required for power plants on U.S. lands and
navigable rivers.
Although our hydroelectric output is steadily increasing, its relative
contribution to the national electric generating capacity has been
declining since the mid-1930's. Since that time, hydroelectric's share
has fallen fran about 30 percent to 20 percent in the early 1960' s and to
15 percent in 1978.
The emphasis an hydroelectric power decreased as the best sites were
developed and generation moved toward low cast fossil fuels and, more
recently, nuclear fuels. With the rising costs of non-renewable fuels,
the Federal Government is now actively encouraging the development of
small dam sites for electric generation since water is both "free" and
renewable.
A study canmissioned by President Carter found that 54,100 MW could be
developed at approximately 47,000 dams which are 25 feet or higher but
presently generating no electricity. About 50 grants averaging $50,000
will be awarded by the Deaprtment of Energy to study the installation of
generating facilities at small dam sites. A1 so, DOE was appropriated $10
mill ion for low head (less than 65 feet) hydroelectric research,
development, and demonstration (US DOE, 1978).
The util ization of water power 1n early Alaska was widespread, especially
by mining canpanies. Although hydroelectric generation continues to grow,
there are no large scale low head facilities to date in Alaska. Low head
requires larger quantities of water for generation than does a high head
system. Since water flow in Alaska is seasonal, low head generation may
necessitate substantial storage capacity for the freezing winters which
are characterized by low precipitation or the power plant could be
operational only during the wanner portion of the year. Large .and small
scale high head hydro or thermal electric generation has been a more
attractive option to date.
One possibility of low head hydroelectric generation is on Lowell Creek
near Seward on the Kenai Peninsula. CH2M HILL is studying the feasibility
of such an installation at a diversion dam near Seward. The dam was
originally built in the early 1940's to prevent flooding of the town
(Rusnell, 1978).
10-2
TURBINE TECHNOLOGY
Turbine technology continues to advance today, moving farther from the
simple, early paddle wheel s or "hurdy-gurdies. II About 1870, Allen Pel ton
found that a split cup could capture much more of the available energy
than the flat paddle (Lindsley, 1977). A third type of impluse turbine,
the fi rst turgo impul se turbine, was designed by Eric Crewdson and
patented in Britain in 1920. In this case, the water jet strikes one side
of the bucket and is di scharged on the opposite side (Wil son, 1967).
The other basic classification for turbines is the reaction turbine. The
common Francis turbine uses a fixed blade with a squirrel wheel-like
turbine. The Kaplan turbine, using adjustable blades was patented by
Viktor Kaplan, an Austrian, in 1915. In axial turbines, where the water
is conducted parallel to the shaft, the machines are named according to
the location of the generator. The rim-generator, in which the generator
rotor is located on the periphery of the turbine runner, was invented in
1919 by L. H. Harza, an American inventor. Patented by a German, Kuhune,
in 1930, the tube turbine generator is located outside the water passage-
way. In the bulb turbine, both the runner and the generator are located
in the water passage while the generator is enclosed in a steel capsule.
Patented by the Escher-Wyss firm in 1933, the first bulb turbine was in-
stalled at Rostin in Pomerania (Poland) in 1936 (Carson, 1978). Bulb
turbines did not draw much attention until World War II when the Germans
began installing them because they could not be differentiated from simple
diversion dams by enemy bombers. Although widespread in Europe, bulb tur-
bine generators have not been economically attractive in the United
States. However, bulb turbines may be valuable in tapping the energy from
existing dams that are being considered for generation. Idaho Falls plans
to have a national demonstration installation operating by mid-1982. Lake
Chelan Power District in Washington State has a bulb turbine plant under
construction (Leeright, 1977).
10-3
TIDAL POWER
According to L.B. Bernshtein, tides have been used by man as an energy
source since at least as long ago as the Middle Ages. Tidal mills were
used on the shores of Gaul, Andalusia, and what is now England during the
11th century. One tidal mill dating back to 1170 was still in operation
in Great Britain as late as 1961.
In addition to the simple water wheel turned by the tide, many ingenious,
although relatively primitive, machines were used to power the grinding
devices. However, with the appearance of impulse and reaction turbines
and the 1nexpens ive power fran thermal electric and hydroelectric
generating plants, tidal power devices generally fell into disuse.
France has led in the development of modern tidal power util ization. In
1737, Belidor, the French artillery engineer, designed a way to produce
continuous power using a double tidal basin scheme. Later, four French
scientists, Decoeur, Claude, Caquot, and Defour, proposed a multibasin
plan. Serious consideration of tidal power to produce electricity did not
cOOle until about 1920, led by Defour of the IIBlue Coal Canmission.1I
Finally, in 1967, a state subsidized 240 MW plant was completed on the
LaRance estuary near St. Malo.
In Russia, tidal mills existed as early ,as the 18th century. Work
concerning modern tidal energy and development was published by professor
Lyakhnitskii (1923) and Poteryhlin (1935). L. B. Benshtein proposed a
plant for the Kislaya Inlet during 1938 and 1939. In 1968, a 400 Kw pilot
plant was constructed at Ki slaya Guba on the Barents Sea. 45 km north of
Mu nnansk.
Since 1950, the Peoples' Repub1 ic of China has actively developed small
tidal power plants. Generally utilizing existing dams and dikes, 40
plants were operating and an additional 88 were under construction by
1958.
10-4
In Gennany, an experimental plant was built at Husum, but was dismantled
at the beginning of World War I. Table 10-1 shows some of the other
countries that have an interest in tidal power generation.
,
There were many tidal mills on the shores of New England, including an
18th century Rhode Island installation with 20 ton wheel s. In 1734, a 50
hp mill was built by Slade's Spice Mill in Chelsea, Massachusetts.
In 1920, Dexter P. Cooper proposed a two-basin scheme with an auxil iary
pumped storage plant for Passamaquoddy and Cobscook Bays on the
Maine-Candian border. In 1935, the U.S. Corps of Engineers initiated a
single pool project; Canadian interest in the project continues to date.
Because of its exceptionally high tides, Cook Inlet in Alaska is al so
receiving attention (Stone & Webster Engineering Corp, 1977).
OTHER OCEAN ENERGIES
Despite the current excitment over waves as an energy source, their
potential has been recognized and harnessed for many years. In fact,
since the mid-19th century more than one thousand wave energy conversion
systems have been patented in the United States, Western Europe, and Japan
(McConnick, 1978). Sane of these systems are currently sol d canmerically
for small scale electrical production (McConnick, 1976). Promising large
scale development is occurring in the United Kingdom where the government
is encouraging research of renewable energies (Peipert, 1978).
Though suggested nearly a century ago by D'Arsonval, the first ocean
thennal energy conversion (OTEC) systen was not constructed until 1930.
Whil e Georges Claude's demonstration system consumed more energy than it
produced, others were not discouraged fran refining the process. The U.S.
Depar'bnent of Energy began its OTEC program in 1975. I f the 25 MW
prototype to be built in the early 1980's is successful, construction of a
100 MW demonstration plant is planned by the mid-1980's (US DOE, 1977).
10-5
TABLE 10-1
Name and /or Location
I. Operational Projects
1. Rance, near St. Malo,
France
2. Rislaya, Guba, (Pilot
Plant) 40 miles north
of Murmanak, Russia
II. Potential Projects
U.S.A.
3. Cook Inlet, Alaska
(Turnagain Arm and Rnik
Arm, A3)
4. passamaquoddy, Maine.
(M2) (D)
Canada
5,.
6.
7.
Minas Basin (B9) (D)
SheFody Bay (A6) (D)
CUmberland Basin (A8) (D)
England
8. Severn River Estuary,
near Bristol (0)
9. Solway Firth (D)
10. Mor~ambe Bay
11. carmarthan
(Not shown on map)
Approx.
Average
'lidal
Range
,.ters)
8 1/2
2 1/2
8
5 1/2
11 1/2
9 1/2
10
9
5
6
5 1/2
*Explanation of letters in parentheses:
(A) Actual output of plant in operation
Average
Annual
Energy
output.
(gwhr)
540 (A)
capacity·
(Mw)
240 (A)
0.4 (A)
10,950 (C) 2,600 (e)
2,100 (B) 1,000 (B)
10,374 (B)
2,967 (B)
2,352 ,(B)
20,000 (C)
13,000 (e)
10,000 (C)
7,000 (C)
3,200 (B)
920 (B)
795' (B)
4,000 (C)
5,000 (e)
4,000 (e)
2,000 (C)
(B) Planned output for plant in design or formal planning stage
(C) Potential output of poaaible 8Cb... for tidal power
(D) Known or believed to be under foraAl study by government
10-6
TA3L~ 10-1 (Cant.)
Name and/or Location ••
Brazil
31. Itagui (B)
32. Sao Luis
India
33. Bhaunagar
Northern Ireland
34. Strangeford
35. Carling ford
Guinea Eissau
36. Porto Gale
North Korea
31.. Yangkakta
(Not shown on map)
South Korea·
38. Inchon
Approx.
Average
7idal
Range
jllletersl..
5
8
1
3
3 1/2
5 1/2
1 1/2
6
Average
Annual
Energy
Output.
(gwhr)
2,000 (C)
1,300 (C)
capacity.
(Mw)
200 (C)
120 (C)
400
Source: Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, Tidal Power Study,
ERDA, January 1977.
10-7
TABLE 10-1 (Cant.)
Approx. Average
Average Annual
Tidal Energy
Range output· capacity'"
Name and/or Lcx:a tion •• (Iletersl (gwbrl (MW)
France
12~ Minquiers (Cotentin Pen in-8 50,000 (Cl 15,000 (Cl
sula)
13. Chausey (Cotentin Penin-8 34,000 (C) 6,000 to
sula) 12,000 (C)
Argentina
14. San Jose, Gulf of San 6 9,000 (C) 1,000 (C)
Jose, Chubut Province
Valdez Peninsula (D)
15. Santa Cruz River 7 1/2 4,000 (C)
16. Puerto Gallegos 7 11/2 2,000 (C)
17. San Julian 6 400 (e)
18. Deseado Estuary 3 1/2 700 (e)
Russia
19. Gulf of Mezen, White 6 1/2 2,600 (C) 1,300 (e)
Sea (D)
20. Okhotsk, nortbern end of 6 25,000 (C)
Kamchatka Peninsula
21. Kuloi Estuary 6 1/2 1,300 (C) 500 (e)
22. Luml:ovskaya (D) 4 1/2 900 (e) 400 (C)
Australia
23. Secure Bay 7 1,700 600
24. Walcott Inlet 12 , 4,000 1,300
25. George water 2,500 800
(Not shown on map)
26. St.. George Basin 3,500 1,000
(Not shown on map)
Chinese peoEle's Reeublic
(Not shown on map)
27. Chientang Kiang 7 7,000 (e)
Estuary (D)
28. Gulf of Fuchin Wan 1,000 (C)
29. Gulf of Sbinhwang Warj 1,000 (C)
30. Gulf of Sanmen Wan 1,000 (C)
10-8
Salinity gradients are a less obvious source of ocean energy and the most
recent of those discussed to receive attention. The first salinity
gradients conversion system was discussed by Levenspiel and LeNevers in
only 1974 (McCormick, 1976).
