] !JR·J. e e LAKE DOROTHY HYDRO, INC. o o LAKE DOROTHY HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ft.·~lJi..·.. FERC NO. 11556-000 (, ~ FIRST STAGE CONSULTATION in INITIAL CONSULTATION PACKAGE ~ Oj D~ Prepared by: ··~· Lake Dorothy Hydro, Inc. / ~ O. and n Tinney Associates u
B March 1996 8 [1 i1-tj ARJLJI§ fJ Al\lska Resources Librarv & Information Services t;J Library Building, Suite 111 3211 Provillcncc Drive Anchorage, AK 99508-l614 ,dr"'o '."' 0.r Lake Dorothy ecd Hydro, Inc. .889 SOl.lthFiankIin-street 907-463-6315 e Juneau, AK. 99801 Fax 907-463-4833 o March 21, 1996
D TO ALL INTERESTED PARTIES: o Re: Lake Dorothy Hydroelectric Project Federal Energy Regulator Commission (FERC) Project No. 11556
"i Initial Consultation Package .0'')·.'.....1 Lake Dorothy Hydro, Inc. (LDID) is investigating the feasibility ofconstructing a hydroelectric generation project at Lake Dorothy, 16 miles southeast ofJuneau, Alaska. o The project is designated in its preliminary permit as FERC Project No. 11556.
LDID will prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) under the National Environmental fi Policy Act. (NEPA) in coordination with the FERC, the US Forest Service (USFS), and ffJ'~ any other agencies wishing to bea cooperating agency. The EAwill be submitted as part
~.\ v ofLDID's Application for License. LDID provides the enclosed Initial Consultation Package (ICP) for your review and , :, comment in compliance with FERC's regulations. The ICP describes the proposed project 0 and identifies, to the extent possible, the affected environment and significant resources o present in the vicinity ofthe project site as required by regulation (18 CFR 16.8). PUBLIC AND JOINT AGENCY MEETING DATE: Week ofApril 22-26, 1996. LDID requests dates'that would be preferable during that week. Exact date, time, D and location will be announced and published. SITE VISIT DATE: Week ofApril 22-26, 1996. g LDID requests dates that would be preferable during that week. Ifany parties cannot participate in this site visit, another site visit will be offered during the NEPA Scoping process. The scoping meeting will be held inlate Ie August or early September 1996.
'·,,!" COMMENT DUE DATE: Comments are due 60 days after the public meeting. C Written comments on theinformation presented in this ICP are requested, and n; include comments to LDID regarding the proposed project, environmental issues, .u and recommended environmental studies. Federal regulations require that, not later 8I~ ' Q d[} n \J than 60 days after the public meeting (est. date April 23, 1996), each interested resource agency and native organization must provide LDHI with written w .comments(l8.CER16.8)... -Thedate.is.forresponseisapproximately,June24, u· 1996.
NOTICE TO AGENCIES: Ifthe recipient ofthis ICP is not the person responsible o for consultation, contact Susan Tinney immediately at (907) 364-2233, with the name, address and telephone number ofthe person your agency wishes to consult fJ on this project. Susan Tinney, Licensing Coordinator for LDHI, will contact resource agencies to finalize o a date for a joint agency meeting and agenda items. Any questions regarding the information package or upcoming public meeting can be D directed to the persons listed below. Mr. Corry Hildenbrand Ms. Susan Tinney Lake Dorothy Hydro, Inc. Tinney Associates n 889 South Franklin 2112A Second St. Juneau, AK 99801 Douglas, AK 99824 ·C"x'... . J (907) 463-6315 Fax: (907) 463-4833 (907) 364-2233 Fax: (907) 364-2709 U J co~.~{J i U./ g President----r' o "~· .1D.
,0~.•• [,
(~ ,0... a r];u· [J •.. , Q. ~,, TABLE OF CONTENTS
~ .. \j' Page I. INTRODUCTION AND LOCATION • General 1 o • Background 1 • Proposed Project 1 • Location 2 G • Hydropower in Juneau 2 • Project Need 3 n\ 5 u • Map . !' ll. GENERAL DESIGN 6 D • Water Coveyance 7 • Power Generation 8 1 9 . .q • Power Transmission 0.) • SCADA and Communications 11
ill. POWER OPERATION AND RESOURCE UTILIZATION D • Project Capability and Mode ofOperation 12 o • Alternative Generation 12 w. ENVIRONMENTALIRESOURCE IDENTIFICATION AND PROTECTION 13 /0 • Previous Studies 13 • Existing Environment 15 E v. STREAMFLOW AND WATER REGIME • Drainage Basin and Watershed 22 o • Hydrology and Power Generation 23 VI. PROPOSED STUDIES • Fish and Wildlife 26 D • Water Quality 27 • Botanical Resources 27 @ • Geology and Soils 27 • Cultural Resources 28 l • Socioeconomics 28 , ~I D" • Recreation 28 • Visual Resources 29 B • Land Use 29 :6~J.;.. U B (t 1---..~ Page VII. .. STATEMENT REQUIREDBY SECTION4.301(A) fj PURPA 30 H.. :;l \j' VIII. REFERENCES 31 [) APPENDICES Appendix A o • Preliminary Engineering Design Drawings AppendixB .0).·;1 • Initial Consultation Package Distribution List
.U11.'. D t G ~ 1]
J D1 0....•....•...... V D £, G C - C :2 ~ 8IV
'0 Ie INTRODUCTION AND· LOCATION GENERAL fl...;.;; The submission ofthis Initial Consultation Package (ICP) is the beginning ofthe formal application process between LDHI, the agencies and other interested members ofthe n public. The ICP is the principal focus ofdiscussion during the first stage ofconsultation. G BACKGROUND Lake Dorothy Hydro, Inc. (LDHI) was incorporated on August 24, 1995. LDHI is a ·lJ.Ff subsidiary ofthe Alaska Energy Resources Company, and is an affiliate ofthe Alaska Electric Light & Power Company (AELP). Persons responsible for development ofthe proposed Lake Dorothy Hydroelectric Project (project) serve AELP in its operation ofthe licensed Annex Creek and Salmon Creek Projects located in the City and Borough of 8 Juneau, FERC Project No. 2307. Annex Creek Project lands are under the jurisdiction of the US Forest Service (USFS) and requires annual consultation with USFS staffregarding ~ maintenance and operation. AELP's stewardship ofnatural and social resources established in its record ofoperating the Annex/Salmon Creek Project for over 30 years G will be applied to the proposed Lake Dorothy Project. On August 24, 1995, LDHI applied for a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) preliminary permit to investigate the feasibility ofdeveloping the Project. The permit was j} issued by the FERC on January 5, 1996, and assigned FERC Project No. 11556. The permit term is 36-months, and sets the License Application filing deadline no later than January 1, 1999. LDHI is beginning its First Stage Consultation by submitting this ICP. o The ICP complies with the FERC's consultation requirements for filing for an Application for License for the proposed Project. o During the permit term, LDHI will consult with the resource management agencies and the public to determine what effects this project will have on the environment and the economy ofJuneau. LDHI will gather the necessary information to present in the FERC D License Application. D PROPOSED PROjECT LDHI proposes to develop the Lake Dorothy Project by tapping into the lake to develop ''11 reservoir storage for inflow regulation. The Project would include a combination power \' tunnel and underground penstock approximately 3 miles in length for water conveyance to a surface powerhouse near tidewater. The powerhouse would contain two impulse-type D turbines that could develop approximately 31.4 MW ofcapacity from the 2,400 ft. of available static head. A submarine cable transmission line, approximately 4-1/2 miles in length, would be necessary to intertie to an existing transmission line running from the g. Snettisham Hydro project into Juneau. Average annual energy from the Project is 9 [J 1 Q
Q estimated to be 166,400 MWh (this equates to about 40% ofthe existing hydroelectric capacity for the Juneau power grid). R Jj LOCATION
The proposed Lake Dorothy Project is located approximately 16 miles southeast ofJuneau G (Lat. 58° 14.7' N., Long. 133° 58.4'W.) on the east shore ofTaku Inlet between Greely and Jaw Points. Lake Dorothy lies at an elevation of 2421 feet, approximately 3 miles
J from the south shore ofTaku Inlet. The Project is located within the Tongass National '-.O-:,' Forest, US Forest Service (USFS) (CRM T42S, R70E, Sec. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 18,21,22,27; T42S, 69E, Sec. 1,12, 13,22,24,26 and 35). The total amount of ;0U Federal land enclosed within the project boundary is about 5,600 acres. The Project area has been extensively evaluated by the US Bureau ofReclamation as part ofa hydropower evaluation ofLake Dorothy that extended from 1948 through 1954. 8 Preliminary feasibility investigations conducted as a prelude to compiling this report included a preliminary environmental assessment, preliminary hydrology and power fll studies, and a preliminary geology report. HYDROPOWER IN JUNEAU L r-~j The climate and topography ofSoutheast Alaska are ideally suited for hydroelectric generation, and many communities, including Juneau, are isolated from interconnection, JJ!Ill.,' and derive a large portion oftheir energy from thissource. Having barriers ofthe ocean, mountains and glacier, Juneau's remote location is blessed With the geophysical characteristics that lends itselfto hydroelectric development. Juneau also has a history of ,01 obtaining energy from long term, reliable hydropower sources. The projects listed below continue to supply Juneau with hydroelectric ener~. f1;,I,i U' • The Gold Creek Project, in downtown Juneau, is a "run-of-the-river" project and was originally constructed in 1904; • Annex Creek Project, located on Taku Inlet was constructed in 1915; D • Salmon Creek Project, 3-miles from downtown Juneau, was constructed in 1915; and • The federally owned Snettisham Project began operating Long Lake in 1973, D the Crater Lake addition came on line in early 1990. e Hydropower has a number ofadvantages as a means ofgenerating electricity. Hvdrooower., .I. is a clean." renewable resource-- that. is--non-oollutim!...--- ...., and-- ...orovides------reliable-- ~ -- power over a long period oftime. This offers consumers long term rate stability unlike G fossil fuel derived energy, which is dependent upon foreign oil and fluctuating prices. the major consideration when deciding the feasibility ofdeveloping hydropower is finding a n~:,.';', site that can be developed economically. Ifthe site can be developed economically, the H next step is to determine ifthe project can be financed. Thus, much ofthe early work on g any hydro project focuses on site selection and evaluation, and feasibility studies. U 2 G ntJ Development ofa hydro project typicallytakes between 3 - 10 years, depending on the size ofthe project.
-5, Electricity is supplied to the CBJ by the federally owned Snettisham hydroelectric plant, and AELP's smaller hydroelectric plants. AELP maintains 100% stand-by power, if in needed, by generating power using fossil fuel . PROJECT NEED
,0 In an effort to plan for the future, AELP contracted with The McDowell Group, Inc. to prepare a report (dated February 1996) on Juneau's economic condition and outlook. The U report summarized that: [.J1 "Juneau's economy is in a period oftransition. The community has experienced bI significant economic growth since 1990 (2,500 new jobs), yet the community's top industries, state and federal government, have been declining. Tourism is Juneau's only basic industry that has grown significantly. All other growth has occurred in B the support sector." n) ".... barring any catastrophic changes in state government, Juneau should expect 1J continuing population and employment growth, though at a slightly slower rate than experienced between 1994 and 1995. Growth will not be uniform, however, with state and federal governments showing further decline, and tourism showing ij;f1 the only significant basic industry expansion."
"In terms ofpopulation growth, Juneau is expected to continue growth at an [] annual rate ofbetween 1.5% and 2%. Carrying these growth rates over a ten year forecast period, Juneau's population would grow between 33,900 and 35,600 by the year 2005. This represents a total population increase ofbetween 16% and U 22%."
AI f\l~ "Ifboth the and Kensington mines are developed, Juneau's population, will grow at a faster rate, probably between 2.0% and 2.5% annually. At that rate, the local population would rise to between 35,600 and 37,400 by 2005." o Demand for energy may soon exceed the capacity ofcurrent hydroelectric sources, as growth in Juneau, both commercially and residentially, increases. Most ofJuneau's recent growth has been in the retail and service sectors. Juneau has become a retail sales hub in 8 Southeast Alaska, with.consumers shopping at the Mendenhall and Nugget Malls, K-mart, U Fred Meyer's and Carr's grocery and variety stores, and Costco for wholesale prices. When energy demand exceeds the hydroelectric supply, AELP, as the regulated utility for the CBJ, would need to provide additional energy by generating power with fossil fuel, if H additional hydroelectric facilities are not developed. One ofthe constraints AELP faces is further dependence on fossil fuel as an energy resource, and the operating restrictions OVl.'. 3 C _.~ rB...... o imposed on the current Air Quality·Control Permits to comply with the Clean Air Act the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) passed in 1990. B Juneau is all hydroelectric powered, except for stand-by power, and the community strongly supports development ofa non-diesel alternative to serve current and future needs. The tradition ofthe Juneau community has been t6 look for innovative and low a cost renewable energy resources within the region, rather than to rely principally on imported and unpredictably priced fuel for diesel resources. In the 1990 Juneau 20-year Power Supply Plan Update, prepared by CH2M Hill, Lake Dorothy was identified as the n best major hydroelectric project for supplying the electrical needs ofthe CBJ. D o v
OJ:1 Or a n f\lJ o
~-~ ...' -''-'9 I cri. [.1.- Q
(f' ~ c. 4 ~'\ ""~ .~ .• , /( ;oo/) ~ I / t FAIJBllN
]
]
\ J J
] Intertie Point
DllTE
LAKEDOROTHYHYDRO, INC. JUNEAU A FERC PROJECT NO. 11556-000-AK TITLE LAKE DOROTHY VICINITY MAP
SCALE PRELIMINARY EXHIBIT G-1 C m Cll .~ Z
.. ------, [J~=li\ t}! II. GENERAL DESIGN
:[>lea.s~Jefer~nceAppendixA, Preliminary Exhibit G-l for projectJayout, and Preliminary 8 Exhibits F-l, F-2, F-4 and F-7 for conceptual project feature design.
The Project features include a lake tap into Lake Dorothy to develop reservoir storage for U\ inflow regulation; and a combination power tunnel and penstock, approximately 3 miles in length, for water conveyance to a powerhouse near tidewater. The powerhouse would C.~l contain two impulse-type turbines that could develop approximately 31.4 MW ofcapacity O" from the 2,400 ft. ofavailable static head. A submarine cable, approximately 4.5 miles in length, would be necessary to intertie to an existing transmission line running from the o Snettisham Hydro project into Juneau. The conceptual design ofthe Project includes the following major features. UJ • Water Conveyance: •A 12 ft. diameter, horseshoe shaped, unlined power tunnel will be driven approximately 15,000 ft. from tidewater to Lake Dorothy, at D' elevation 2,240 ft. • The lakewill be "tapped" with the blasting ofa 15 ft. plug, approximately 240 ft. below the surface elevation ofLake Dorothy. B •A 54- inch, 2,000 ft. long, steel penstock will provide the transition from the tunnel to the two power turbines. • Power Generation: o •A bench, approximately 2 acres in size, will be cut into the hillside just above extreme high water elevation to accommodate the powerhouse -\ and support facilities. A small cantilevered dock will be constructed at -;;
~'fl.'.. WATER CONVEYANCE B Reference Preliminary Exhibit f-2. Water Conveyance for the Lake Dorothy Project consists ofthe inlet works and the 0' combination power tunnel/penstock. The Lake Dorothy Inlet Works consists oftwo major components, the underwater lake tap into Lake Dorothy, and the inlet valve and valve shaft n that control the water flow into the power tunnel. LDHI proposes the following: 1 U • Inlet Works (Lake Tap E12,240 and Gate Shaft) F Tunnel type 12-ft horseshoe shaped, conventional drill .;,' • O and blast, unlined • Tunnel length 15,750 feet o • Penstock diameter 54-inches o • Penstock length 2,040 feet Underwater lake tapshave a long and successful history in the Juneau area. AELP's Annex 1.; Creek powerplant (1914) on the opposite shore ofthe Taku Inlet utilized, as far as can be I 0 determined, the North America's first underwater lake tap. Based on the available USGS fathometer survey ofLake Dorothy, an underwater lake tap of240 ft is anticipated. A preliminary location for the lake tap just to the north ofthe existing Lake Dorothy outlet, will o permit a tap into an area free ofbottom sediments and well away from any snow avalanche or rock fall areas such as those which surround the 18ke. Access to the lake tap will be from the constructed power tunnel and will help to minimize the visual effects ofthe excavation in the o area.
The intersection between the lake tap area and the power tunnel will contain a concrete plug G with a hydraulic gate valve that will control the flow ofwater from the lake into the power tunnel. The valve will be operated from a valve house constructed on the surface on a rock ridge above the tunnel. Access from the ground surface to the gate valve will be via a 15-ft o diameter conventionally sunk shaft that will also serve as the air inlet for the power tunnel dewatering.
8 A small prefabricated metal gatehouse containing an electric winch for examination ofthe valve shaft and access to the power tunnel will be constructed at the surface. An electric generator D to supply power for operating the hydraulic motors controlling the inlet valve will be installed. Access for construction, outfitting, and operation ofthe inlet shaft and gatehouse will be by ·.~ helicopter. o.. -! G~ 7 \] r}
~. Based on the preliminary site geology report, the rock conditions for economical and safe power tunnel excavation appear to be excellent. From the air photo analysis conducted as part ofthe study,itapRears that the power tunnel will be excavated totallywitbin a high quality, ·8-1, '-' quartz diorite gneiss.
Construction ofthe power tunnel will be a value engineering approach. LDlll proposes to u allow the contractor to decide whether to use a tunnel bore machine, or a conventional drill and blast approach. The contractor, will base his decision on the equipment available Q at the time ofconstruction.
UrJ.1 POWER GENERATION Reference Preliminary Exhibit F-1. o LDlll proposes to locate the powerhouse on the surface near tidewater at Taku Inlet. The surface powerhouse will be the distinct feature on the outlet structure bench. The powerhouse, approximately 42-ft-wide by.130-ft-Iong by 42-ft-high, will house the two o automated, remotely controlled, Pelton wheel turbines and their generators. Attached to the powerhouse will be a 3 bay shop and storage facility approximately 42-ft-wide by 60 o ft-long. It is anticipated that the building itselfwill be an insulated, pre-engineered, slab on-grade, steel frame, metal clad building painted to blend into the environment. Within the building will be·a bridge crane for assembling and maintaining the turbines and o generators. Integral to the powerhouse will be a control room, machine shop, and supply storage for D the maintenance and operation ofthe facility. Control ofthe project will be from the remote central operation station at the Thane Substation, and when necessary, the plant can be controlled locally at the site. Power tunnel access to the powerhouse would be U through a chamber excavation for the bifurcation.
A boat will be kept at the facility for emergency service and for transportation ofmaterials D ifneeded. Snow removal equipment, such as a backhoe, will be kept at the powerhouse as well. 01 LDlll proposes the following: Q
Pnull:>rhnll~p .n~l'Itinn TiopUll'ltpr • -. - ~. _...... __ .....----_T ..... _..... ---_ .. _--- • Powerhouse Type Surface (Architecturally designed to blend D with existing terrain) • Turbines 2 Pelton-type G • Unit hydraulic capacity 185 cfs • Generator output 31.4 MW total (initial run) ~\
8 01 ,fl.6 a The preliminary design for the powerhouse includes excavating an area approximately 600' x 130',byblasting a bench into the rockJace.. Itis anticipated that the bench rockwilLbe castoff f~ into Taku Inlet and will be used to provide a transition area for the submarine cable (refer to Preliminary Exhibit F-4). Included in the powerhouse excavations will be construction ofa channel for the discharge waters. The outlet will be placed under the powerhouse and the n waters will flow to tidewater. It is anticipated that the powerhouse elevation will be above the maximum storm surge at maximum tide, and the outlet channel will slope to tidewater.
C>, On the upslope side ofthe powerhouse will be a chamber connected to the power tunnel excavated to contain the steel bifurcation that splits the water from the 54-inch-diameter steel penstock for delivery to each ofthe two power generation units. It is anticipated that both the o outlet·tunnel and the bifurcation tunnel will have nominal ground support requirements and be o essentially unlined. POWER TRANSMISSION o Reference Preliminary Exhibit F-4 and F-7. o The power transmission component ofthe Project includes the following: • The Lake Dorothy Powerhouse Substation~ •A New Submarine Cable transmission line~ o • Two submarine cable support buildings~ East Terminal adjacent to the powerhouse West Terminal adjacent to the existing building for the Snettisham o Project near Pt. Bishop • Intertie into existing overhead transmission system to the Thane Substation n • Modifications to the Thane Substation to accommodate the Lake Dorothy Project.
o LDID proposes the following: n LV • Switchvard Location Adjacent to powerhouse • Primary Transmission Line o Type: New submarine cable crossing to Q intertie to existing 138kV overhead line.
D o Length: Approximately 4.8 miles o G 9 D o
C 138kV Submarine Cable & Support Systems . The submarine cable portion ofthe project includesth~ca,ble andthe east and west 8 terminal cable support buildings. The support buildings provide the transition for the overhead bus work to the submarine cable, and required equipment to support the o submarine cable operating system. The preliminary design for the support buildings include: • Cable support systems that have a pressurized insulating oil system to ensure o positive pressure on the cables during their operational life. • Stand-by emergency generators to supply power for critical support systems. • Batteries and inverters to supply critical AC and DC power. o • SCADA interfaces to monitor the cable support system at the Thane o Substation. Lake Dorothy Powerhouse Substation and Switchyard IT The Lake Dorothy powerhouse 'substation and support building will be located adjacent to the su~ace powerhouse, and will be fenced to provide security and safety. There will be o two transformers at the substation. Redundancy ofthe equipment will ensure reliability at the Project. Either transformer will be sized to transform the power generated by both turbines. This will ensure reliability ofservice when performing maintenance on either o transformer.