LOW HEAO TECHNOLOGY
With low head hydro (10 to 150 feet), large volumes of water must be dis-
charged in order to obtain appropriate amounts of electricity; therefore,
the machinery cost per Kw are somewhat high. Also, large fluctuations in
head wi th changing river flow lowers the efficiency of equipment des igned
for a specific head and flow rate. However, low head hydro plants are
frequently close to major consumption areas and often supply a significant
part of the energy in the areas served.
There are two basic types of low head turbines: The vertical-shaft
turbines and the tubular types.
VERTICAL-SHAFT TURBINES
The fixed blade propeller type unit 1s very efficient at full load, but
efficiency drops off rapidly with a decrease in load; however, rivers
frequently undergo large fluctuations in head. A significant step towards
increasing the feasibility of the propeller type unit was the invention of
the adjustable-blade Kaplan turbine which ensures high efficiencies at all
heads. The adjustable blade Kaplan propeller units have an efficiency
curve which is, in effect, a summation of an infinite number of propeller
turbine performance curves (Carson t 1978). The Kapl an type turbine was
operational in the early 1920 1 s. The fixed blade type has a lower capital
cost but the adjustable blade type can be used at locations where the
units operate at varying loads and heads.
10-9
TUBULAR TURB I NES
There are basically three types of tubular turbines: (l) the
II r im-generator" type, in which the generator rotor is located on the peri-
phery of the turbine runner, (2) the "tube" type, in which the generator
is located outside of the water passage, and (3) the "bulb" turbine, in
which the runner and generator are both enclosed within the water pas-
sages. This last type derives its name from the steel capsule or "bul b"
which encloses the generator. Tubular turbines can either be fixed-blade
or adjustable blade types. The advantages and disadvantages of these
turbines as well as examples of the designs are given in the section in
Ocean Energy Technology--Tidal Energy.
BULB TURBINE STATUS IN THE U.S.
Traditionally, power-generation turbines in the United States have been
installed vertically and require a flow of falling water to power the
generators.
In 1933, a Gennan company pioneered the technique of install ing
bul b-shaped turbines horizontally in a river, obta ini ng generation from
much smaller dams or "run-of-the-river" flows. The technique has been
wide spread in Europe but only since the energy crunch hit the United
States has the feasibility of bulb turbines been considered here. Several
small communities and power districts are now planning bulb turbine
plants.
In early 1974, French manufacturers were awarded a contract for eight, 54
MW bu"b units to be installed in the second powerhouse of the Rock Island
powerplant on the Columbia River. The customer was the Lake Chelan Power
District in Washington State. Recently the voters in Idaho Fall s, Idaho
approved the issuance of revenue bonds for a 001 b turbine project that
would increase the capacity of the Idaho Falls Electrical Division from an
average of 4.0 MW to a nameplate capacity of 24.6 MW. Construction will
'Involve three 7.2 MW bul b turbine generators at two locations in the Snake
River. As part of the building process for this project, International
10-10
Engineering Canpany contacted 16 organizations. These organizations are
listed in Table 10-2 to give the reader an overview of some of the
canpanies that are knowledgeable with respect to low head hydro generators
and turbines and have had manufacturing experience in this field. Table
10-3 provides a summary of the cost estimates for four projects
C,ons idered.
HYDRO TURBINE APPLICATION
Numerous different types of turbines for hydropower are on the market.
The names of a number of the turbine types are given in Table 10-4
together with a few canments concerning their charateristics. Also, a
canparison of turbines has been made with respect to their applications as
a function of the height of the water head and the power per unit desired.
This information is shown in Figure 10-1.
OCEAN ENERGY TECHNOLOGY
Expanding our recent concept of hydropower beyond the traditional use of
rivers and 1 akes pennits an examination of the energies contained in the
seas. At present, five areas are being explored, although little develop-
ment has occurred to date. This section will provide an overview of
extraction of energy fran wind waves, tides, tenperature gradients,
sal ini ty gradients, and sea currents. Despite the attractiveness of the
inexhaustibi1 ity of these resources, a number of problems renain to be
overcome.
WIND WAVES
Waves with which we are generally familiar are generated by the wind. The
energy contained in a wave depends upon the velocity of the wind and the
length of time it blows the wave. Interestingly, for a given wind
velocity, a wave will become "fully developed" and unable to absorb
additional energy. Thus, expanding the fetch (length of the patch of sea
over which the wind is blowing) past the minimum required for full
development will result in no change of wave height or period.
10-11
A.B. Karlstads Mekaniska Werkstad
Kristinehamn Works
5-681 01 Kristinehamn 1,
Sweden
Neyrpic, Inc.
·50 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, N.Y. 10020
Attn: Mr. Edmund E. Chapus, President
A.B. Bofors-Nohab
S-461 01 Trollhattan
Sweden
Attn: Mr. A. Meland
Westinghouse Electric Corporation
One Maritime Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94111
Attn: Mr. R. Beckwith
Allis-Chalmers Corporation
Hydro-Turbine Division
P.O. Box 712
York, Pa. 17405
Attn: Mr. Wiley Ford
Dominion Engineering Works
P.O. Box 220
Montreal, Quebec H3C 255
Canada
Attn: Mr. Carl Anderson
Kvaerner-Moss, Inc.
31st Floor
BOO Th i rd Avenue
New York, N.Y. 10022
Attn: Mr. Johannes Christoffersen
Toshiba Inernational Corp.
465 California St., Suite 430
San Francisco, CA 94105
Attn: Mr. S. Ohtsuka
TABLE 10-2
Sulzer Bros. Inc.
1255 Post St., Suite 911
San Francisco, CA 94109
Attention: Mr. Edy Sennhauser
Voest-Alpine
Lincoln Building
I 60 Eas t 42nd Street
New York, N.Y. 10017
Attn: Dr. A.W. Reichling
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.
601 California St.
San Francisco, CA 94108
Attn: Mr. Bill Tanaka
General Electric Company
55 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Attn: Mr. E.W. Hendron
Hydroart SA
via Stendha1 34,
20144 Milan, Italy
Ateliers des Charmi11es SA
109 rue de Lyon
CH-1211 Geneva 13
Swi tzerland
Nissho-Iwai
Broadway Plaza
Suite 1900
700 South Flower Street
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Attn: Mr. W.V. Slocum
Siemens-Allis Inc.
555 California St.
Bank of America Ctr.
Suite 4730
San Francisco, CA 94104
Attn: Mr. Jon W. Le Sage
LISTING OF ORGANIZATIONS WITH LOW HEAD HYDRO TURBINE DESIGN
AND/OR MANUFACTURING EXPERIENCE
(Contacted by IEC for Idaho Falls Project.)
Source: Jeff Paine, Private Communication to Gene Rutledge, DEPD.
10-12
TABLE 10-3
COMPARISON OF REDEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES FOR
LOW HEAD HYDROPOWER, IDAHO FALLS, IDAHO
Alt,rnative
It_ Z __ 3"'--__ 4
NUMBER AND TYPE OF UNITS one 7200-kW two 4oo0-kW one 72oo-kW on. 7200-kW
bulb unit bulb units bulb unit· Kaplan unit
AVERAGE ANNUAL ENERGY (kWh)*·
Plan A 53,600,000
48,800,000 Plan 8
COSTS
Cap1tal Cost (S)
Total Construction Cost (lncl~d-
ing contingencies}*·* 10,625,000
Engineering and Administration 1,594,000
Interest during Construction 855,000
Total Capital Cost 13,074,000
Equivalent Annual Cost (S/yr)
Capital Recovery (assuming 50-yr
rep~nt period at 7\ interest)
Operation and Maintenance
Total Equivalent Annual Cost
Energy Cost (S/kWh)
Plan A
Plan B
947,340
63,500
1,010,840
0.01886
0.02071
BENEF ITS****
Total Annual Benefits (S/yr) 1,608,000
Total Annual Benefits N1nus Total
Equivalent Annual Cost (S/yr) 597,160
8enefit-to-Cost Ratio 1.591
* Submerged powerhouse.
** Under present flow conditions.
*** Includes salvage allowance for existing units.
55,500,000 53,600,000
50,500,000 48,800,000
11,415,000
1,712,200
919,800
14,046,000
1,017,770
70,560
1,088,330
0.01961
0.02155
1,665,000
576,670
1.530
11,606,000
1.741,000
934,000
14,281,000
1,034,800
65,230
1,100,030
0.02052
0.02254
1,608,000
507,970
1.462
*.** Power benefits Ir' bll.d Oft plant operation under Plln A Ind on I value
of SO.030/kWh, wh1ch Wli furni.hed ~ the Idaho '111. El.ctric Division,
53,000,000
48,200,000
12,648,000
1,897,000
1,018,000
15,563,000
1,127,700
62,370
1,190.070
0.02245
C.G:l469
1,590,000
399,930
1.336
Source: Public Information Kit, 1978 Bulb Turbine Revenue Bond Election,
City of Idaho Falls.
10-13
TABLE 10-4
TURBINES FOR HYDROELECTRIC POWER PLANTS
NAME
1) Pelton
2) Francis
3) Kaplan
4) Turgo
TYPE-WHEEL
Impulse
Reaction
Reaction
Impulse
5) Cross Flow Impulse
COMMENTS
Double-cup designed by Allen Pelton in about
1870; more efficient at high heads (50 feet
or more); can be run with as little as 1.5
cu. ft. per minute. Pelton wheels as small
as four inches are available, (Lindsley, 1977).
An impulse wheel is turned by the force of a
jet as it hits wheel cups.
Leffel company sells models, Hoppes units,
ranging from ~ to 10 Kw and heads from 8
to 25 feet; IPD sells a fixed pitch propeller
version for heads between 5 and 50 feet,
(Lindsley, 1977).
A variation of the Francis, the runner re-
sembles a boat propeller with variable pitch
blades. Runner speeds on reaction-type turbines
are adequate for direct or moderate step-up
drive to spin a generator.
Within its range, the Turgo impulse turbine, ;s
a competitor to both Pelton drwLFrancis machines.
Note below the difference in the cup design for
the Pelton versus the Turgo (Wilson, 1967).
C-----~l e~::~---~· -.. ""',, ~
,,<,,-
Units available from Gilbert Gilkes & Gordon
LTD, Water Turbine & Pump Manufactures, Kendal,
England. With respect to the kilowatt range
covered by high capacity Turgo Impulse Turbine,
inquiries direct to Gilkes are suggested.