The transformers will incorporate the standard AELP relay package mounted adjacently to o the transformer on the existing enclosure. Two. 138kV vacuum circuit breakers will be D installed. The breakers will provide the mechanism for isolating the submarine cable. o West Taku 138kV Cable Interface Switchyard (near Pt. Bishop) There will be one 138kV vacuum circuit breaker feeding the Lake Dorothy cable and one 138kV vacuum circuit breaker to feed the Snettisham Project. A new 138kV dead-end 01 structure will be constructed to support the 138kV line where it ties into the overhead transmission line. The new structure will be located near the terminal buildings.
Q Thane Substation Modification
Modifications to the Thane Substation are required for the Lake Dorothy Project to D incorporate it into the Juneau power grid. The expansion is needed to accommodate the o additional step-down transformer and bus work. G o 10 o
i UA. SCADA & COMMUNICATIONS 8 I.I>IDwllliIlst311 a SuperVisory Communication and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system to monitor and control the Project, and communications. This system, as proposed in the preliminary design, would incorporate a microwave systerti and repeaters to serve the o Lake Dorothy Plant, the gate shaft at the outlet ofthe lake, back to the Thane substation. Status points for monitoring the Project would include the gate shaft at the outlet ofLake Dorothy, status ofthe turbines and generators (including power output, voltage, Q frequency, and alarms), and the status ofthe cable support buildi!1gs. All the information o would be relayed to the operator at the Thane Substation. It is envisioned that a microwave system will be installed for communications (telephone, facsimile, etc.) for the contractor's use early on at the commencement ofthe project o construction. o o o
1 0~ n 0--···
11 0...;;; B D o Q o 11 C "'\ f' ~ C :2 U III. POWER OPERATION AND RESOURCE UTILIZATION '] Project Capability and Mode ofOperation This Project will supply additional hydroelectric energy for the CBJ. Currently, electricity ] is supplied to the CBJ by the federally owned Snettisham hydroelectric plant, and AELP's smaller hydroelectric plants. AELP also maintains 100% stand-by fossil fuel generation in the event ofloss ofenergy from the remote hydroelectric power sources. ~J Demand for this renewable energy may soon exceed the capacity ofcurrent hydroelectric sources, as growth in the commercial and residential sector increases. Whenenergy ] demand exceeds the hydroelectric supply, AELP, as the regulated utility for the CBJ, would need to provide additional energy by generating power with fossil fuel, ifadditional hydroelectric facilities are not developed. One ofthe constraints AELP faces is further ] dependence on fossil fuel as an energy resource, and the operating restrictions imposed on the current Air Quality Permits ofits facilities to comply with the Clean Air Act the EPA passed in 1990.
Preliminary power studies for Lake Dorothy, performed by RW. Beck, indicate an annual ~] firm energy production of150,900,000 kWh, and average annual energy of166,400,000 kWh. Comparatively, the annual firm energy available from the Snettisham project is 179,000,000 kWh for Long Lake and 106,000,000 kWh for Crater Lake (285,000,000 ] kWh total). The Project will tap into Lake Dorothy to develop reservoir storage for inflow regul~tion. ] Water for generation purposes would be conveyed by a combination power tunnel and penstock, approximately 3 miles in length, to a powerhouse near tidewater. The powerhouse would contain two impulse-type turbines that could develop approximately \ 31.4 MW ofcapacity from the 2,400 ft. ofavailable static head. Water that passes through ) the turbines would be released to tidewater. A submarine cable, approximately 4.5 miles in length, would be necessary to intertie to an existing overhead transmission line running #~ from the Snettisham Hydro project into Juneau. i.-( The project will be automated and remotely controlled by AELP's existing Supervisory J Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system. This will allow AELP staffto remotely start and stop the plant, and to monitor critical parameters ofthe power generation facilities. The project will likely be staffed with an OperatorlWatchmen for security reasons related to the remote location ofthe plant.
] Alternative Generation
The alternative to the Lake Dorothy Project to meet the future energy needs would be for J AELP to install additional fossil fuel generation capacity.
12
Q
IV. ENVIRONMENTIRESOURCE IDENTIFICATION AND o PROTECTION B Individuals associated with the development ofthe Lake Dorothy Project have been involved for a number ofyears in operating other hydroelectric projects in Alaska and will bring that knowledge to this effort. Regarding environmental protection and related o measures for the Project, the study team has considered the environmental aspects at each step in project development. Project facilities will be sited, constructed, and operated harmoniously with the surrounding environment. At this time, specific environmental o measures have not been developed. LDHI invites commentators on this ICP to provide .information regarding appropriate environmental protection measures during the formal o scoping meetings that will be held or in written response during the comment period. o PREVIOUS STUDIES The Lake Dorothy hydroelectric project has been extensively evaluated as a hydropower o source since the late 1920's. There was a Preliminary Permit Application (No. 1038) filed with the Federal Power Commission on November 26, 1929, and a permit granted on the 1 Project on June 5, 1930 . Application No. 755 included a request for a license of Lake o Dorothy at the same time a license was requested for the Long Lake project. This ··" application was authorized and terminated. 0.j, The US Bureau ofReclamation undertook a series ofgeologic and feasibility studies on developing Lake Dorothy as a hydropower source beginning in the 1940's and extending through 1959. The reports conclude that development ofLake Dorothy is feasible from a o geologic standpoint, although its remote location and access to the area may increase the cost ofthe project. Territorial and Federal agencies submitted statements to the USDI regarding their interest in the project (Chapter VITI, Cooperating Interests, U.S. Department ofthe o Interior, Bureau ofReclamation. Lake Dorothy Project Alaska. September 1949.). Generally, all comments submitted in 1949 were positive toward development ofLake Dorothy as a power source. In addition, the development was considered highly desirable to o attract the establishment ofnew industries and expand and modernize existing industries. Listed below are the USBR historic reports. o U.S. Department ofthe Interior, Bureau ofReclamation. Alaska - A Reconnaissance Report on the Potential Development ofWater Resources in the Territory of 8 Alaska. December 1948. U.S. Department ofthe Interior, Bureau ofReclamation. Hydroelectric Power. o Summary Data Lake Dorothy Project Near Juneau. 10-22-59.
O·.l-~ 1 Federal Power Commission. Water Powers ofSoutheast Alaska. Number 48, Dorothy Lake near g Taku Inlet. 1947. C 13 o u.s. Department ofthe Interior, Bureau ofReclamation. Lake Dorothy Project o Alaska. September 1949.
U.S; Department ofthe Interior, Bureau ofReclamation. StatusReport on the Ldke B Dorothy Project Alaska. April 1955.
Athearn, M. J. Preliminary Geologic Report Lake Dorothy Project. US Department o ofthe Interior, Bureau ofReclamation, Alaska Geologic ReportNo.5, Alaska Investigations Office, Juneau, Alaska. 28p. 1954
2 3 o In the 1984 Juneau 20-year Power Supply Plan and the 1990 Update to the plan , Lake Dorothy was identified as the best major hydroelectric project for supplying the electrical needs o ofthe CBJ. The advantages cited in the 1984 report and summarized below include: • Low installed cost. The low cost is primarily the result ofthe fact that the Lake o Dorothy is a lake tap project (not requiring construction ofa dam) and that it is close the existing transmission facilities. • Very high head project (greater than 2,000 feet). Also, because ofthe steepness of o the terrain, it can be developed with a relatively short tunnel. • Large storage capacity. Allows for a high degree offlow regulation and makesthe project valuable for meeting winter energy requirements. o • Total length ofthe transmission facilities required is only 4-1/2 miles. This is a very short interconnection distance given the size and potential ofthe project. • Proximity to Juneau. This project is the closest to the load centers ofJuneau ofthe o hydro projects located south ofJuneau. o The report did cite two disadvantages, they include: • Powerhouse location is an area ofextreme weather on a steep hillside, with limited [J topographic area suitable for use·as a powerhouse site. The cost to develop the powerhouse could be costly. • Currently in an undeveloped area. The development ofsuch new sites can be costly o due to construction support requirements. See References for complete bibliography on available data on the Lake Dorothy project o area. 8 o o 2 Ebasco. 20-Year Power Supply Plan for Juneau, Alaska. 1984. 3 CH2M Hill. 20-Year Power Supply Plan Update for Juneau, Alaska. August 1990. Q 14 C D o EXISTING ENVIRONMENT Early in January 1996, LDlll contracted with Raven Environmental and RW. Beck to do a Preliminary Environmental Assessment ofthe Lake Dorothy Project. The general o findings in the report are discussed below. o Climate The Juneau area is characterized by a mild maritime climate, heavy precipitation and high number ofcloudy days. Winter temperatures average 31.5°F at Juneau, and 26.9°F at Annex C Creek on Taku Inlet. July temperatures in Juneau average 55.3°F. Precipitation is highly variable in the region, with the Juneau Airport averaging 90 inches ofprecipitation and 94 D inches ofsnow per year. The average rainfall recorded at the Snettisham Power Project, located 11 miles east ofthe Project, is 150 inches per year. Precipitation in the Dorothy Creek 1 watershed is estimated at 130 inches annually (Johrison, 1957). The average number ofclear, 0J. cloud free days at Juneau averages on 54 per year, while at Annex Creek on Taku Inlet the average is 94 days (Johnson, 1957). o Geology
The Project lies within the Juneau Mining District, in the Coast Range subdistrict, o immediately adjacent to the Juneau Gold Belt subdistrict. Topography ofthe area is rugged and mountainous, with elevations extending to more than 5,000 ft. within the Lake 4 Dorothy watershed. The Coast Range subdistrict is dominated by the Alexander terrane . o It is predominantly composed ofmetamorphosed Paleozoic through Triassic clastic sediments (shale, siltstone, graywacke, and sandstone) and limestone with areas ofmafic and felsic volcanic rocks. Most ofthe rocks in the Juneau Mining District have undergone o at least one metamorphic event. In the Coast Range subdistrict the rocks have been subjected to progressive regional metamorphism ranging from greenschist through o amphibolite. Extremely high grade metamorphic rocks exist in the core ofthe Coast Range plutonic-metamorphic complex. In contrast to the adjacent area in the Juneau Gold Belt subdistrict, which contains numerous mine workings and prospects, the Project area o is devoid ofsuch features. Lake Dorothy was formed by natural quarrying and abrasion by a thick mass ofice that o joined a major glacier flowing down Taku Inlet. Pleistocene glaciation completely covered the area and was the dominant force in shaping the landforms in the area. Glacial abrasion deepened the Lake Dorothy basin well below its present rock outlet and removed 9 virtually all preglacial material. Most ofthe area above Lake Dorothy is exposed bedrock, with a few talus slopes and pockets ofvegetation. A small delta ofglacial debris. sand and gravel material exists at the south end ofLake Dorothy originating from an existing, small, o receding glacier. o 4 The geologic description of the Alexander terrane is based on the Bureau of Mines Special Q Publication, Mineral Investigations in the Juneau Mining District, Alaska, 1984-1988. 15" C o ~jE1 Soils
Unconsolidated deposits in the Project area consist ofglacial moraine, glacial outwash, o deltaic deposits, beach sand and gravel, and talus deposited since the retreat ofthe Pleistocene glaciers. These deposits are typically small, less than 20 ft. deep, and ~ discontinuous over the project area. Glacial sediments are confined to creek valleys and fronts ofexisting glaciers. The nearest large deposit ofsand and gravel is the delta ofthe o receding Norris Glacier, about 7 miles north ofJaw Point. . The Soil Conservation Service (1962) has mapped the Project area as "S018". This . mapping unit is described as "Humic Lithic Cryorthods, very gravely, hilly to steep o association." The association has 10 components, split between well and poorly drained descriptions. Generally soils on slopes ofless than 10% tend to be hydric, or poorly o drained. Mineralized soils dominate the Project area when soils are present. In the non-forested portions ofthe Project area residual soil is almost entirely absent. Where it does occur it is limited to a few inches in depth. In the forested areas it is usually o only a superficial accumulation ofthin slope-wash, leaves, evergreen needles, and moss. At low elevation and to the west ofDorothy Creek soils tend to be more productive (and may be thicker due to less steep slopes in this area) and support a small amount of o commercial quality timber. o Site Seismicity Juneau is in Seismic Risk Zone 3, which indicates that major damage may occur from earthquakes equal to or greater than 6.0 on the Richter Scale. During the past 100 years o 16 earthquakes ofthis magnitude or greater have been recorded for the greater Juneau area. The National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) earthquake data base was consulted to determine the low intensity earthquake activity within 100 kilometers (62 miles) ofthe t1 Project. A total of890 earthquake events, less than 4.0 on the Richter Scale, exists in this data base for the Project. .,0: Vegetation Resources and Effects o The Dorothy Creek watershed is dominated by rock and ice landforms, which comprise 50% or more ofthe watershed. The remaining area is dominated primarily by Alpine Tundra and Coastal Rainforest, with limited occurrences ofMuskeg. The lakes within the watershed are o deep, lack significant shallow water areas, and have precipitous shorelines that provide almost no opportunity for the development ofriparian or wetland vegetation.
o Dorothy Creek flows over bedrock from Lake Dorothy to Lieuy and Bart Lakes, while dropping 1,500 ft in elevation in a distance of1.2 miles. Dorothy Creek drops another 900 ft. in the remaining 1.5 miles before entering Taku Inlet. The last mile flows through a narrow, U steep-sided, forested north-south trending canyon. These physical conditions provide almost no opportunity for significant occurrence or development ofriparian or wetland vegetation. Q 16 C o o There are few effects anticipated for vegetation in the Project area. This is due to the fact that the Project features only include a lake tap, tunnel to tidewater, and a powerhouse site. Roads and other surface support activities are not needed to complete theProject. Surface o construction activities will be limited to the Powerhouse bench and the location ofthe lake tap above Lake Dorothy. o Fisheries Resources and Effects
1.•. .. '1 Dorothy Creek is a nonanadromous, high gradient, Class III stream originating at Lake 0 Dorothy, flowing through Lieuy and Bart Lakes, and terminating in Taku Inlet. Eastern Brook trout were stocked in Lake Dorothy in 1931, and were still present during an ADF&G survey o in 1972. Drawdown effects are not expected to significantly alter the oxygen content or temperature ofLake Dorothy. However, the only habitat that could be used for spawning either exists on the face ofthe delta or in streams traversing it. This habitat may no longer be o accessible to fish use as a result ofthe Project. Based on LDHI's experience with the hydro project at Salmon Creek, the drawdown effects ofthe lake, may not effect the survival ofthe o the small residual population ofEastern Brook trout in the lake. The Taku Inlet is a 48 mile long estuary ofthe Taku River, the most important commercial salmon river in northern Southeast Alaska. Taku Inlet carries a heavy glacial sediment load o originating both from glaciers within the estuary and from glaciers located along the Taku River and its tributaries. Taku Inlet joins Stephens Passage approximately 14 miles south of Juneau. The ProjeCt is located approximately 6 miles up from the mouth ofTaku Inlet where it o joins Stephens Passage.
The lower 15 miles ofTaku Inlet supports the most significant regional salmon fishery in the o Juneau area. Slightly more than 50% ofthe catch is comprised ofPink and Chum salmon, while the rest is made up ofalmost equal amounts of Sockeye and Coho salmon. King salmon o make up less than 1% ofthe commercial catch. The Taku Inlet fishing district (ADF&G statistical area 111-32) includes Taku Inlet and that portion ofStephens Passage enclosed by a line extending from approximately Rhine Creek, near Bishop Point, to Point Arden, and thence o to Circle Point, just below Slocum Inlet.
.~i.' In addition to the salmon fishery Taku Inlet also supports crab and shrimp fisheries. O.··.' Brown and Red king Crab, Tanner Crab, and Dungeness Crab are commercially harvested, as well as several species ofshrimp. However, these fisheries are quite small.
8 Project related effects to fisheries include the reservoir drawdown effects on Lake Dorothy described above, and marine traffic effects in Taku Inlet that are limited to Project construction o related travel to the site. Travel will be coordinated with commercial fishing activities. o Q o 17 o o Wildlife Resources and Effects Mammals
G The Project area lies at the lower end ofthe Taku Inlet. The Taku River is one ofthe major corridors through the Coast range for movement ofwildlife between the interior and the coast. It is the only such corridor in Northern Southeast Alaska. As a consequence many terrestrial D mammals and birds may seasonally move through this region. o The Project area has an assemblage ofmammals drawn from both interior and coastal regions due to the Taku River corridor. Ofthe 49 species ofmammals in Southeast Alaska, 39 may reside or seasonally occur in the Project area. However, the Project area is not known for o having large concentrations ofwildlife, and receives very limited hunting and recreational activity. This may, in part, be due to the influence ofstrong Taku winds present in the area and the lack ofsheltered habitat from these winds. 'Most ofthe hunting and recreational o activity occur along the Taku River and the head ofthe Taku Inlet, 10-15 miles or more from the Project area. This may be related to the greater diversity ofhabitat, and to the general ease o ofaccessibility from the water, which occurs in the river corridor and upper Taku Inlet. The most notable wildlife use ofthe area is for goat hunting. There are no records that indicate the Project area is used significantly to harvest other big game species or furbearers. o The Project area is easily accessible by floatplane from Juneau. The Project lies in Game Management Unit (GMU) lC, which extends along the Southeast mainland ofLynn Canal and Stephens Passage to the latitude ofCape Fanshaw and Eldred Rock, encompassing an area of 2 o 7,600 mi . There are typically 125-150 permits issued each year for this GMU, with a corresponding success rate of25-33%. For the period 1990-1995 there were eight goat hunts conducted in the Project area, which resulted in the harvest ofone nanny. This level ofuse o accounted for less than 1% ofthe hunting effort for GMU 1C. In this general region ofGMU 1C, the most significant goat hunting areas are in Endicott and Tracy arms, and the upper Taku u Inlet area in the vicinity of Wright Peak. o Birds Alaska supports a diverse seasonal bird population, and is the breeding ground for many migratory species..There are at least 424 species known to occur in the State, and 298 in o Southeast Alaska, alone. Ofthese, 160 are known to nest in Southeast Alaska. More than 100 species are known to reside year round in Southeast Alaska. Within the Juneau area more than 270 species have been recorded. However only 77 are commonly observed. It is likely 8 that fewer species may be observed in the Project area than the 77 commonly observed, since the Project area does not contain the Black Cottonwood and shallow intertidal habitats present C in the Juneau area. The last Bald Eagle survey was conducted in this area more than 15 years ago. At that time two Bald Eagle nests were recorded in the vicinity ofthe Project. The closest one (#95) lies o approximately 700 ft. west ofthe mouth ofDorothy Creek. The second one (#96) is located Q o 18 o 3/. mile north ofDorothy Creek. The present status ofBald Eagle nests in the Project area is U unknown.
NorthemGoshawk are known to occur in the Point Salisbury area and on the southern G shoreline ofDouglas Island. Although no sightings have been reported from the Project area, the proximity ofother sightings to the Project area suggests that they may be present in the B Project area. There have also been reports ofPeregrine falcons using the cliffareas to the north ofDorothy o Creek. However, this activity, and their seasonal presence, is unconfirmed. A Steller's Sea Eagle also inhabits the Taku River Valley. This species, native ofRussian o Siberia, is the only know occurrence in North America. It has resided in the Taku River Valley for the past 7 years. It is most commonly seen at the confluence ofthe Tulsequah and Taku rivers, eight miles above the US-Canada border, but has been sighted up and down the river o and upper Taku Inlet. o Effects Wildlife effects are expected to be ofshort duration and minimal. This is in large part due to the design features ofthe Project. The only surface activities are associated with a o powerhouse location near tidewater and a lake tap at Lake Dorothy. The total land area disturbed by the project is expected to be less than 4 acres, with less than 2 acres permanently o altered to support the powerhouse and associated facilities. It is likely that goats may be displaced temporarily during the 2 month work period needed to construct the lake tap. This activity might also interfere with goat hunting in the area during o that year. However, no residual effects are expected after completion ofthe lake tap.