About 16 Turgo Impulse wheels have been sold by
Gilkes (up to 1973) with outputs from 5 to 10
horsepower. (Note: In Canada & Newfoundland,
which have climates somewhat s1miliar to Alaska,
Gilkes has installed, in the 1 to 10 horsepower
range, ten Pelton type turbines, seven Francis
type turbines, one Turgo impulse turbine and
three Kaplan type turbines (Potential of Small
Hydroelectric Power in Alaska, 1976).
Water discharged from a rectangular nozzle
strikes a multi-bladed runner or wheel; de-
Signed to operate with as little as a three-
foot head. Ossberger Turbinefabik makes
cross flow turbines in the 1.5 to 8 Kw range,
(Lindsley, 1977).
10-14
o
I
Head (M)
80~------------
Pelton
60
40
20
o
o 50
Francis
Kaplan
100 150
Power Per Unit (MW)
Figure 10-1
Hydro Turbine Application
Source -Private COllY!1llnication, Richard Wood, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory,
USOOE to Gene Rutledge, DEPD.
200
The energy carried by the wind waves varies widely, depending on location
and season, as shown in Figure 10-2 (McConnick, 1978). It has been
estimated that a one-kilometer wave front off the coast of Scotland's
Hebrides Islands could provide enough electricity for a town of 85,000
persons (Scott, 1977).
While over one-thousand wave energy conversion systems have been patented
in Western Europe, North America, and Japan, the majority of these are
variations on perhaps eight basic techniques (McConnick, 1978). Several
of these are described briefly in Figures 10-3 through 10-8.
Especially pranising are Andrew Slater's "nodding dUcks." (Figure 10-8)
Finding that a bobbing ba1lcock extracted only about 15 percent of the
available energy, he concentrated on rocking devices. Salter, of Scot-
land's Edinburgh University, uses cam-shaped floats, pivoting on a shaft
to power hydraul ic pumps.
The back of the float is shaped "to make a wave think it was driving
another wave." (Moss, 1976) A perfect wave-to-duck match could result in
a 96 percent energy transfer. However, ocean wave variations lower actual
efficiency to about 60 percent.
A 1/50 ocean scale prototype was successfully tested, leading to a 1/15
ocean scale test on Loch Ness. If results are encouraging, a 1/4 scale
model will be tested as will a one-kilometer string of 15-meter-diameter
ducks producing 45 MW in the open seas off Scotland's Hebrides Islands
(Scott, 1977).
Sir Christopher Cockerell envisions a system of "Cockerell rafts" floating
off Scotland's northwest coast. About 100 yards long by 50 yards wide,
the hinged rafts would drive hydraulic rams which would drive electric
alternators (McConnick, 1976).
10-16
40
IS
30
i
I IS
~-J 13 20
I II 15
10
,
OIICGOtI-
IlASHI/KlTOM
20
f ~
i-n ::
!.
tALI rOllIlA
s
N. ATLAllTlC
--_*'1"5. A1l.AllTIC
~~~~~~~,-t~,
Figure 10-2
Monthly Averaged Wind-Wave Power per Crest1ength
Striking the Continental United states.
Source: Michael E. McConnick, tlSalinity Gradients, Tides and Waves as
Energy Sources," presented at North Carolina State University
conference on Energy from the Oceans -Fact or Fantasy,
January 27-28, 1976.
10-17
Designed and constructed by a
Frenchman in the early part of
the century, this system supplied
all of the light and power to
his seaside home.
CENTER·PJPE----___.-J
ONE-WAY VAlVE--......., ..
/\
Figure 10-3
Isaacs Wave-Energy Converter
,-By. PASS
Figure 10-4
Bouchaux-Prace1que Wave-Energy Converter
Designed for deep water operation, the one-way valve permits the
entry of water on the downward bob of the float. The compressed air
(P) forces the water out through the turbine.
Source: Michael E. McCormick. "Salinity Gradients, Tides and Waves as
" Energy Sources," presented at North Carolina State University
conference on Energy from the Oceans -Fact or Fantasy,
January 27-28, 1976. 10-18
Figure 10":5
Pneumatic Wave-Energy Converter
Designed independently by both Masuda (1971) and Rodrequez (RMR
Corporation of Manila), this system may be used in either deep or shoaling
waters. Both are commercially available for buoys and the Masuda system
has been used successfully to power lighthouses in Japan.
Figure 10-6
DeMaree Wave-Energy Converter
This system was invented by J. S. DeMaree of Suppliers, Inc. of Lexington
to be used in either deep or shoaling waters. The waves are caused to
break prematurely and to strike an impulse-type device used for energy
conversion.
Source: Michael E. McConnick, HSalinity Gradients, Tides and Waves as
~nergy Sources,1I presented at North Carolina State Un1vers1ty
conference on Energy from the Oceans -Fact or Fantasy,
January 27-28, 1976.
10-19
Figure 1O!-7
Bolding-Alexander Wave-Energy Converter
Bolding-Alexander Corporation of Rialto, California has proposed
a device for use in the surf zone. The surging motion of a wave forces
air through a one-way valve into a storage compression tank which is
used to drive an air turbine.
Source: Michael E. McCormick, "S a1inity Gradients, Tides and Waves as
Energy Sources,lI presented at North Carolina State University
conference on Energy from the Oceans -Fact or Fantasy,
January 27-28, 1976.
¢WIND
DlR£c:TlON
Fioure 10-8
Nodding Duck Wave-Energy Converter
CIRCLES
BECOME
SMALLER
WITH DEI'TH.
GMM8
EXJIONIN1'W.
IMAI'I
Source: David Scott, IIWave power tapped by nodding ducks ,II PopyJar Science,
November 1977, pp. 16-18.
10-20
Another approach is being used by A. N. Bott for a Mauritius project. A
wave-impounding wall captures the waves converting their kinetic energy to
potential energy. Using a rotary version of the hydraulic ram. water will
be pumped to a high level reservoir. where it will power a conventional
hydroelectric station (Moss. 1976).
Wave energy convers ion dev; ces are designed for energy extract; on either
in deep water or near the shore. While devices used near the shore may
have serious ecological ramifications, deep water devices are likely to
have few ecological consequences when placed at a distance fr(l1l the shore
that allows the waves to regenerate.
The phen(l1lena of fully developed waves pennits not only protection of the
existing coastal environment. but also multiple extraction of the wind
energy accumulated and concentrated by the waves. With a wind velocity of
50 Km/hr over a period of four hours. the waves would reach full
development in 45 Km (27 miles) (McConn;ck. 1976).
The behavior of the ocean varies widely fr(l1l si te to site. Due to bottan
friction and irrotationa1 ities. the open sea is generally more desirable
for wave power conversion. In certain regions. the winds are relatively
constant in both speed and direction.
However. since open seas tend to receive waves fran all quarters. an
anni-directiona1 device is preferable despite its disadvantage of usually
being frequency sensitive. Half-plane (directional) energy conversion
devices are generally frequency insensitive. but in variable ocean
conditions are less cost-effective (McConn1ck. 1978).
TIDAL ENERG Y
Oceanic Tides
Despite modern sucess in predicting tidal levels, scientists are .still in
disagreement about such basics as whether tidal energy is caused by the
earth's kinetic energy or solar heat energy. While the exact causes of
10-21
tides are unknown, the gravitational attraction of the moon and, to a
lesser extent, the sun are important factors. Locati on must al so be
considered; mid-ocean tides are in the order of about two feet while the
costal tides are the highest, their magnitude depending on the physical
characteristics of the shoreline.
Although the tides lag behind a bit because of friction, the moon and sun
exert their forces in a series of cycles of differing lengths. As the
earth rotates, tides due to the moon occur every 12 hours-25 minutes and
tides due to the sun every 12 hours. The angle of incidence of the moon's
and sun's attractive forces change fran day to day as the moon and earth
revol ve and rotate. Al so, the magni tude of the gravitational forces
varies with the position of the earth and moon in their elliptical orbits.
These forces and others, which are not as yet clearly understood, canbine
to diminish or exaggerate the resulting tides. Canbining these forces,
with periodicities ranging fran 3.1 hours up, results in a theoretical
maximum tide every 1,600 years. The next super-tide is not due until
3300.
As already mentioned, the shoreline also affects the magnitude of the
tides. Extreme tidal ranges are especially likely in estuaries such as the
Bay of Fundy and the Severn River, where there is a funnel effect. Where
tidal wave length is fran tl.«) to four times the length of the estuary,
resonance can significantly increase the tidal amplitude.
Another important factor is the Cori 01 i s force wh i ch is exerted by the
earth's rotation on a stream moving north or south. For example, in the
Irish Sea the flood tide flows northward and the sea is approximately four
feet higher on the eastern shore. During the ebb tide, the flow reverses
and the waters on the western shore are about four feet higher (Stone &
Webster Engineering Corporation, 1977).
10-22
Tidal Technologl
Technological issues incl ude sluice gate design, automated electrical
controls and cathodic protection since large amounts of metal are sub-
merged in sea water. Also, the design of the turbogenerator is very
important to the engineering and economic success of any tidal energy
project.
Since relatively low operation heads are available at tidal sites, huge
volumes of water must be discharged through the hydraulic turbine to
obtain power. Therefore, very large turbines with speeds as low as 40
revolutions per minute must be installed.
Table 10-5 gives a summary of the advantages and disadvantages of four
different turbogenerator designs and Figures 10-9, 10-10, 10-11, and
10-12, give examples of these designs.
French designers for the Rance tidal power project realized that tidal
energy was di fferent fran run-of-river low head projects and that in order
to approach economically feasible electricity costs, the turbine units had
to operate as generators in both directions. Hydraulic design, planning
problems and generator construction problems were solved by French
designers (Cotillon, 1977).
TEMPERATURE GRADIENTS
A. Ronald McKay of the Institute of Arctic Environmental Engineering,
University of Alaska has suggested that power be generated using Arctic
I
sea water as the heat source.
According to the Carnot principle, power generation is possible when a
temperature difference exists. The application of this principle to the
sea, using it both as a sink and a source, was first suggested by
D'Arsonval in 1882. One of his students, Georges Claude, gave the first
functioning ocean thennal energy conversion (OTEC) demonstration in Cuba,
producing 22Kw in 1930. The success of his project was limited because
the pumping equipment required more energy than was being generatec.
10-23
o
I
N
+">
TABLE 10-5
TURBO GENERATOR DESIGN FOR TIDAL ENERGY
TYPE
1. Convential vertical shaft
unit with a direct connected
generator located above the
turbine.
2. Sloping shaft tub1ar unit
having a generator in the
dry, either upstream or
downstream of the turbine.
3.
4.
A horizontal shaft bulb unit
with the generator components
installed in a steel bulb
surrounded by the turbine water
passages.
A horizontal shaft turbine
connected to a rim type generator
which operates in the dry.
ADVANTAGES
Readily accessible and no
space limitations as in
case with bulb type units.
Standard generator design
features. Proven deSign.