The powerhouse site is proposed for a cliffarea adjacent to the mouth ofDorothy Creek. o Preparation ofthis site will result in minimal alteration ofexisting habitat; and, because ofthe cliff, will not affect existing patterns ofwildlife use ofthe area. However, there may be some o avoidance ofthe mouth ofDorothy Creek during the 2 year construction period. Project-related effects to Bald Eagles and other raptors is not expected to be significant. o However, ifany new nests have been established closer to the mouth ofDorothy Creek in the past 15 years then some conflict may occur. This will not be known until an Eagle survey is conducted in the area to look for nest trees. Confirmation ofthe occurrence ofPeregrine B falcons in the area is also needed before any concerns for this species could be addressed. D U o 19 (] o
[J Water Quality
At present the entire flow ofDorothy Creek, averaging 96.2 cfs, enters LieuyandBart Lakes. c Once the Project is completed only 9.9 cfs can be expected to flow into Lieuy Lake, and 26.8 cfs into Bart Lake. These flows are derived from surface runoffwithin the watershed and would not contain the glacial silt that originates from Lake Dorothy. Both lakes would be o expected to become clear water lakes in a short time with an increased euphotic zone. Additionally due to the 70-90% reduction in glacial and high elevation watershed runoffwater, lake waters are expected to warm considerably during the summer months. Due to the C deepness ofthese lakes it is anticipated that lake waters will become stratified, with warm waters confined to a shallow surface layer. The slow lake flushing rates, resulting from the D reduced inflows, combined with temperature differences between surface and deeper waters, could result in blocking the exchange or flushing ofbottom waters during summer stratification periods. Some enhancement oflake productivity might also be expected as a result ofthe o warmer summer temperatures. However, this effect may be very limited due to the low concentration ofnutrients in these high quality waters. o The hydrologic analyses for the Project indicate that the maximum fluctuation ofthe water level in Lake Dorothy could reach 162 ft. However, during most years the fluctuation in surface water level is expected to seasonally reach only 41 ft. In most years the lake is not o expected to flow into Dorothy Creek. This will result in dewatering ofthe section ofDorothy Creek flowing into Lieuy Lake. This portion ofDorothy Creek flows over bedrock and drops 700 ft. in 0.6 miles. "Analysis ofair photos shows virtually no pool or riffle structure in this o segment ofDorothy Creek. It appears to cascade as a white water stream from its outlet to the point where it flows into Lieuy Lake. No significant effects have been identified with o dewatering ofthis portion ofDorothy Creek. Recreation
o Lake Dorothy is accessible by floatplane from Juneau. Local charter services occasionally fly tourists to the Lake Dorothy for camping and alpine hiking. It is not a frequently used o destination, but may represent a halfdozen or more destination trips during the summer and fall. The air charter services also fly goat hunters into Lake Dorothy during the Fall hunting o season. There is a 4-5 mile trail from tidewater to Lake Dorothy. However, the trail can not be detected from helicopter or aircraft overflights ofthe area. The only records oftrail use in the g area are associated with the abandoned USGS gaging station on the lower end ofDorothy Creek. The US Forest Service has removed the trail designations from their topographic quad o maps because oflack ofinformation on public use and because it has not been maintained. The marine waters in the Project area are not suitable for recreational development or use of shore fixed structures. The area is subject to strong local tidal currents and scouring by ice o flows and debris when tides are greater than +15 ft. The deep water adjacent to the shore also o precludes anchoring at Dorothy Creek. 20 D o [] Cultural Resources
Incontrasttoother areas near the Project,this area appears to have no recent history of B cultural use. The Office ofHistory and Archaeology has no records ofhistoric sites occurring in the Project area. The area is also not listed in the Sealaska inventory ofhistoric sites in the [] Juneau area. The closest site to the Project is Taku Village near Point Bishop on the west shore ofTaku Inlet. This may be a result ofthe general inaccessibility ofthe east shore of o Taku Inlet between Jaw and Greely Points due to cliffs, precipitous shorelines, and deep water. o o o o o o B o o 9 o o o 21 flU.. :J: o-< AI o or (j) -< p. G
H....-l {d V. STREAMFLOW AND WATER REGIME 6 Drainage Basin and Watershed The Project lies wholly within the Dorothy Creek drainage basin on the southeast side of 2 Taku Inlet. The Dorothy Creek watershed is approximately 15 mi , and ranges from sea o level to over 5,000 ft in elevation. Approximately 72% ofthe watershed lie above 2,500 ft elevation. Less than 4% ofthe watershed lie below 1,000 ft elevation. Three lakes carved o into the bedrock by glaciers, Lieuy, Bart, and Dorothy, ranging in surface area from 80 to 950 acres, are located in the watershed. The drainage basin consists ofextensive areas of bare, placated rock, particularly above 1,800 ft elevation. Shrubs and sparse forest cover o much ofthe drainage below 1,800 ft to less than 800 ft elevation. Below the 800 ft elevation the watershed is covered mostly by a mixture ofsparse to commercial quality u timberlands. Lakes o Lake Dorothy is the largest ofthe three lakes, and the origin ofDorothy Creek. More than 72% ofthe watershed lie above and drains into Lake Dorothy, which sits at an elevation of i.·.·.:: 2,421 above sea level. The surface area ofLake Dorothy is approximately 950 acres. It is ·O approximately 31/z miles long, I/Zmile wide-over most ofits length, and 3/. mile wide at its
.1 widest point. Lake Dorothy is a steep-sided, elongate lake that reaches a maximum depth ~ 0··... of 565 ft. Water depths in excess of300 ft are reached within 500 ft ofthe shoreline, except at the south end ofthe lake where glacial debris and outwash have created a small C delta. Lieuy Lake lies downstream 0.6 miles west ofLake Dorothy on Dorothy Creek. It is at an elevation of1,710 ft., and has a surface area ofapproximately 80 acres. It was fonnerly 2 o known as Veronica Lake. Less than 10% (approximately 1.4 mi ) ofthe Dorothy Creek watershed drains into Lieuy Lake. o The third lake in the watershed is Bart lake, fonnerly known as Mary Lake. It lies 0.6 miles south ofLieuy Lake on Dorothy Creek at an elevation of890 ft. Bart Lake has a surface ~ area ofapproximately 250 acres. It is a steep-sided lake with a maximum depth of543 ft. n.•. ..·. 2 lJ Water depths exceed 100 ft within 300 ft ofthe shoreline. Approximately 16% (2.4 mi ) of the Dorothy Creek watershed drains into Bart Lake. IJf=!.." C Dorothy Creek Dorothy Creek is a nonanadromous, high gradient, Class ill stream originating at Lake Dorothy, flowing through Lieuy and Bart Lakes, and terminating in Taku Inlet. The total g length ofDorothy Creek is 3.6 mi. It drops more than 700 ft in 0.6 mi. to enter Lieuy Lake, and then drops another 800 ft in 0.6 miles before entering Bart Lake. Dorothy Creek drops H another 500 ft in 0.5 miles as it leaves Bart Lake, and the remaining 400 ft in the last mile of IJ 22 C t..1=1.--.J4 its flow to Taku Inlet. Dorothy Creek flows over bedrock for most ofits length and would be classified as a high gradient incised glacial torrent channel (HC9) for most ofits length. Typical chara.cteristics ofthese streamS are gradients averaging 19%, bedrock confined, 8 mean incision depth of6.5 mi., and bedrock streambanks. C Hydrology and Power Generation
Data are available from two gaging stations on Dorothy Creek. The upper gage at the Lake t Dorothy outlet has nine years ofdata available for water years 1987 through 1995. The lower gaging station 0.8 miles upstream from the mouth ofDorothy Creek has 36 complete o years ofdata for water years 1930 through 1941, 1943, and 1945 through 1967. o Location Drainage Area (est. sq. mi.) Lake Dorothy at Outlet 11.0 - } 0y LieuyLake 1.4 ······ Bart Lake 2.4 Bart Lake Outlet to Lower USGS Gage 0.4 C Site C Total Area at Lower-USGS Ga~e Site 15.2
Stream flows at the lower gaging station average 143 cfs; with average maximum and C minimum flows of 184 and 108 cfs, respectively. The majority ofthis flow originates within Dorothy Lake (81%), with only 26.8 cfs originating from surface drainage into Lieuy and fJ Bart Lakes. The lowest streamflows occur from December through April, and highest in July and August.
The average outlet flow from Lake Dorothy into Dorothy Creek is 123 cfs, and seasonally D ranges from 104 to 141 cfs. This represents approximately 86% ofthe average flow from the Dorothy Creek watershed, as measured from stream gaging records near the mouth of o the creek. ,0 Method In Janu~ry 1996, LDIll contracted with R.W. Beck to perform preliminary hydrology and power studies. Two alternative approaches were selected by R.W. Beck to develop c estimates ofLake Dorothy monthly inflows. The first approach was with multiple correlation using the HEC-4, Monthly Streamflow Synthesis computer model, which was developed by the Hydrologic Engineering Center, U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers. The o second approach is referred to as a volume frequency distribution approach. It recognizes ~: , B 23 bt..
{~1~l that, for Lake Dorothy, the development ofthe range and distribution ofthe time-series of annual inflows is ofcritical importance. The volume frequency distribution approach is ,8 suggested in the third edition ofRay Linsley'sHY4r()logyjorEngineers. The volume frequency approach produces Lake Dorothy inflow results for the period of record available at the Lake Dorothy Creek gage. To determine which method probably o yields the most accurate results, additional data from the Juneau vicinity was reviewed for the recent period ofrecord concurrent with the Lake Dorothy outlet recorded data. Recorded data from the Mendenhall River, shows that flow for the 1987 through 1994 [J period was about 14 percent above the average for the longer term from 1966 through 1994. Precipitation data at the Juneau airport, show that the 1987 through 1994 period was about 18 percent above the average for the longer term from 1950 through 1994 for which C recorded data is available. From this it is concluded that the 1987 through 1995 period, for which data is available at the Lake Dorothy outlet, is a wetter than average period. I "'······-,";" Therefore, HEC-4 Lake Dorothy inflow data set was selected for use in the power studies 0 because it should provide a better estimate ofthe average inflows. 8 Power Study Model Description ~ A monthly reservoiroperation and power study model writtenin FORTRAN were U developed for the Lake Dorothy Hydro Project based on R.W. Beck's standard reservoir power model routines. Input to the model consisted ofmonthly inflows, an elevation capacity table, desired minimum flow through the conduit, desired maximum reservoir level, o and parameters as summarized below: [1 Parameter Value Maximum normal pool E12,421 Minimum normal pool E12,259 Elevation oflake tap E12,240 o Storage at maximum normal pool 142,400 acre-feet Storage at minimum normal pool 12,500 acre-feet 1 -...•.-. ~.. 0.-, Active storage 130,000 acre-feet Tunnel type 12-ft horseshoe-shaped conventional drill and blast, unlined; or tunnel bore machined with a diameter [) between 8-ft to 10-ft. Tunnel length 15,750 feet Penstock diameter 54 inches :@ Penstock length 2,040 feet Turbines 2 Pelton-type Turbine centerline El30 C Turbine efficiency 91% avg. Unit hydraulic capacity 185 cfs r... ~l Generator output 31.4 MWtotal ld Generator efficiency 96.5% Transformer efficiency 99% U' Station service 0.5% o 24 Q
.F.ll.b~ ~~ Based on the above parameters, hydraulic losses were estimated to be about 14 feet at a conduit flow of115 cfs, which is the average Lake Dorothy inflow. A maximUlnnetpower 8 output ofabout 31.4 Mw would correspond to a flow of185 cfs at the expected average net head. It was assumed that all ofthe generation would be useable, which means there would always be sufficient load to be served by the Project output. t)r Overall efficiencies would be about 86 percent. This reflects a short transmission line and a powerhouse that would operate mostly at a constant flow rate and at almost the same head. fJ Under these conditions, the plant would operate near its point o~ maximum efficiency most ofthe time. The Lake Dorothy elevation-capacity curve used in the power studies was o based on data from the 1955 USBR Status Report on the Lake Dorothy Project. Power Study Results
,D Results ofthe power study were reviewed by LDHI. The basic type ofoperation chosen and presented in this ICP is Run 2 and is described below:
8 Installed Operation Average Firm Energy Maximum Hydraulic Capacity Type Annual (MW1l) Energy Capacity (MW) Energy (MWh) (cfs) D (MWh) a 31.4 Basic 166,400 150,900 200,000 185 Run 2 was recommended for use in preliminary economic studies. The installed capacity of ""1' 31.4 MW with a hydraulic capacity of185 cfs were recommended for use in preliminary ...[ J layouts and cost estimates. {j This model: • Maximizes the firm energy, regardless ofreservoir drawdown • Increases flexibility ofoperation lJEl. • Gains some peaking potential o g c o U 25 P1L"~
8 g VI. PROPOSED STUDIES
Considering the findings in the preliminary el1vironIIlental·assessment, preliminary [J hydrology and power studies, the preliminary geology report, and discussions with resource management agencies, the following section presents LDIll's current iO' understanding ofthe region. LDIll proposes the following studies. I LDIll has gathered historic and baseline site documentation through literature review of ( } historical reports, data base searches, resource agency consultation, photographs, site visit reports, field note documentation and video recordings. After the initial agency meeting " has been conducted, and all comments are received, LDIll will build upon the existing ; 1( resources to document the environmental conditions at the project site. Di The results ofthe site documentation will be presented in the Draft Environmental o Assessment portion (in lieu ofan Exhibit E) ofthe License Application that describes the existing environment. {] Fish and Wildlife
J ~ \U Consultation will be maintained with the USFS and ADF&G to determine the possible project related effects to the Eastern Brook Trout in Lake Dorothy. LDIll proposes to do a fish population survey in Lake Dorothy to confirm the presence offish. Spawning ,0 habitat for the trout will be documented, to include areas ofupwelling and permeable gravel. Based on LDIll's experience with the hydro project at Salmon Creek, the ,0 drawdown effects ofthe lake, may not effect the survival ofthe fish in the lake. LDIll will consult with the USFWS regarding nests for Bald Eagles and the Peregrine Falcon. Ifany nests are identified, they will be' documented and mapped. The area of D concern for nests is limited to the powerhouse bench. An aerial survey for nests will be conducted, and ifBald Eagle or Peregrine Falcon nests are found, appropriate avoidance guidelines will be followed during construction. Since Peregrine Falcons nest in cliff o areas, it is assumed that the excavation ofthe bench for the powerhouse will create additional nesting areas for this species, therefore, the additional nesting areas created o should mitigate any project-related effects for the Peregrine Falcon. The Northern Goshawk has been spotted in the Point Salisbury area. When conducting ~ the nest survey described above, any sightings ofthe Northern Goshawk will be ,.l__lIl1","""O'l"'l+arl UV"'U.l.l.l'-'.I.....""u. fl, lY Most ofthe project features are located underground, with the exception ofthe powerhouse. The location for the powerhouse is a steep rock face (approximately 350-ft) that descends into tidewater. Site visits to the lake area have confirmed the presence of D bears and goats. Mountain Goats are the species ofconcern and the project-related ,8 effects to this species are limited to the construction ofthe lake tap. C 26 IT g Experience by other developers ofhydro projects indicate that wildlife living near or passing through the Lake Dorothy Hydro Projectwhile under construction, will either not LJ be affected or would only be temporarily affected by the noise and activities of construction. fJ The Applicant will be working with the USFS, ADF&G and USFWS to address any other wildlife concerns. [] Water Quality
D In order to document the baseline water quality,.samples will be taken at the outlet of Lake Dorothy near the upper and at the outlet ofDorothy Creek near the abandoned o lower gaging station. It is proposed that USGS take the samples at a time when they are conducting a stream {) gage check. At the time USGS takes the samples, they will document temperature, pH, turbidity and conductivity. The samples will be sent to a laboratory for analysis, in accordance with the PERC license requirements. Analysis may include measurements of: u significant ions, chlorophyll-a, nutrients, total dissolved solids, total alkalinity, total hardness, dissolved oxygen, bacteria, suspended sediments, and turbidity. o Because Dorothy Creek is a nonanadromous stream, no effect is expected from the diversion ofthe water through the tunnel and turbine to tidewater north ofthe creek. I(]J' Effects to the lower lakes are limited due to the low concentration ofnutrients in these ~ high quality waters. ; ,/ Botanical Studies ,0··{ The Project area is located within the Tongass National Forest. The USFS reports that there are no threatened or endangered species in the area. Few effects are anticipated for 'D vegetation in the Project area, this is due to the fact that the Project features only include a ~. lake tap, tunnel to tidewater, and a powerhouse site. Roads and other surface support lJ)n•. activities are not needed to complete the Project. Studies proposed are limited to a biological evaluation for sensitive plant species, and may include a ground survey. The study area will be limited to the areas involving surface construction activities, which are IQ. ~ the Powerhouse bench and the location ofthe lake tap at Lake Dorothy.
Geology and Soils ('11.\J!1 The draft License Application will contain a detailed description ofthe geologic features and soils. These willinclude bedrock lithology, stratigraphy, structural features, glacial o features, unconsolidated deposits, mineral resources, soil erodability and potential for 8 '=) 27 C 8 rt· r ~ o mass movement. A description will be provided to show the location ofexisting and u potential geological and soil hazards. Cultural Resources o In contrast to other areas near the Project, this area appears to have no recent history of cultural use. The Office ofHistory and Archaeology has no records ofhistoric sites occurring in the Project area. The area is also not listed in the Sealaska inventory of D historic sites in the Juneau area. The closest site to the Project is Taku Village near Point Bishop on the west shore ofTaku Inlet. This may be a result ofthe general inaccessibility ofthe east shore ofTaku Inlet between Jaw and Greely Points due to cliffs, precipitous o shorelines, and deep water.
l ., J! In addition to the literature search already conducted and telephone discussions with D selected agencies, LDlll will consult with local historians and archaeologists to ensure all areas ofknown or possible concerns are examined. All Federal and State antiquities'laws and records will be reviewed. The work will be conducted by an entity approved by the U State Historic Preservation Officer. The data will be compiled and reviewed, and potential U effects to any identified resources will be identified. D Socioeconomic Studies Socioeconomic studies will be conducted once agreement regarding the scope of necessary studies is reached with the agencies during the initial consultation meeting. 1-1 'Vl",} They will generally include a literature search and telephone discussions with selected .' agencies. Once studies are completed, data will be compiled and reviewed, and changes resulting from the project that will affect the local economy and the region will be B identified. ~ f D·... \ Recreation ~ -..... -..,... ,-q; As stated in the Existing Environment section ofthis ICP, the Project area is not heavily 0 used for recreation. Project-related effects are limited to the season ofconstruction activity. This activity may detract from the remote character ofthe lake and its '~ surroundings during the construction period. Once the project is on line, visitors will be able to continue experiencing a wild lands setting. A recreational plan will be prepared in consultation with the resource agencies as part ofthe Draft EA ofthe FERC License U' Application. o 8 C 28 8 ;g•.. ~ ,, . Visual Resources
LJf The draft License Application will present a plan to protect visual resources. The powerhouse and substation will be constructed in as unobtrusive a manner as possible, and· architecturally colored to blend into the landscape. Specific measures will be developed in D consultation with the USFS. fJ Land Use The draft License Application will describe the existing land uses ofthe proposed project l ,- lands and those land uses that would occur ifthe project is constructed. Identification of .. \ U lands will be made on a map, drawing, or aerial photograph to show the location, extent D and nature ofland uses. ,u
1 •UJ un, U G f{ti o I~ C· o 8 29 G
VII. PURPA STATEMENT
Lake Dorothy Hydro, Inc. does not intend to seek benefits under section 210 ofPURPA and will not seek to satisfy the requirements for qualifying as a small hydroelectric power production facility as outlined in 18 CFR 292.203.
J
30 ~ n ""I n ;;l n ~ c n (,l
------Q f"i l) VIII. REFERENCES
~l BIBLIOGRAPHY
ADF&G. Life Histories and Habitat Requirements ofFish and Wildlife. Alaska Habitat o Management Guide. Alaska Department ofFish and Game, Division ofHabitat, Juneau, Alaska. 1986. -j ! C ADF&G. Wildlife Notebook Series- Pikas, Lemmings, Hares, Bats, Porcupine, Shrews, Voles, Marmot, Mink, Muskrat, Northern Flying Squirrel, RedSquirrel, Weasels, Sitka Black-tailedDeer, Coyote, Black Bear, Brown Bear, Moose, Mountain C' Goat, Lynx, Beaver, Wolverine, Wo(f, River Otter, RedFox, Marten, Eagles, Common Ravf!n, Chickadees, Boreal Owl, American Dipper, Accipters, Greater n and Lesser Yellowlegs, Grouse, Gulls, Ptarmigan, Sparrows, Woodpeckers, t)d' Osprey. Alaska Department ofFish and Game, Juneau, Alaska. 1994.
,5 Armstrong, R. H. A Guide to the Birds ofAlaska. Alaska Northwest Publishing Company, Anchorage, Alaska. 1980.
\ J·: Armstrong, R., and P. Isleib. Listing ofBirds ofthe Sheep Creek Watershed andAdjacent 0 Gastineau Channel. Undated. o Athearn, M. J. Preliminary Geologic Report Lake Dorothy Project. US Department of the Interior, Bureau ofReciamation, Alaska Geologic Report No.5, Alaska [} Investigations Office, Juneau, Alaska. 1954. CH2M Hill. Twenty Year Power Supply Plan Update for Juneau, Alaska. Submitted to o Alaska Electric Light and Power Company, Juneau, Alaska. 1990. CH2M Hill. AJMine Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. Draft Resource Characterization, Task 12.10 Cultural Resources, Archaeology, and B Subsistence. Prepared for US Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. . [} CH2M Hill. AJMine Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. Draft Resource Characterization, Task 12.6 Geology and Soils. Prepared for US ,S Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. City & Borough ofJuneau. Comprehensive Plan ofthe City & Borough ofJuneau. Community Deveiopment Department, City & Borough of Juneau, 155 South U Seward St. Juneau, Alaska, 99802. August, 1995.
I j ·O··jc::l ,.\ ,j~ Ig•..• o 31 o
o EBASCO. Twenty Year Power Supply Plan for Juneau, Alaska. Submitted to Alaska Electric Light and Power Company, Juneau, Alaska. 2 vol. 1984. ',0\ ~, Environaid. Environmental Scoping Study ofSnettisham/Ketchikan Transmission Line System. November 1981.
o Federal Power Commission. Water Powers ofSoutheast Alaska. Number 48, Dorothy Lake near Taku Inlet. 1947.
o Gulliver, John S. and Roger E.A. Arndt. Hydropower Engineering Handbook. McGraw Hill, Inc., 1991. i\ , I O Hicks, M. D. Mountain Goat. Federal Aidin Wildlife Restoration Annual Performance Report ofSurvey- Inventory Activities, July 1, 1993- June 30, 1994. Alaska Department ofFish and Game, Division ofWildlife Conservation, Grant W-24-2, o Study 12.0. 1994. o Icy Strait Environmental Services. AJMine Project, Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. Draft Resource Characterization, Task 12.2 Terrestrial Birds and Mammals. Prepared for CH2M Hill and US Environmental Protection Agency. o 1996. Isleib, P., R. Armstrong, R. Gordon, F. Glass. Birds ofSoutheast Alaska: A Checklist. U' Alaska Natural History Association, Anchorage, Alaska. 1993.