Generator is essentially a
vertical shaft machine tipped
to achieve higher turbine
efficiencies that result from
straighter water passages.
Proven deSigns. Comparable
in cost to bulb.
Provides maximum operating
efficiencies and the lowest
overall cost of any power
equipment design. Capable of
wide operating flexibility.
The rim type generator operates
in the dry outside of turbine
water passage and does not have
the electrical problems associ-
ated with the long core design
used in bulbs units. May become
30 percent less expensive than
bulb generator because of absence
of generator shaft, rotor spider
and unusual cooling requirments.
DISADVANTAGES
Require deep elbow draft tube
and a wide intake section. Both
of which contribute to higher
powerhouse costs. Efficiencies
one to two percent lower than
axial flow units. Appear to be
less economic than bulb type.
Considerable difficulties have
been experienced in the field
installation due to sloping
alignment; efficiency is 1-2%
lower that bulb type unit due
to increased bend losses of
water passage.
Need watertight steel housing
completely within water passage.
Special effort needed to minimize
the physical size and weight for best
overall efficiency.
Large size units have not been manu-
factured due to difficulties encount-
ered in providing suitable water seals
and generator rotor support bearings.
Until actual operating experience has
been obtained for larger units, rim
design should be considered experi-
menta 1.
HIGH
POOL
MAX.EL.+ 13.!5' -----:=-==-":--
MIN. EL. + 3.0' -----=-=-.:...-::.../
El.O.O'
I FLOW;
POWERHOUSE GANTRY
4
~. .. ..
I-
9
CI)
LI.I
ti
c:I
LI.I
liI::
'" l-
~
" • to ' •
'" ... ..
NOTE:
ELEVATIONS ARE M.S.L. DATUM
o 10 20 10 40 110
, I I I I I
SCAL-I -I'IIT
Figure 10-9 Vertical Shaft Turbogenerator Design
LI.I " 4 .. !;t, .. " .. U)
o' LI.I
" CO
;:)
I-
LOW
POOL
MAX. EL. 0.0' --------------
MIN. EL.-13.0'
Source: Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, Tidal Power Study, ERDA,
January 1977.
10-25
itlAX OPE~Arl""G
[PfJQ. ELlM;' ---",/V .:JPERATlNG
CPOOL EL. 3.0' •
~---------------------------------------2»~---------------
Figure 10-10: Tube Type Turbine Installation With Generator In The Dry
Source: Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, Tidal Power Study,
ERDA, January 1977.
.tJA)I.OPER rAIl"'ATE" ELO.O·
L.
II
BASIN
POWERHOUSE GANTRY CRANE
r-1
L ROADWAY.J
~~.~,.J'~ ___ ----...t.;~.~J., ----_____ J~!::
9. ••
CONTROL
ROOM
MACHINERY ROOM---I-IJ __
POWERHOUSE
MAIN ROOM
GATE-
GATE
GANTRY
CRANE
SEA
STOP
LOG
ho-.-SLOT
M.5.l.
:.-".y
TRASH BULB T J~~~~~~.===U=N=IT======~~~~.====~[~~J~(===J~t=· ==~~[~==~J~~~=.~.~~~.
~:[~
J I
BUOYANCY fA BALLAST CHAMBER
Figure 10-11: Horizontal Shaft Bulb Unit With Generator In Steel Bulb.
Source: Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, Tidal Power Study,
ERDA, January 1977.
10-27
6.30 MIN,-. ==,-
TURBINE RUNNER BLADES
----~-
~~----'~ -
'~
735 14.55
21.90
Figure 10-12: Rim Type Turbogenerator.
Source: Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, Tidal Power Study,
ERDA, January 1977.
----d=~~==~ 2.30 MAX. ---=;;:..-:=---1.60 MIN.
Tests in Dakar in 1955 incorporated the use of solar energy to augment the
heat source. J. H. Anderson and J. H. Anderson, Jr. proposed in 1965 that
propane be used as a working fluid rather than sea water.
All of these systems use air or surface water as a heat source and lower
temperature deep sea water as a sink. McKay suggests that, except for the
short summer season, Arctic and Sub-Arctic regions could reverse the
system. Sub-polar icecap water at 29°F or large rivers could be used as a
heat source while atmospheriC temperatures of as low as -60°F would serve
as a sink.
A Simple Rankine cycle using R-22 (CH C1 F2) as the working fluid has been
proposed (Figure 10-13). The cycle would be reversed during the warmer
summer months, using the atmosphere as a heat source.· Still, Figure
10-14, showing thermal efficiencies throughout the year, clearly indicates
that the system requires storage capacity to supply energy during the
spring and fall. In the Claude and Anderson systems, the temperature
difference remains constant.
The economics of large plants appear favorable, especially for remote
areas. Present technology is adequate except for the underwater heat
exchanger. Since the water immediately below the Arctic pol ar ice cap is
very near freezing t the extraction of energy will undoubtedly result in an
ice buildup on the exchanger surfaces. It may be feasible to minimize
this effect by forcing sea water over the exchanger surfaces. Or, perhaps
deeper warm water currents of up to 40°F which exist in some areas could
be utll ized to prevent icing and enhance the thermal performance of the
sys tem (McKay, 1971).
The U.S. Department of Energy is somewhat more cautious in their evalu-
ation of problems yet to be solved. It suggests that metal corrosion in
salt water, "biofouling" of equipment, construction and assembly of huge
boilers and other parts, stability of OTEC plants in heavy seas, and the
laying and maintenance of long undersea transmission lines require still
further study. Also of concern are environmental hazards such as working
fluid leakage or the long term effects of heat removal fran the ocean (US
DOE, 1977).
10-29
Source:
Figure 10-l3
Rankine Cycle
,-, , ,
HEAT SINK
(COLD AIR OR
WATER)
CLOSED SYSTEM
CONTAINING FLUOROCARBON
REFRIGERANT
I \ _ H. Ro~ltliOft
I \ ___ Willi Ro4i1lio11
I I I ,
I , , ,
, I
5 : ,
it I-----~+-_i~---~----_f_--CI •• 4, ~. II \ u ,
~ 4 I ,
U , \
i: , ,
... I , ... lIJ------+--++-------1i-----f---~:::~:: •
..J
~
II: ...
~ 2
\ \ , ' ,
I I \
1 I \
I I \ if 1
I,
'I I
".. ,... Mot. •• Mo, .lvii, Jol., A_O. "pC. Oct. Ho~, 1*. .1l1li.
TIM' ,
Figure 10-14
Thermal Efficiency by Month
A. Ronald McKay. "Power Generation Using Arctic Sea Water as a
Heat Source, II October 8, 1971.
10-30
A discussion of the legal, political, and institutional issues is found in
Ocean Thennal Energy Conversion, published under the auspices of the
American Society of International Law (Knight, 1977).
SALINITY GRADIENTS
A wa ter of a given sal; n i ty wi 11 tend to di ffuse into wa ter wi th a
different salt content until the two have equal ized. If a semi-penneable
membrane (allowing the flow of water, but not sal t) is placed between the
two, a pressure gradient occurs. A function of temperature, this "osmotic
pressure" causes water to flow from the lower sal t concentration to the
higher. Also influenced by pressure, the flow is reversed when the
ambient pressure of the water of higher salinity exceeds the osmotic
pressure. Thus, the concept can be used either to create a head between
waters of different salinity or to produce fresh water.
Salt concentration is a function of temperature and will vary with
location and ocean depth. Wanner surface water will have a higher
salinity. The most extreme salinity differences occur at the mouth of
fresh wa ter rivers.
Osmotic pressure in atmospheres can be calculated from Francis A.
Richards~ equation:
where
and
p = p o
T = Tempera ture °C
F73 = T~ 273
p . = -12.08 ( T)
TF = the change Ifn freezing temperature due to salinity from the
the fresh water value of DoC
This is roughly equivalent to 0.7 atmospheres of osmotic pressure for each
1 0/00 (parts per thousand) of salinity.
Separating fresh water from 35 0/00 sea water creates osmotic pressure of
about 24 atm, a head of about 238 m of fresh water. In the hypersaline
Dead Sea, where salinity is 270 0/00 , a pressure of 189 atm would occur.
This is equivalent to a head of 1,890 m (over one mile) of fresh water.
10-31
Salinity gradient energy can be converted in deep water by a method
suggested by Levenspi el and deNevers. As shown in Figure 10-15, when a
vertical pipe ;s forced below 238 m, the depth where osmotic pressure
equals ambient pressure in 35 0 100 salt water, fresh water will flow
through the sem;-penneable membrane into the lower end on the pipe.
Lighter than salt water, the fresh water will rise above the 238 meter
depth. Passing through a turbogenerator, the fresh water returns to the
sea through a second semi-penneable membrane at a depth above 238 m.
A second energy convers i on method requ i res the dammi ng of the mouth of a
river, as described by Wick and Isaacs. Passing through a turbogenerator,
the fresh water woul d enter a buffer lake up to 238 m below the river and
ocean surface. Osmotic pressure would then force the fresh water through
semi-penneable membranes into the ocean (Figure 10-16).
In both systems, the primary technological problem is the semi-permeable
membrane. Large, self cleaning membranes cannot yet be manufactured. The
twin-dams technique would be too costly to compete with other fuels at
present and woul d have much greater envi rOmlental impact (McCormick,
1976) .
OC EAN CURRENTS
Another energy source found in the oceans is the currents. Observations
indicate that the Florida current is suitable for continous energy
conversion. Wal terO. Weber, a Sydney geophysicist-hydrographer, esti-
mates that 18 to 22.5 GW might be extractable from the South Equator; a1
and the Australian currents. He suggests that twenty to twenty-five 900 MW
ocean current power plants might be used to capture the energy off
Australia's northwest coast.
On a worl dwide basis, present research indicates that at least 1000 TWH
(1012 KWH ) could be generated annually using only a few of the known major
ocean currents. This comprises 29 percent of the estimated 1978 world
electrical demand of 3400 TWH.
10-32
AIR
238 METER DEPTH ----
figure 10-15
Deep Wa ter Sa l"j ni ty-Grad1 ent Energy Converter
Figure 10-16
Estuarine Salinity-Gradient Energy Converter
Source: Michael E. McConnick, IIS alin1ty Gradients, Tides and Waves as
Energy Sources,lI presented at North Carolina State University
conference on Energy from the Oceans -Fact or Fantasy,
January 27-28. 1976.
10-33
The relatively slow moving ocean currents can drive large diameter
turbines connected to the base of anchored semi submersible platforms.
Better locations are generally at depths greater than 250 meters. The
tension leg platform, designed for deep water oil industry operations, can
meet the required operational and safety conditions (Scott, 1976).
The extractable power in kilowatts per vertical square meter of peak
current area at a cross-stream posHion is proportional to the speed of
the current. Unfortunately, this inexhaustible, pollution free energy
source is often distant fran the user. Conventional overland and sub-
marine transmission lines could result in energy losses of over 35 percent
in the case of Australia.