Jarell, G. H., S. O. MacDonald. Checklist to the Mammals ofAlaska. University of o Alaska Museum, Fairbanks, Alaska. 1989. Johnson, F. A. Water Power Possibilities ofSheep Creek, Carlson Creek, Lake Dorothy o and Turner Lake near Juneau, Alaska. Preliminary Report. .US Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, Open File Report. 1957. .
fJ Juneau Audubon Society. Birds ofJuneau, Alaska, Checklist. Juneau Audubon Society, P.O. Box 21725, Juneau, Alaska 99802.1993. fl U LACHEL & Associates. Report on the Geology ofthe Lake Dorothy Hydroelectric Project preparedfor Lake Dorothy Hydro, Inc. 1996.
B McDowell Group, Inc. Juneau's Economic Condition and Outlook. Preparedfor Alaska o Electric Light & Power Company. February 1996. O'Clair, R. M., R. H. Armstrong, and R. Carstensen. The Nature ofSoutheast Alaska. o Alaska Northwest Books, 22026 20th Ave., S.E., Bothell, WA, 98021. 1992. HI u! 32 Q o Raven Environmental and RW. Beck. Lake Dorothy Hydroelectric Project Preliminary Environmental Assessmentpreparedfor Lake Dorothy Hydro, Inc. 1996.
[1 R W. Beck. Preliminary Hydrology andPower Studies, Lake Dorothy Hydroelectric Project preparedfor Lake Dorothy Hydro, Inc. January 22, 1996.
J.,,i f. Research Design Productions, Inc. The Juneau Factbook. Research Design Productions, Inc., Anchorage, Alaska. 1983. o Rinehart, W., H. Meyers, and C.A. von Hake. Summary ofEarthquake Data Base, Key to Geophysical records Documentation No. 21, updated to 1995. US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic And Atmospheric Administration, National o Geophysical Data Center, Boulder CO. 80303. Data base records compiled for Lake Dorothy area minor earthquakes. 1985. o Seitz, H. R, and D. S. Thomas. Fathometer Datafrom Bart Lake andLake Dorothy near Juneau, Alaska, 1988-1989. US Department ofthe Interior, Geological Survey, B Open File Report 90-152. 1990. Streveler, G., and J. Brake!. Mammals ofthe Goldand Salmon Creek Watersheds. o Report to the City & Borough ofJuneau. Icy Strait Environmental Services, Gustavus, Alaska. 1993. o Three Parameters Plus. AJMine Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Process Resource Characterization Draft Report: Vegetation andJurisdictional Wetlands. Prepared for CH2M Hill, Inc. and US Environmental Protection G Agency. November, 1995.
USACOE. Snettisham Project, Alaska, Environmental Impact Statement, Supplement I. o US Army Corps ofEngineers, Alaska District, Anchorage, Alaska, April, 1981. ~-l. .1J USDA. Soils ofthe Juneau Area. US Department ofAgriculture, Soil Conservation Service. February, 1974.
USDA. Tongass National Forest, Chatham Area, Integrated Resource Inventory Draft o Mapping Unit Descriptions (Soil, Vegetation, Landforms). US Forest Service, '8 Region 10, Juneau, Alaska. 1991. USDA. Tongass LandManagement Plan Revision, Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. US Department ofAgriculture, Forest Service, o Region 10. Publication R10-MB-145, August, 1991. USDA. Alaska Hydric Soils List. US Department ofAgriculture, Soil Conservation o Service. January, 1992. Q 33 0·.'·:1 o o USDA. Channel Type User Guide, Tongass National Forest, Southeast Alaska. US Forest Service, Region 10, Technical Paper 26, April, 1992.. D USDI. Alaska -- A Reconnaissance Report on the Potential Development ofWater Resources in the Territory ofAlaska. US Department ofthe Interior, Bureau of o Reclamation, Alaska District. December 1948. USDI. Lake Dorothy Project, Alaska. US Department ofthe Interior, Bureau of o Reclamation. September 1949. USDI. Preliminary Geologic Report Lake Dorothy Project. Alaska Geologic Report No. 5. US Department ofthe Interior, Bureau ofReclamation, Alaska District. October o 1954.
USDI. Status Report on the Lake Dorothy Project, Alaska. US Department ofthe o Interior, Bureau ofReclamation, Alaska District. 1955.
USDI. Compilation ofRecords ofQuantity and Quality ofSurface Waters ofAlaska B through September 1950. Geologic Survey Water Supply Paper 1372. US o Department ofthe Interior, Geologic Survey. 1957. USDI. Hydroelectric Power. Summary Data Lake Dorothy Project Near Juneau. US o Department ofthe Interior~ Bureau ofReclamation, Alaska District. 10-22-59. USDI. A-JMine Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement. US Department ofthe Interior, Bureau ofLand Management, Publication BLM-AK-ES-91-01O-2800 o 980. 1991.
USDI. Mineral Investigations in the Juneau Mining District, Alaska, 1984-1988. Bureau a ofMines Special Publication. US Department ofthe Interior, Bureau ofMines, Juneau, Alaska. Undated.
:0\.. 00\ USFWS. National Wetlands Inventory Juneau area QuadMaps andJuneau "Notes to n Users". US Fish & Wildlife Service, Juneau, Alaska. 1988. t) Viereck, L. A., and E. L. Little, Jr. Alaska Trees andShrubs. USDA Forest Service 8 Agriculture Handbook, No. 410. 1972. C o Q 34 U .,) n :i2 ;;t )
(~ Appendix A
Engineering Design Drawings Preliminary Exhibits G and F 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
-1 I )
0 o
~) r ~I
~ ) .J
-I J ~------600'------;------l..1 ·-1 220' ...------380'------+------..1 I c c ._J I~ 100' ·r 1" PENSHICK ] ACCESS TUNNEL 20' 11500 1--24'-1 15' t-- 1--10' GAL /-J FUEL
PERMANENT PERMANENT SHOP/BOAT STORAGE TEMP CREW CARETAKER'S (3 BAYS) ( QUARTERS QUARTERS n.-----..-r----, 42' 150' Iv I L J"""''--_.Ju UL_--""-L -:.J
STAGlNG 8. B CDNSTRUCTlDN t 130' B mm 'WDRK AREA 1 l-or ~I k60,-l 130'------...,-, I I TAIL ! RACE -) I
~>-----60'-----<",.JJ Lei
24' BOAT DOCK CRANE A LAKEDOROTHYHYDRO,lNC. JUNEAU ALASKA A J 1 L.---,------;:==F==: FERC PRO.JECT NO, 11556-000-AK TAKU INLET nTLE RAMP LAKE DOROTHY PLAN VlE'W SURFACE PO'WER HOUSE J AIRPLANE PRELIMINARY EXHlBIT F-1 FLOAT IlR\/N CII j .I J .woo - 3eOO - 3000 3000 ~'------l..----L-- VI.-- ~L--- ~ 2SOO '------,- 15 IT IIIAloI£NT£II VV ------VALVE SHAIT-----. ~ 2DOO J V ~ 2DOO 5 FT DIAIlEml RAISE BDRE ------OPTION 15 1500 ~ 1500 UMUNID POWER lUNNEL I 12 FT HORSE5IlOE I "ft~ ~ :~E1Ell~Al.VE- I 1000 V ~ 1000 INTAKE lUNNEL I: ROCK TRAPS- _10.1ll' 5110 54 IN DIA STEEL PIPE OPTION 25 ~vi--~HORSESH~ ~ IN 12 IT ./ ! ~ I I I II I I I I I II I I I I ;fd I I III II I ! I I T I I I lil5+OO lSO+OO 14S+oo 1040+00 135-H1O 130+00 125+00 120+00 115+00 110+00 105+00 100+00 ,,5+00 00+00 85+00 80+00 7.5+00 "70+00 85+00 80+00 55+00 50+00 25+00 1.5+00 10+00 0+00 l PROFILE - SOUTH ALIGNMENT .) LAKE DOROTHY HYDRO, INC. __ ] FERC PROJECT NO. llSS6-000-AI< LAKE DOROTHY H'l'DRO PROJECT PROFIlE ALONG TUNNEL CENTERLINE ""., PREUMINARV EXHIBIT F-2 CH£X:I DAlE 2/V/iB 2/Z1/fJ6 SHT 1 OF 1 ] C:\ACAIlWIN\DRAWlNGS\GEN\DOROTHY\lACHEL\PROFlLE2.DWG 1000' ""\ J 800' '-, 600' ~I ,_J EXCAVATED ROCK--..,. LAKE DOROTHY PVR HJUSE '" 'Y TAKU INLET CABLE INTERFACE BLDG SEA LEVEL 0' ~l I J NOT CONTINUOUS VITH VEST TERMINAL PRDFILE -200' INDICATES SLOPE FROM EAST TERM[NAL ONLY ( -600' -800' ---11----1---+------.,....-+---+----/---1------+---+---+---+--- 2400' 2200' 2000' 1800' 1600' 1400' 1200' 1000' 800' 600' 400' 200' 0' 200' 400' 600' 800' 1000' 1200' 1400' EAST TERMINAL PROFILE NOTES. TRANSITIDN TO EXISTING OVERHEAD PaVER LINES 1. PROFILE IS PRELIMINARY 8. REQUIRES FURTHER INVESTIGATION. NO SOUNDINGS HAVE BEEN 200' VEST TERM[NAL CABLE TAKEN. r;r INTERFACE BLDG TAKU INLET SEA LEVEl I 0' -) -200' -400' NOT CONTINUOUS \lITH EAST TERMINAL PROFILE INDICATES SLOPE F"RllM \lEST TERMINAL ONLY ( REVISIIJt MTE -600' '------~------{. LAKE DOROTHYHYDRO. INC. JUNEAU AK FERe PROJECT NJ. 115:;6-000-AK -800' TITLE LAKE DIlRDTHY POVER CABLE TAKEOFF J EAST & VEST TAKU TERMINALS -1------j'------,I---I----/---+--'-----I---+---I------j-----j'------,I------j---jl---- SCALE PREllMINARY EXHIBIT F-4 400' 200' 0' 200' 400' 600' 800' 1000' 1200' 1400' 1600' 1800' 2000' 2200' 2400' 2600' 2800' 3000' 3200' 3400' 1-__-+--=::.=:O"-+--==_f--.:=C::.:H~KE::!D!...... lDVG. NO. VEST TERMINAL PROnLE I---=l::-NT:..,':::S:--+----':'~:-:+."..,:~~+...... :::C..!:V!!H__/ f'ftOf"ILf:3 ) j ~ l ) PROPOSED EXISTING SUBMARINE CABLE TO SUBMARINE CABLE TO LAKE DOROTHY SNETTISHAM ,~~ r I 26' I ] 1L...... -----,..