COSTS
A brief list of available cost studies is given in Table 10-6. When
possible, Alaskan sources are provided. The scarci ty of reliable cost
estimates is largely due to the theoretical or experimental nature of many
of the ocean technologies.
APPLICABILITY TO ALASKA
LOW HEAD HYDRO
Availabil ity of water may be a limitation to low head electric generation
in some areas of Alaska. The larger quantities of water required are
often available only seasonally even in the mountainous coastal regions
where annual percipitation may exceed 200 inches. Despite the apparent
abundance of the resource, twenty or thirty days of col d weather can
produce water shortages. High head electric generation, which uses less
water, is more likely to be used in these mountainous areas.
The remainder of the State, where semi-arid conditions or extended cold
periods exist, is subject to dramatic water fluctuations with both drought
and flood conditions. These extensive areas are characterized by low
precipitation, predaninant1y frozen ground, extended seasonal freezing,
and watersheds with relatively low water-retention qualities.
10-34
...... o
I
W
U'1
TYPE PROJECT
Large Hydro Projects
Low Head Hyd ro
Thennal Gradients
Ocean Cu rren ts
Salinity Gradients
Small Hydro
Wind Waves
Tidal
TABLE 10-6
RECENT HYDRO COST STUDIES
SUMMARY OF AVAILABLE INFORMATION
An October. 1977 Alaskan Hydroelectric Project Cost Analysis
provided estimates for upper Susitna, Bradley Lake, Green Lake,
Mahoney Lakes. Swan Lake and· Lake Grace (McConkey, 1977).
The 1978 Idaho Falls, Idaho study compared costs for one 7.2 MW
bulb unit, two 4.0 MW bulb units, and one 7.2 MW Kaplan unit,
(International Engineering Company, Inc., 1977). See Tabl e 3.
A prototype Ocean Thennal Energy Conversion (OTEC) plant with
25 megawatt electrical output is scheduled to be constructed in
the early 1980's. If the pilot plant is successful, the U.S.
will build a 100 megawatt demonstration plant in mid-1980's.
The only infonnation available based on an actual operating
unit is the 22 kilowatt facH ity that was buil t on the Cuban
Coast where the water pumping equipment required more power
than the facility produced.
Progress to date has been 1 imited to paper reports. No rel i-
able cost estimates available.
Progress to date has been limited to paper reports. No reli-
able cost estimates available.
Cost estimates are available from dealers.
Experimental work has not yet advanced to the point where cost
estimates are reliable.
Cook Inlet project cost estimates are made by Stone and Webster
Engineering Corporation in their 1977 Tidal Power Study. See
Table 10-7.
Large interior rivers may flow throughout the year. However, their low
conditions occur during the winter when energy demand is greatest.
Nevertheless, while the huge Rampart project may not be acceptable fran an
environmental viewpoint, it is possible that a series of low head hydro
projects along the Yukon River cou1 d not on1 y supply needed energy where
fuel costs are very high, but al so enhance the land and river with better
control of water flow which would provide (a) flood control, (b) minimum
water flow year round and (c) better protection for nests of waterfowl.
The numerous lakes of the Arctic and interior valleys, deltas, and plains
are usually shall ow and rema in frozen to the bottan much of the year.
A1 though snowfiel ds, glaciers, and permanently frozen ground contain vast
quantities of water, the cycle of availability may be more closely related
to hydrologic centuries than hydrologic years (Alaska Water Study
Canmi ttee , 1977).
TIDES
Cook Inlet, with an average tidal range of approximately 8 meters (26.7
feet, has the highest range in the United States and one of the highest in
the world (Todd, 1977). Despite substantial environmental impact, the
site has the advantage of proximity to Anchorage, the State's largest
electrical consumer. Presently, much of the area is served by electricity
generated by low cost natural gas. As this resource is exhausted over the
next decade, it is likely to be replaced by the development of the Beluga
Coal Field and/or the proposed Susitna Darn project. Although a tidal
plant may be economically canpetitive in the long term, it is not likely
to be seriously considered except, perhaps, in conjunction with the
construction of a bridge across the Inlet. Another potential site 1s at
Angoon is Southeast Alaska, where the mean tidal range is 10.6 feet (Stone
& Webster Engineering Corporation, 1977). (See Figures 10 M 17 through
10-19. )
A two volume report was published in March, 1977 by Stone and Webster
Engineering Corporation funded by Energy Research and Development Admini-
stration. The Alaskan sites addressed were four in Cook Inlet, i.e. Knik
10-36
MATANUSKA RIVER
___ ,-,~~ ... KNIK RIVER
SYMBOLS:
p~ POWER HOUSE
--L..... FILLING GATES FG J .
-ROCK FILL DAM
= LOCK
543210 5
, • 1 t , , ,
SCALE-STATUTE MILES
Fiaure 10-H
Proposed Tidal Projects
Cook Inlet
PROJECTS AI,A2,& A4 Source: Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation. T~dal Power Stugy.
ERDA. January 1977. L-__________________________________________________________ _
.:::>
I
W co
PROJECT A-3 (2 POOLS)
lOW POOL
Source:
MATANUSKA RIVER
SYMBOLS'
~ POWER HOUSE PH
:;:--l--FILLING GATES FG
EG+-EMPTYING GATES
-ROCK FILL DAM
~ LOCK
543210 5
~dA~E~ S!TA~UTE MILE~
Figure 10-18
Proposed Tidal Project
Cook Inlet
Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation. Tidal P~r S~.
ERDA. January 1977.
I-
oCt
a::
l-
(/)
~
oCt
J:
I-
oCt
J: ~
u "
KENASNOW
RKS .
•
o ~oo 1000
1...' ~~~'~~-",' SCALE -YAROS
ADMIRALTY
Figure 10-19
ISLAND
ADMIRALTY
ISLAND
Proposed Tidal Project -Angoon
Source: Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, Tidal Power Study,
ERDA, January 1977.
1 0-39
l
Arm (750 MW), Turnagain Arm (2,600 MW) and one and two pool projects using
both arms (3,550 MW and 2,600 MW), and site one at Angoon (30 MW).
Attention was given to environnenta1, socioecomxnic, legal and hydrologic
factors. A cost summary is shown in Table 10-7.
OTHER OCEAN ENERGY RESOURCES
The energy potential fram Alaskan wind waves has not yet been calculated.
However, the U.S. Department of Energy has recently funded a ten year
study of wind waves of the coastal United States and its possesions.
Project member Dr. Willard Pierson, states that waves in Alaska are very
high energy and would require especially durable conversion systems
(Pierson, 1978). Clearly, icing would be a problem in the northern part
of the State.
While ocean thermal energy conversion may not be appl icab1e to Alaska as
conventionally envisioned, the concept still appears feasible. Instead of
using the ocean as both heat source and sink, the atmosphere could be used
as a sink, thus taking advantage of the low northern temperatures.
Because of the experimental status of the energy conversion systems
associated with these resources, re1 iab1e cost estimates are unava 11 ab1 e.
Table 10-8 provides the maximum allowable investment for electric
generating systems to campete economically with the diesel systems
presently used by most Alaskan communities.
OCEAN NUTRIENT UPWELLING
In recent experiments by scientists at the University Alaska Institute of
Marine Science's Seward Field Station, deep ocean, nutrient rich water has
been pumped into a surface pond. The result has been an increase in
primary productivity (phytoplankton) by as much as five fold over that of
the control pond. Therefore, a significant increase in food production
capacity of such marine life as salmon, abalone, mussels and other finfish
and shellfish is possible.
10-40
......
o
I
-1=>0 ......
TABLE 10-7
CONVENTIONAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
PROPOSED TIDAL POWER PROJECTS
(June 1976 Prices)
Project Data
Total Installed Capacity. Mw
Total Dependable Capacity, Mw 1
Annual output, Million kwhr Z
"fbtal Construction Period, Years
Project Costs
Construction Cost 3
Interest During Construction
Total Project Investment
Fixed Charge Rate, Percent
Annual Costs
Fixed Charges
Operation and Maintenance
Total
Annual Power Benefits
Dependable Capacity j 5114/kw
Energy It 8.0 Mills/kwhr
Total
Benefit/Cost Ratio
Average Power Cost, Mills/kwhr 4
Project A1
bik AnI
750
None
2,870
7
$1,572,000,000
385(000(000
$1,957,000,000
7.60
$ 148,732,000
11,500.000
5 153,200,000
None
5 22.960,000
S 22,960,000
0.15
53.4
Project A2
Turnagain Arm
2,600
None
9,000
8
$.,657,000,000
1(303(000(000
S5,960,000.000
7.60
$ 452,960,000
13(000,000
S 465,960,000
None
S 72.000.000
$ 72,000,000
0.15
51.8
L SUfldb:-)!'vj res;::rve ;.>alJller qer.~r-dtion facilities nust t)e ocoerlt':o."M,l to orovicte <1~oer.dahla C30~(ltj~
fO:CG"ire. jq13)
Z. A.nm.ul ;t3j;b~;t consumption" exctudiM: Od":.ior,dl dafef1se and Mn-ir:~~r':i;'!1 ~Sef'5, is fOr"siJs:: :0 fan
~':.~~" i5.~ and Z,?S B K'AHct {3dtt~:1~ P].::ifj..: ~:or:hft-~i~ laborator';f!i .. 1,?7~}_
3. (;.:)"s;:ruction cost estimates lTh:iy be low b,pcd'JSe enviror\.""1Ien~dl iJn(Mct ,,~r; roOt c)oselj con.;iC':!rej .. "
th~ ;:tr",,)~2r:t 1e:;,jgn~ (r""r;ulre. 1975).
4. ;'1e a ..... ~!"'ilge ;lOwer cost estirndte assur'l€s tha!: 311 power gen~rate1 can ~ :1'Ir]rk~tej, (:~cGuire, 1978).
Project A.3
2-Pool SCheme
2.600
960
10,950
10
$6,070,000,000
2.125(000.000
58,195,000,000
7.60
S 622,820,000
111,300.000
5 637,120,000
S 109,QQO,OOO
B7.600100~
$ 197,040,000
0.31
58.2
Source: Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation, T~~J __ Po~~r Stud~, ERDA,
January 1977, iab1e 14-3.
TABLE 10-8
ALLOWABLE HYDROELECTRIC INVESTMENT VS. FUEL COST
20-Year
20-Year Ave. Annual
Fuel Fuel Cost Maximum Hydro Investment
Diesel Cost/Gal For 8760 kWh Per kVk ~ 20 Year Amortization
Fuel (5ex. Assuming 6% 8\ 10%
Coal/Gal Escalation~ 13 kWh/Gal Interest' Interest Interest
$0.30 $0.496 334.23 $1,938 $1,661 $1,440
0.40 0.661 445.41 2,584 2,214 1,918
0.50 0.827 557.27 3,233 2,770 2,400
0.60 0.992 668.61 3,878 3,323 2,879
0.70 1. 157 780.02 4,523 3,875 3,358
0.80 1.323 891.43 5,171 4,431 3,840
* Based on a 50% load factor.
EXAMPLE:
If a util ity ;s paying $0.50 a gallon for diesel fuel and can
borrow money at 8% interest on a 20-year loan (quarterly payment),
the annual payment of $557.27 would allow for an investment of
$2,770 per KW installed capacity for an installation with a 50%
load factor. Additional credit should be allowed in the above
table for the peaking capacity which in 1978 is estimated at $200
per KW.
Source: Robert W. Retherford Associates, Waste Heat Capture Study,
prepared for the Alaska Division of Energy and Power Develop-
ment, June 1978.
10-42
Nitrite concentrations as a function of ocean depth and season are known
or can be measured. During the summer, a thermocline develops and
nutrients are depleted in the surface water; however, a sustained
phytoplankton growth might be achieved throughout the sunlight rich summer
months if a mechanism existed for artificial upwelling.
A tidal power "siphon" systen has been suggested by Neve' and others and a
sketch showing the proposed operation is shown in Figure 10-20.
RECOMMENDATIONS
(1) The Division of Energy and Power Development of the State of Alaska,
in cooperation with interested organizations, should consider the
sponsorship of a symposium on Ocean Systems including tidal, thennal
gradient, wind wave, salinity gradient and ocean current energy
potenti al in Alaska. The speakers shoul d be national and inter-
national experts in their respective energy disciplines.
(2) The State of Alaska should consider developing a technical infor-
mation exchange with Dr. Norman Bellamy, Wave Power Project,
Lanchester Polytechnic and Andrew Salter of Scot1 and I s Ed1 nburgh
University on shaft-pivoted, cam-shaped floats which drive hydraul ic
pumps (nodd'ing ducks) using the energy fran waves. If it appears
that Alaska has an economic potential for wave energy utl1ization,
prototype model for Alaskan waters should be considered following an
evaluation of the experimental results of a quarter-scale unit
planned for the estuary of the River Clyde, near Glasgow.
(3) A prel iminary examination of the technical J economic and environ-
mental feasibility of tidal energy using bulb turbines in specially
designed "ports" in a bridge or causeway across Knik and Turnagain
Arm should be considered. These "ports" would permit simple retro-
fitting of a bulb turbine for electrical power generation as the
energy market develops.
10-43
rlDAL IA'f
I
!
'00 .... " .. ,
I
Figure 10-20
Schematic of Tidal Powered
Artificial Upwelling System
Source: R. A Neve, R. C. Clasby, J. J. Goering. and D. W. Hood, IIEnhancement
of Primary Productivity by Artificial upwelling,1I 1976 (After W. E.
Shiels and D. W. Hood, "Artificial upwelling in Alaskan fiord estuaries,"
Northern Engineer 2:41-45, 1970). .
10-44
(4) An analysis sh,Ould be made of energy systems (Carnot Cycle) that can
use the temperature difference between the ocean salt water and the
air temperature in the cold coastal regions of Alaska for energy
productions.
(5) Attention should be given to hydro methods for upwelling nutrients
from deep ocean locations to the surface for beneficial use in food
production.
SUMMARY
Alaska has a high potential for hydroelectric power, particularly the
large scale high head variety. In the mountainous coastal areas of the
State which receive the heaviest rainfall, high head sites are very
common. However, in the interior and northern portions of the State, an
in-depth assessment of low head hydroel ectric potential has never been
done.
Technology is advancing rapidly for recovery of ocean energy resources.
Alaska has high energy tides and wind waves, the two ocean resources that
have received the most attention to date. In the Arctic, where waves and
tides would be inapplicable, there exists the possibility of utilizing
temperature gradients. The usefulness of salinity gradients and ocean
currents has yet to be detennined, but all of these alternative energy
resources merit additional attention.
10-45
KEY CONTACTS
Eric Coleman
Manager, Water Turbine Division
Gilbert Gilkes and Gordon, LTD.
Kendal, England
Phone: Kendal 28
Dal e W. Rusnell
Chief, Power Development
Division of Energy and Power Development
State of Alaska
7th Floor MacKay Building
338 Denali Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
(907) 276-0508
Professor Michael E. McConnack
(Editor, Ocean Engineering, Journal)
Ocean Systems Branch
Division of Solar Technology
U.S. Department of Energy
Washington, D.C. 20545
(301) 267-3872 (U.S. Naval Academy)
Richard Neve
College of Fisheries
University of Washington
Seattle, Washington 98195
(206) 543-4290
Jeff Paine
City of Idaho Falls
P.O. Box 220
Idaho Falls, Idaho 83401
(208) 522-5891
Professor Willard J. Pearson
CUNY Institute of Marine & Atmospheric Science
City College
138 and Convent Ave.
New York, New York 10031
. (212) 690-8315
Eric Yould
Director
Alaska Power Authority
334 W. 4th
Sui te 31
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
(907) 277-7641
10-46
REFERENCES
Alaska Water Study Canmittee. Alaska Water Assessment: Summary Report.
Juneau, Alaska: AWSC, August 1977.
Bailey, David Z. "Large-span Tensioned Hydro (Aero) Foils for Power
Generati on Anchored Across a Stream, Current, or Wi nd, II MTS Journal,
Volume II no. 5 & 6.
Ba i rd, Hamil ton. "Coul d hydraul i c
potenti al 1" Energy InternationaL
rams increase
July 1976.
our hydro power
Batelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories. Alaskan Electric Power:
An Analysis of Future Requirements and Supply Alternatives for the
Railbelt Region. Volume 1. Prepared for the Alaska Division of
Energy and Power Development and the Alaska Power Authority.
Richland, Washington: March 1978.
Carson, J. L. (Principal Mechanical Engineer) and R. S. Samuelson
(Principal Civil Engineer). "Low Head Power Generation With Bul b
Turbine." San Francisco, California: International Engineering
Canpany, Inc. Distributed as part of City of Idaho Falls,
Publ ic Infonnation Kit: 1978 Bulb Turbine Revenue Bond Election.
Co til lon, J. "Advantages of bulb units for low-head developments," Water
Power and Dam Construction. January 1977. --
International Engineering Company, Inc. "Bulb Turbine." San Francisco,
California: IECO, Undated.
International Engineering Company, Inc. "Idaho Falls City Hydroelectric
Power Plant." Preliminary report. Prepared for the City of Idaho
Falls, Idaho and the U.S. Energy Research and Development Admini-
stration. August 1977. Distribution as part of City of Idaho Falls'
public Infonnation Kit: 1978 Bulb Turbine Revenue Bond Election.
Knight, Gary H., J. D. Nyhart, and Robert E. Stein, eds. Ocean
Thennal Energy Conversion. Lexington, Massachussetts: Lexington
Books, 1977.
Leeright, Bob. "Idaho Fall s Eyes "Bul b" Turbine As Future Source of
Electricity." The Statesman, November 21, 1977.
Lindsley, E. F. "Water Power For Your Hane," Popular Science. May 1977.
McKay, A. Ronald. "Power Generation USing Arctic Sea Water as a Heat
Source. II Presented at the canbi ned Second Annual Thennal Power
Conference and Eighth Biennial Hydraulics Conference at Washington
Sta te Un ivers i ty, Pull man, Wash i ngton. Fa i rbanks, Alas ka : Insti-
tute of Arctic Environmental Engineering, University of Alaska,
October 8, 1971.
10-47
McConkey, W.
Regional
Alaska's
Alaska:
1977.
D. Lane, C. Quinlan, M. Rahm, and G. Rutledge. Alaska
Energy Resources Plannin~ Project-Phase 1. Vol ume I;
Energy Resources -Flndings and Analysis. Anchorage,
Alaska Division of Energy and Power Development, October
McConnick, Michael E. (Professor of Ocean Engineering, U.S. Naval
Academy). "Salinity Gradients, Tides and Waves as Energy Sources.1I
Presented at N. C. State University conference on Energy from the
Oceans--Fact or Fantasy. Ral iegh, North Carol ina: January 27 .. 28,
1976.
McConnick Michael E. "Wave Energy in a Random Sea," Proceedings of
the 13th Intersociett Energy Conversion Engineering Conference.
San Diego, Californ a, August 20-25, 1978. Volume II Published
Warrendale, Pennsyl vania: Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.,
1978.
McGuire, Terry. Financial Analyst, Alaska Power Authority. Interview
November 30, 1978.
Marier, Don. "How The Ram Works," The Mother Earth News Handbook of
Homemade Power. New York, New York: Bantam Books, Inc. May 1974.
Moss, J. IIAl ternative energy at crest of the wave, II El ectrical Review.
Volume 198 no. 17, April 30, 1976.
Peipert, James R. IIBritain Taking Wave Power Seriously,1I The Anchorage
Times, September 21, 1978.
Pierson, Willard J. Telecon to the Alaska Division of Energy and Power
Development. August 29 and September 6, 1978.
Potential of Small HydroelectriC Power in Alaska. Seminar co-sponsored by
the D1vision of Energy and Power Development, Border Electric, and
Davi s .. Goertz Construction. Anchorage, Alaska, September 21, 1976.
Robert W. Retherford Associates. Waste Heat Capture Study. Prepared for
the State of Alaska, Division of Energy and Power Development.
Anchorage, Alaska: June 1978.
Rusnell, Dale W. Chief of Power Development, Alaska Division of Energy and
Power Development. Interview. September 1, 1978.
Scott, David. IIWave Power Tapped by Noddi ng Ducks, II Popular Science.
November, 1977, pp. 16-18.
Scott, W. E. IIAfter gas, Australian northwest offers tidal, wave energy,"
Energy International. Volume 14 no. 6, September 1976.
Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation. Tidal Power Study, Final Report.
W. W. Wayne, Jr., Study Director. Prepared for the U.S. Energy
Research and Development Administration. Boston, Massachusetts:
Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, March 1977.
10-48
Todd, Flip. "Having To Look At Coal, Tides, Steam, Wind," Alaska
Industey. June 1977.
U.S. Department of Energy. "Ocean Thennal Energy Conversion." OPA-007
Washington, D.C.: DOE, November 1977.
U.S. Depar'bnent of Energy. "Water Power: Use of a Renewable Resource,"
DOE/FERC-0001. Washington, D.C.: DOE, April 1978.
Wilson, Paul N. "A High-Speed Impulse Turbine." Reprinted from IIWater
Power," January 1967. Leaflet M34/1967. Kendal, Engalnd: Gilbert
Gil kes & Gordon LTD.
10-49
APPENDIX 10-A
HYDRAULIC RAM
The ram is able to convert low energy water to a smaller amount of high
energy water. This concept gives it a very attractive potential for use in
low head rivers or ocean waves. Using all the major laws of thennodynamics
with each cycle, the system has been shown to be very effective for small
scale needs. Drive pipe diameters of more than 20 em are unusual because of
the severity of the water hammer effects (Hamilton, 1976).