--.:~___¢___I_~--==:::=..L--~~fL______f.__.i==._-----l D ~ SUBMARINE CABLE TYPICAL SECTION PROPOSED LAKE DOROTHY CABLE l,~""" INTERFACE BLDG ~ EQUIPMENT INTERFACE"""n,""BLDG ~ EQUIPMENT,""-, (] '] I I I I I I I I ~ EXISTING OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINE TO THANE SUBSTATION PI AN VIEW NC. REVISIDN DATE LAKE DOROTHYHYDRO. INC. JUNEAU AK ] FERC PROJECT NO. 11556-000-AK TITLE LAKE DOROTHY 'WEST SIDE SUB STATION SCALE PRELIMINARY EXHIBIT F-7 f-- I--==:.:..-+~="'___+...;C~H-!!:KE=D:...... jD'WG. NO. INT'S Silt; ) DATE 'WEST-SUB J C,\ACAD'WIN\DRAIJ1NGS\GEN\DOROTHY\'WEST-SUB ~'1 tI"'~ .'-- .•• .:. /f ."- ),,0/: FAIR3PN ." (...... \ .' T42S R70E Section 13 Copper River Meridian VICINITY MAp! .. ! Intertie Point Tantallon Pt REVISIlIN DATE LAKEDOROTHYHYDRO. INC. JUNEAU A I FERC PROJECT NO. 11556-000-AK I TITLE -J .~ LAKE DOROTHY VICINITY MAP SCALE PRELIMINARY EXHIBIT G-1 D....G. NO t--=IN.:..:T..::·S:'-+-';:':-~+-#~--1-....!::.!~-lLDVH DATE ] ] J l .---l J ] ] J '-\ ] ] ] Appendix B Initial Consultation Package Distribution List LAKE DOROTHY HYDRO, INC. LAKE DOROTHY HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC. PROJECT NO. 11556-000 SERVICE LIST NAME AGENCY ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. Ms. Judith Bittner Alaska Dept. Natural P.O. Box 10-7001 762-2626 - State Historic Resources, Division of Anchorage, AK 99510- Fax: 762-2535 J Preservation Officer Parks & Recreation, 7001 History & Mr. Tim Smith Archaeology J -SHPO Mr. John Dunker Alaska Dept. Natural 400 ·W. Willoughby 465-2533 " - Water Resource Resources, Division of Juneau, AK Fax: 465-2954 J. Officer Mining and Water 99801-1724 Mana ement Mr. Terry Rader Alaska Dept. Natural 400 W. Willoughby 465-3442 'l Resources, Division of Juneau, AK Fax: 465-2954 ,_J Lands 99801-1724 Mr. Paul Morrison Alaska Public Utilities 1016 West 6th 276-6222 - Chief Engineer Commission Suite 400 Fax: 276-0160 ] Anchorage, AK 99501-1963 Ms. Patience Alaska State Library P.O. Box 110571 465-2927 -J Frederiksen, Reference Materials Juneau, AK Fax: 465-2665 Librarian 99811-0571 Mr. Bill Ballard Alaska Dept. of 6860 Glacier Hwy. c_] - Regional Transportation Juneau, AK 99801 Environmental Public Facilities Coordinator State of Alaska Alaska Dept. of Public 45 Whittier St. ] Commissioner Safet Juneau, AK 99801 -f? '] J J 03/18/96 ] Page 2 _J l LAKE DOROTHY HYDRO, INC. LAKE DOROTHY HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ] FERC. PROJECT NO. 11556-000 SERVICE LIST -I J NAME AGENCY ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. Mr. Dennis Egan City & Borough of 155 S. Seward - Mayor Juneau Juneau, AK 99801 ] Ms. Patty Ann Polley City & Borough of 155 S. Seward .- City Clerk Juneau Juneau, AK 99801 Chairman Juneau Chamber of 124 W. 5th St. 586-6420 Commerce Juneau, AK 99801 Mr. Jonathan Douglas Juneau Economic 400 W. Willoughby 463-3662 Chairperson Development Council Suite 211 Juneau, AK 99801 ] Director Juneau Public Library Juneau, Alaska 99801 Director City & Borough of Marine View Bldg., ] Juneau 4th Floor Dept. of Community Juneau, AK 99801 Development Mr. Bill Smith City & Borough of 155 S. Seward St. 586-5230 ] Juneau Juneau, AK 99801 Fax: 586-3365 Juneau Coastal District oJ -] U.S. Forest Service.. 8465 Old Dairy Road 586-8800 Juneau Ranger District Juneau, AK 99801 U.S. Forest Service 8465 Old Dairy Road Tongass National Juneau, AK 99801 Forest , . Mr. Michael Spencer Federal Energy 825 North Capitol NE 202-219-2846 .~ i- _ FERC Project Regulatory Washington, DC Contact Commission 20426 Ms. Lois Cashell Federal Energy 825 North Capitol !'IE 202-219-2700 - Secretary . Regulatory Washington, D.C. Commission 20426 Ms. Ann Miles Federal Energy 810 First Street NE, - Associate West Regulatory Room 1065 Branch Chief Commission Washington, DC - Office of Hydropower 20426 Licensin J Mr. Arthur Martin Federal Energy 1120 S.W. Fifth Ave. 503-326-5842 - Regional Director Regulatory Suite 1340 Fax: 503-326-5857 Commission Portland, OR 97204 - Portland Regional Office 03/18/96 Page 3 LAKE DOROTHY HYDRO, INC. r-j LAKE DOROTHY HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC. PROJECT NO. 11556-000 I SERVICE LIST l NAME AGENCY ADDRESS TELEPHON E NO. u.s. Army Corps of P.O. Box 898 '1 Engineers Anchorage, AK ,~j Re ulato' Branch 99506 Mr. Jim Helfinstine U.S.Coast Guard 709 W. 9th St. 463-2250 - District Bridge Program Seventeenth District Juneau, AK 99801 ,Jn Administrator Office Ms. Sandra Dunn Bureau of Land 6881 Abbott Loop 1-800-478-1263 - Assistant District Management Road Fax: 1-267- l Manager - Lands Anchorage, AK 1267 ,J 99506 Ms. Susan Lavin Bureau of Land 222 West 7th Ave., 907-271-3826 -l - Withdrawal Section Management #13 Fax: 907-271- ,J Alaska State Office Anchorage, AK 5479 99513-7599 '~-) Mr. Charles Tippeconnic Bureau of Indian P.O. Box 25520 586-7177 1 - Environmental Affairs Juneau, AK FAX: 586-7169 ~~_J S ecialist 99802-5520 Mr. Calvin Miller U.S. Dept. of 949 East 36th Ave., -1 - Resource Agriculture Suite 400 J Conservationists Soil Conservation Anchorage, AK Service 99508-4362 Ms. Valerie Payne U.S. Environmental 222 W. 7th Ave. 271-5083 -J Protection Agency #19 Fax: 271-3424 Anchorage, AK 99513-7588 Mr: Nevin Holmberg U.S. Fish & Wildlife 3000 Vintage Park 586-7240 ] U.S. Dept. ofthe Service Blvd. #201 Fax: 586-7154 Interior Juneau, AK 99801-7100 -Mr. Bruce Bigelow U.S. Geologic Survey P.O. Box 1568 586-7216 Juneau, AK 99801 Fax: 586-7996 Mr. Steve T. Zimmerman US Dept. of P.O. Box 21668 586-7235 1 - Chief of the Protected Commerce-National Juneau, AK J Resources Management Marine Fisheries 99802-1668 Division Service NMFS AK Re ion Office Regional Director National Park Service 2525 Gambell Alaska Regional Office Street , Anchorage, AK I 99503 J Mr. Paul Gates Dept. of the Interior 689 "C' Street 271-5011 - Regional Office of Room 119 Environmental Officer Environmental Affairs Anchorage, AK J 99501-5126 J 03/18/96 Page 4 LAKE DOROTHY HYDRO, INC. LAKE DOROTHY HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT --1 FERC. PROJECT NO. 11556-000 SERVICE LIST ] NAME AGENCY ADDRESS Mr. Larry Brockman U.S. Environmental 1200 Sixth Ave. - Hydropower Protection Agency Seattle, WA 98101 Coordinator Re ion 10 Honorable Ted U.S. Senate Washington, DC Stevens 20515 Honorable Frank U.S. Senate Washington, DC 20510 Murkowski NAME AGENCY ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. Mr. Robert Loescher Sealaska Corporation One Sealaska Plaza 586-1512 - Vice President, St.,400 Resources Juneau, AK 99801 Manaaement 1276 Director Sealaska Heritage One Sealaska Plaza 463-4844 Foundation Suite 201 Juneau, AK 99801 Ms. Danelle Southeast Alaska 419 Sixth St. 586-6942 McCarthy Conservation Council Suite 328 - Executive Director Juneau, AK 99801 President Alaska Native 320 Willoughby Ave. 586-2049 Brotherhood Juneau, AK 99801 President Alaska Native 320 Willoughby Ave. 586-2049 Sisterhood Juneau, AK 99801 President Central Council Tlingit 320 West Willoughby 586-1432 Haida Indian Tribes of Juneau, AK 99801 Alaska Mr. Joseph Beedle Goldbelt 9097 Glacier Highway, 790-4990 - President Suite 200 Fax: 790-4999 1 J Juneau, AK 99801 Ms. Mollie J. Dent Sierra Club Legal 325 Fourth St. 586-2751 - Director Defense Fund, Inc. Juneau, AK 99801 Ms. Patty Kirchoff Sierra Club, Juneau P.O. Box 210674 - Director Group Auke Bay, AK 99821 Director Southeast Alaska Franklin Bldg. 586-4777 Tourism Council Juneau, AK 99801 ] Chairman Taku Conservation 1700 Branta Road Society Juneau, AK 99801 Mr. Doug Mertz Alaskans for Juneau 319 Seward St. #5 463-6305 Juneau, AK 99801 Director Juneau Audobon P.O. Box 21725 Society Juneau, AK 99802 ] 03/18/96 Page 5 LAKE DOROTHY HYDRO, INC. LAKE DOROTHY HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC. PROJECT NO. 11556-000 SERVICE LiST NAME AGENCY ADDRESS TELEPHONE NO. Director Alaska Trollers 130 Seward, Suit~ 213 586-9400 ] Association Juneau, AK 99801 Director United Fisherman of 211 - 4th St., #112 586-2820 Alaska Juneau, AK 99801 ] ] '] ] rJ ] ] ] , J ~J 03/18/96 Page 6