The quantity of water the ram will pump can be calculated:
where,
D SXFx2 · --r J
D is the amount of water delivered in gallons per minute.
S is the amount of water supplied to the machine 1n gallons per
minute.
F is the fall or vertical distance in height between the supply of
water and the ram.
L is the lift or vertical distance the water is lifted frCJII the
pump to the storage tank.
The fraction of 2/3 represents the efficiency of the ram. Older
models had efficiencies of about 40%.*
Figure 10-21 describes the operation of the hydraul ic ram. The cycle
presented occurs about 25 to 100 times per minute (Marier, 1974).
*Don Marier, "How The Ram Works, II The Mother Earth News Handbook of HCJllemade
Power, May 1974, p. 114.
10-50
......
o
I
01 ......
AIR
CHAMBER
Step 1 Water rushes down the drive pipe and escapes out the waste valve.
Step 2 Pressure buflds yp and closes the waste valve outlet.
CHECK
VALVE
AIR
CH ..... R
STORAGE TANK
"'-'-=-7
STORAGE TANK
"'-'-=-7
Step 3 The shutting of the waste valve forces water through the check valve and into the air chamber.
Figure lO-A-l
Hydraulic Ram
a
I
Ul
N
STOllAGE TAlIII(
~
Step 4 The rushing liquid compresses the air enclosed in the air chamber so that it pushes back 11ke a piston
which closes the check valve and forces Miter up the delivery pipe to a sto~ge tank.
Step 5
ITOIIAO£ T ANI(
~
When the check valve closes, the Miter in the drive pipe rebounds for a ~t Iftd creates a partial
vacuUII that allows the waste valve to drop open again at the same time. The vacu ... draws a Slllall
amount of air into the raM through the atr valve. This gas (air), which 1s needed to replace the
enclosed air because SONe escapes ~th the water during each cycle, .rtll be forced into the compart-
Jllent when the 1ncf.llling stream starts flowing down the drive pipe again. A -.11 ~t of water is
lost through the air valve during each stroke of the puap. The excess fluid which was not pushed up
the delivery pipe thus flows out of the waste valve opening. (The water out the Mlste valve opening
may be ten times that going up the delivery pipe).
Figure lO-A-l (Cont.)
Hydraul ic Ram
CHAPTER 11
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT
I NTRODUCTI ON
Regardless of the site chosen, the engi neering techniques employed or the
mitigating measures taken, the development of any hydroelectric facil ity
will affect the existing environmental regime.
Environmental problems related to hydroelectric development fit into two
basic categories. The first relates to the impacts attributable to the
actual construction of the facility. The construction will cause the most
immediate, and intensive al teration to the surrounding environment
al though the operation of a hydroelectric facil ity causes less poll ution
than other major generation systems. Other problems would incl ude, but
not be limited to, the flooding of acreage, the alteration of the original
stream flow, dust related to construction, noise of construction and the
water pollution caused by access roads, camping sites and other construc-
tion sites.
The other category arises primarily after the establ ishment of the
hydroelectric facility. These long-tenn impacts relate directly and
indirectly to the environment. More specifically these problems might
include increased human activi ty, construction and/or use of recreational
facilities, attraction of new industries as well as the alteration of the
habitat of migratory and residential fauna.
In addition to the general environnental problems arising from the
development of any major hydroelectric facility, each site will have its
own individual problems which are unique and cannot be projected to the
construction of other facil1ties under consideration el sewhere in the
State.
The cost of hydroelectric facH ities may be great both in economic and
non-economic tenns, but the benefits may be great as well. Some of the
inevitable impacts of the fac 111 ty on the ecological setti ng can be
mitigated or negated by proper population control, revegetation programs,
and game control techniques. It is the intent of this chapter to discuss,
in general, the potential en vi ronmental impacts resul ting fran the con-
struction and operation of major hydroelectric facilities within the State
of Alaska.
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF A HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY
The building of a hydroelectric facility will entail heavy construction
not only at the actual site, but along all access routes to the site and
construction camp and borrow pits fran which material must be removed.
This construction activity wl1l be severely damaging to the existing
environmental conditions. Aside fran the actual destruction of portions
of the local vegetative canmunity on the immediate site and along the
roadbeds, the alteration of a vegetative community in the immediate
vicinity of the construction site is a certainty. Access roads must be
cut across local vegetative matter thus disrupting the community. The
grading, cutting and fill ing which must be part of the construction
activity will alter the soil regime. result in soil compaction, and
scatter the thin layer of decaying matter associated with vegetated areas.
The soil will be moved, perhaps permanently. Then. as a natural
consequence, erosion and sedimentation problems could occur. Moreover,
improper cuts, incorrectly recontoured slopes and haphazard revegetation
techniques could result in further erosion problems as well as
esthetically displeasing results.
The aquatic envirorvnent will also be affected. As building materials are
required in construction, many of them must come fran existing, or more
canmon1y, newly opened pits or from gravel bars in nearby streams or
riverbeds. The removal and transport of gravel often results in increased
sedimentation and an accelerated erosion rate. This in turn will create
an altered aquatic community for the stream as well as creating damage to
streambeds.
11-2
Open oorrow pits, if not managed properly, can also be hazardous to ooth
man and animal. Additionally, the creation of a new biotic canllJJnity
based on the pond of water which 1s frequently the by-product of the
extraction of building material fran the pit is highly probable. An
altered soil regime is yet another problem to be cOhs1dered.
Streams must be crossed by access roads and, if proper precautions are not
taken, erosion and sedimentation could alter the existing biotic canmunity
in the water and on the land. This can even lead to the eutrophication
(oxygen deficiency) of a waterway, particularly if the roads are to be
used over a long period of time. However, in certain areas of the State,
even short tenn or once only usage can have severe effects. Especially
sensitive are the Arctic region, alpine tundra areas, and pennafrost
zones. It shoul d be noted that the continued long tenn di sruption caused
by permanent roads can also result in severe problems to the vegetative
canmunity in the immediate vicinity, particularly if the area disturbed is
a climax canmun1ty.
The environment can be further altered if new open zones and revegetation
procedures introduce exotic or foreign species. Periodic maintenance
required on the adjacent rights-of-way could insure that only those exotic
species capable of withstanding the continued appl ication of herbicides
and mechanical cutters would grow in the disturbed areas. This in turn
could prevent the vegetative canmunity fran healing itself totally.
Additionally, there are other minor problems associated with the construc-
tion of a hydroelectriC facility. There will be dust, noise. litter and
human activi ty which will cause envi ronmental problems beyond the
temporary time frame.
Furthennore, certain animals cannot tol erate the intrus ion of man into
their habitat. When such intrusion does occur, the life pattern of these
species is changed. causing them to leave the area to seek other,
undisturbed 1 iving space. Unfortunately the increase in population could
create a strain on the ability of the new living area to support its new
population level.
11-3
LONG-TERM ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The most obvious environmental change brought about by the construction of
a hydroelectric facility is the inundation of a large area of land when
the reservoir begins filling. Valuable fannland, timberland or animal
habitat may be lost as well as scenic and possibly white water areas.
Migratory routes used by terrestrial animals may be blocked, moose browse
may be destroyed, waterfowl nesting areas may be flooded, resident stream
species of fi sh may be unable to survive in the lake environment and
anadromous fish that have previously spawned the waterway may be unable to
make their way to their breeding ground (as has been evidenced on the
Columbia River in Washington State).
There is very little that can be done to restore spawning runs after the
construction of large hydroelectric facil Hies. Even the construction of
fish ladders, spawning channels, fish transport operations, regulated
flows, and f1 ip 1 ips have generally had very disapPointing results in
mitigating the effects of damming a river.
However, the great~st prob1 em to be cons idered in the construction of a
hydroelectric facil ity is the impoundment of tremendous quantities of
water. The increase in the surface area of water will result in greater
evaporation rates as well as an increase in the humidity levels of the
surrounding area.
The cl imate of the immediate surrounding area will be altered, possible
resulting in a change in the vegetative canmunity immediately adjacent to
the lake. A large body of water tends to moderate the cl imate of the
immediate area, keeping it sl ight1y moister and cooler in the summer and
slightly wanner in the winter. This is especially true if portions of the
lake remain free of ice for any great length of time.
The newly created lake will also result in an altered aquatic community.
This new community, based on lacustrine or lake conditions rather than
riverine or river condi tions will be substantially different than its
ecolocia1 predecessor. Anadromous fish migrations will be effected as
well.
11-4
Other problems are those of sedimentation and siltation. When water that
1s carrying a heavy sediment laod is impounded and prevented fran moving
rapidly, the sediment will settle to the floor of the reservoir. The
build-up of sediment behind the reservoirs may require subsequent
dredging.
The now relatively sediment free water may be unable to replenish nutrient
and colloidal levels downstream from the hydroelectric facility as is
normally done during flood stages and the early spring and summer run-off.
A low sediment level can also effect the stability of deltas fronting on
zones of high oceanic activity. Wl1ve erosions and tidal infl uences could
then result in the shrinking of the delta when sediment loads are no
longer of a high enough concentration to offset oceanic influences.
Further problems could yet be created. The amount of siltation and sedi-
mentation within the ocean-bound stream or river is a major component in
the habitat of estuary or oceanic flora. Another matter of concern is
that of water-flow~ The hydroelectric facility is built to control the
flow of water past a given point. An alteration of the water-flow regime
is inevitable. Water management tends to produce a waterflow that remains
relatively constant throughout the year.
Such regulation can be beneficial to the downstream areas. Floods are
restricted and the supply of water during the dry spell is virtually
assured. The even supply of water year-round will 111so have a beneficial
effect on the eggs and fry of anadromous fish.
However, a lack of annual flooding can cause eutrophication of sloughs and
marshes fed by the river from the failure of the floods to flush the areas
out. This could lead to a major change in the downstream biotic
canmuni ties.
A regulation of water flow could also result in the chemical change within
the water itself. Increased nitrogen, oxygen and dissolved salt levels as
well as a change in the water temperature can occur. A change in the
siltation rate 1s guaranteed. One of the greatest problems is known as
11-5
nitrogen super saturation. Such a condition occurs when water cascades
down a spillway, entrapping nitrogen gas. Nitrogen will be absorbed by
the fish, causing bubbles or blisters as it expands. The fish will in
effect have the same problems as would a diver experiencing the bends.
Perhaps the greatest long term envi ronnental impact of a hydroe1 ectric
facility is that of human population immigration. The construction of a
hydroelectric facil 1ty may attract an ever increasing number of people
from the inception of the project. It is this mushrooming influx of
people which can place the mos~ strain on the environment.
The construction of a hydroelectric facility will inita11y attract a small
contingent of construction personnel. Usually this results in the
creation of a temporary construction site. Although supplies may be flown
into the construction site, waste materials are not flown out. As
sanitation is not a particularly pressing problem at first. there is
11 ttl e incentive to develop anything beyond an open dump. Since the
construction camp is usually located near the construction site. waste is
accumulated in the vicinity. This usually results in an increase in the
population of scavenger species such as fox. ravens and bears.
During the final stages of construction there is an added impetus to
develop some permanent facilities for the incoming hydroelectric tech-
nicians. At this time serious consideration will be given to location of
residential units, ongoing sewage treatment. sol id waste disposal and
parking for automobiles and operational machinery.
With the development of these permanent facilities there is also an
a ttendant need fo r the di smant1 i ng of the now unnecessa ry temporary
facilities created during the initial construction phase. This dis-
mantling or retrenchment must be accomplished in the most environnentally
conscientious way to avoid future problems resulting from improper
rehabilitation efforts.
The influx of hydroelectric technicians is minimal. It is the third phase
of human population immigration which may occur after the hydroelectric
facility has been completed that causes the most concern.
Inundation of acreage will create a lake that may result in enhanced
recreational poss1bl1 Hies. This in turn may lead to seasonal migration
of people into areas previously isolated. With the newly created reser-
voir, recreational outings are now a viable possibility. Camping,
hunting, fishing and hiking will create added pressures to the environ-
ment. Four-wheel ing and snowmobl1 ing woul d extend the frontier of human
activity. Boating and camping facilities could logically follow.
This possible influx of recreational enthusiasts would naturally result in
a need for new or expanded recreational facilities. However, 1 imits have
been imposed upon the number of vi s itors allowed into national parks in
the "lower 48" for any given time. More recently, recreational sites on
the Kenai Peninsula have been closed to additional users due to
overcrowding. Proper recreational management plans could limit any
problems as may arise in such situations.
Also associated with the third phase of immigration could be the attrac-
tion of business or industry to the area. Although recreation related
enterprises may form a substantial portion of the initial surge of
activity, larger businesses could be attracted by the availability of
massive supplies of water and inexpensive electricity. These businesses,
1n turn, would accelerate the need for the development of airports,
highways and other transportation fadl Hies which could in tum generate
greater human migration. However, as evidenced at many of the major
hydroelectric sites in the western United States, such a massive influx of
industry to the immediate vicinity of such sites does not necessarily
occur. Additionally, given the extremely high construction and operating
costs wi thin the State of Alaska, the occurance of such a problem is
unl1 kely.
11-7
The critical concern in regard to human migration is planning. Appropri-
ate city planning will place business and residential structures in
locations where they will cause the least environmental damage. Proper
placement of boating, swimming and fishing areas will reduce accidents and
preserve wildlife and wildlife habitat. Intelligent restriction of
motorized vehicles will preserve the ecology of the surrounding area.
Wi th a canprehens ive planning effort both the needs of the pubHc and
those of the environment can be fulfilled.
INDIRECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The development of any hydroelectric facil ity does have the potential of
producing environmental impacts other than those caused by the con-
struction and physical presence of the facil ity. These indirect impacts
are the result of the very existence of the facility, the electrical power
generated and the impounded water in the reservoir.
facility is undertaken for primarily one reason:
generation.
A hydroel ectric
electrical power
Transmission lines are needed to transport the power to its point of use.
Regardless of the level chosen for the right of way, the transmission
lines will create environmental difficulties. If the lines are run above
the ground, towers must be constructed. If the transmission lines are run
on the ground, they must be strung by vehicles. And, if lines are to be
run underground, trenching equipment must be brought in. No matter which
method is chosen. the initial establistvnent of the right-of-way will
destroy the existing ecostructure. If there is a constant need to have
access to the transmi ssion 1 i nes the destruction of the vegetative
canmunity may be permanent. Fortunately, after the initial highly
intensive human activity 1s supplanted by infrequent entries into the
area, the disruption of the wildlife habitat would not be unduly
excessive. However, if the util ity easement is used consistently,
irreparable ecological damage could occur.
1l-8
Another indi rect, envi ronnental impact of hydroel ectric fadl i ties would
be the creation and use of recreational facilities because of the reser-
voir. Further, the canbination of water and electricity could stimulate
industrial growth around hydroelectrical facilities as well. If the new
power source encouraged the development of a new industry, environmental
impacts would be compounded. As each type of industry creates its own
unique problem as well as canpounding the canmon ones, the decay of the
ecological structure would be accelerated. In particular, the openings of
new areas for human activities or presence would have a widespread "ripple
effect" on the surrounding land. As a rule, increased human presence wil 1
cause pressures to be placed on the land.
However, a hydroelectric faultiy will not necessarily be plagued by all of
the potential problems described in this chapter. Adequate planning and
the implementation of safeguards can avoid or mitigate many of the
environmental impacts. The final analysis of costs and benefits is site
and project specific.
EXPERIENCE IN ALASKA
Alaskan Considerations
The impacts discussed thus far are canmon to most hydroelectric
developments, both within and without Alaska. The extent of the impacts
and the appropriate mitigation strategies depend upon the specific
characteristics of each site and project.
There are several additional factors which must often be considered in
Alaska because of the low temperatures canmonly experienced. Generally,
these impacts are associated at least in part, with the permafrost
(permanently frozen subsoil) which exists in many parts of the State.
Tundra areas overlying permafrost can be extremely sensitive to surface
alterations. Simply driving a vehicle over the tundra can be sufficient
to canpact the vegetation, thus lowering its insulating properties. With
greater fluctuations in temperature, the permafrost melts and the ground
11-9
subsides. Usually, the damage spreads as adjacent ground temperatures
rise. The end result can be substantial ponding and erosion. In areas
where there is a danger of permafrost damage, construction activities are
often required to be conducted during the winter months. At this time,
the surface is frozen and is resistant to compaction.
Roads and other fac il ities can cause similar permafrost deterioration by
altering existing temperature patterns. Special insulation practices can
usually prevent serious problems. Impounded water could precipitate an
increase in seismic activity in the area, particularly if the area 1ies
astride a seismic fault zone. Should the site selected for a
hydroelectric facility be underlain by continuous or discontinuous
permafrost, the impounded water will cause the permafrost to mel t due to
the continued above-freezi ng temperatures of the lower depths of the
reservoir.
Over the period of a few years, the seasonal freezing and thawing of soil
and water surrounding transmission and other poles can force the poles out
of the ground. IIPole jacking" can be prevented by using special anchoring
devices and backfilling pole holes with gravel (Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 1978).
The freezing of the water surface during the winter and the additional low
water level s may bring about ice shelving probl ems. When the surface
freezes completely and to a sufficient depth it becomes structurally
solid. As the water level drops due to the drain-off to create
electricity, the ice sits high above the water creating a void or vacuum.
Should the ice collapse when a man or animal is on its surface, serious
injury or loss of life can result.
Environmental Monitoring
Most closely invol ved in envi ronmental issues surrounding Alaskan hydro-
electric are the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. To the extent possible, agencies attempt to address environmental
11-10
concerns before the construction Of mljor facilities. An excellent
eXiIIlple is reflected in the feu_flit.)' study proposed for the Susitna
Hydroelectric Project. The stu~y would include the:
Monitoring of Field Activities for Environmental Acceptability
Evaluation of Alternatives
Water Quali~ Analysis
Socio-economic Analysis
Land Use Anllysis
Anllysis of ~lCrtltionll Dtvelopment
Susitnl Trlnsmission Corridor Assessment
Fish Ecology laseline S~dies and Analysis
Wildlife Ecology Iiseline Stu~its and Analysis
Plant Ecology 81stlint S~dies lnd Anllysis
Geological Analysis
Access Roid Environnen\.l An.lysis
While two of these substudies would be canpleted in less than two years,
the baseline studies would be conducted over a four or five year period.
Envi rorrnental Igencies conti nut their invol vement after the
pre-construction phiSe of I project. Periodic inspections are made of
construction sites and CillTlpS to insure Ictivities are in canpliance with
standards and approved procedurts (Shiplty, 1910).
There have been no post-construc:tion impict analyses for Alaskan hydro-
electric projects. However, the .~~ivit,y in this lrea is expanding. The
Alaska Department of Natural Resources and Department of Fish and Game are
currently conducting a streilTl flow study of the Susitna River. The
minimUil streilll flow will be detennined Ind, if the hydroelectric projects
are realized, the long-tenn implcts will 1M IIIOnitored. It is intended
that the study will provide a IIDdel fer the asstssment and monitoring of
future hydroelectric projtcts (Steel, "10). The Department of Fish and
Game has had limited previous hYdroelectric involvement, but plans to
increase its future activities. It 15 felt thlt the impacts on anadromous
fish Ire in special need of Ittention (TreAt, "79).
Although there is no fonnal plin It this ti_, the Alaska Department of
Envirorrnental Conservation anticipites increased attention to hydro-
electric development impacts from the planning through the operating
phases (Fowler, 1979 and Sturdevant, 1979). The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency does not foresee any near-term changes in their
involvement (Lamoreaux, 1979).
11-12
REFERENCES
Biswas, A. K., and M .R. Bi swas. "Hydropower and the Envi ronment," Water
Power and Dam Construction, May 1976, pps. 40-43.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Electric Power Regulation.
Final Envi ronmenta1 Impact Statement: Solomon Gul ch Project. No.
2742-Alaska. March 1978.
Federal Energy Regulatory Canmission. Solomon Gulch Project/
No. 2742 --Alaska, Final Environmental Impact Statement, March,
1978.
Fowler, Rikki. Alaska Department of Envi ronmental Conservation: Inter-
view with Greg Edblan. December 13, 1979.
Lamoreaux, Bill. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Telecon with Greg
Edb1om. December 13, 1979.
Shipl ey, Robert. Alaska Divi s ion of Energy and Power Development.
January 1980.
Steel, Mike. Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Water Management
Section. Te1econ with Greg Edb1om. January 17, 1980.
Sturdevant, David C. Alaska Department of Envi ronmental Conservation.
Telecon with Greg Edblan. December 13, 1979.
Trent, Tan. Habitat Protection Section, Alaska Department of Fish and
Game. Te1econ with Greg Edblom. December 17, 1979.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Permit Program, A Guide for Applicants,
November 1, 1977.
~_---;-;-;, __ ' Alaska District. Expert witness testimony before a
public meeting in Fairbanks, October 8, 1975.
--..,.,--r---.--...,.., Al as ka Di strict. South-Central Rail belt Area
Hydroelectric Power Study, Information Brochure, August 1976.
__ ......,..,..--.----.....--' Alaska District. South-Central Rail bel t Area Alaska
(Hydroelectric Power srd1' Review of Reports, Upper Susitna
River B'asin, fSii6ll'C ear ng Minutes, Fairbanks & Anchorage, 1975.
U.S. Department of Energy, Federal Power Commission. The 1976 Alaska
Power Survey Vol. 1, p. 9-3, 1976.
11-13