Draft Study Plan Vol 1 (PDF) - Alaska Power and Telephone Company

June 6, 2012 

To All Agencies 

and Other Interested Parties 

Re: 

Draft Study Plan – Beginning of 60-Day Review, Comment, and 

Recommendation Period 

Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project; P-14229-001—Alaska 

Dear Agency Representatives: 

Enclosed is a Draft Study Plan for the Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project for your 

review, comment, and recommendation. Any comments or recommendations are due 

within 60-days of the date of this letter. 

Please provide your comments to: 

Glen D. Martin, Project Manager 

Goat Lake Hydro, LLC 

C/O Alaska Power & Telephone Company 

P.O. Box 3222 

Port Townsend, WA 98368 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

Office of Hydropower Licensing - Room 6H-10 

888 First Street, N.E. 

Washington, DC 20426 

All comments must: (1) bear the heading "Draft Study Plan Comments"; and (2) set 

forth in the heading the name of the applicant (i.e. Goat Lake Hydro, etc.), the project 

name (i.e. Connelly Lake Hydro), and the project number of the application (i.e. P- 

14229-001). Any party interested in commenting must do so before August 4, 2012. (60 

days from the date of this letter). We will then incorporate your comments and 

recommendations into the Final Study Plan and submit them to the Agencies. 

A scoping meeting will be held in Juneau on June 26, 2012, for the resource agencies, to 

discuss and clarify any issues you may have with the proposed Connelly Lake 

Hydroelectric Project. A public scoping meeting will be held in Haines on June 27, 2012, 

for the same purpose, to gather comments and to discuss and clarify any issues.

All Agencies and Other Interested Parties p. 2 Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project 

June 6, 2012 

P-14229-001 

The June 26 scoping meeting will be held at: 

Federal Building 

NOAA Sustainable Fisheries Conference Room 

709 W. 9th St., 

Juneau, Alaska 

Tuesday, June 26, 9 a.m. – Noon 

The teleconference line for those unable to attend is 907-585-7060. When you call in 

please wait for a roll call so that we can record who is in attendance. 

The June 27 scoping meeting in Haines will be held at the: 

Borough of Haines 

Assembly Chambers 

213 Haines Highway 

Haines, Alaska 

6 p.m. – 8 p.m. 

There will be no teleconference line for this meeting. 

If you have any questions, please call me at (360) 385-1733 x122. 

Sincerely, 

Glen D. Martin 

Project Manager 

(360) 385-1733 x122 

(360) 385-7538 fax 

glen.m@aptalaska.com 

Enc. (as stated)


June 6, 2012 

P-14229-001 

CONNELLY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT 

P-14229-001 

AGENCY MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 26, 2012 

Meeting Time: 9 a.m. – Noon 

Teleconference Line: 907-586-7060 

Location: Federal Building, 709 W. 9th St., Sustainable Fisheries Conference Room, 

4th Floor, Juneau, Alaska 

AGENDA 

1. Roll Call & Sign in Sheet 

2. Opening Remarks about Draft Study Plan 

3. PowerPoint Presentation about the Project 

4. Discussion and Questions 

5. Adjournment


June 6, 2012 

P-14229-001 


P-14229-001 

PUBLIC MEETING AGENDA FOR JUNE 27, 2012 

Meeting Time: 6 p.m. – 8 p.m. 

Location: Haines Borough Assembly Chambers, 213 Haines Highway, Haines, 

Alaska 

AGENDA 

1. Roll Call & Sign in Sheet 

2. Opening Remarks about Draft Study Plan 

3. PowerPoint Presentation about the Project 

4. Discussion and Questions 

5. Adjournment

DRAFT DOCUMENT 


P – 14229 – 000 – ALASKA 

DRAFT STUDY PLAN 

FOR 

GOAT LAKE HYDRO, INC. 

c/o ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE COMPANY 

P.O. BOX 3222 

PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368 

(360) 385-1733 

June 2012




TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................ 1 

2. PROJECT DESIGN ………………………………….................….……… 1 

3. PROJECT OPERATIONS ……………………………………………...... 10 

4. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT …………………………………………...... 12 

5. DRAFT STUDY PLAN ………………………………………………......... 40 

APPENDICES 

A. 11x17 Project Diagrams 

B. Flow Duration Curves 

C. 2011 Draft Fish Survey Report (incomplete without 2012 survey) 

D. 2011 Geotechnical Reconnaissance Study / plus the 1995 HL&P Report 

E. 1994-1997 USGS Gage Record for Connelly Lake 

F. Water Quality Sampling Results (2011-2012) 

G. Stream gaging Connelly Lake Outlet (GLH started September 2011) 

H. Connelly Lake, Outlet Stream, and Chilkoot River Fish Habitat Survey, 

(ADF&G, 1995) 

I. Catalog of Waters Important for the Spawning, Rearing or Migration of 

Anadromous Fishes (ADF&G – 2005) 

J. Connelly Lake Reconnaissance Photos, (GLH – 2008) 

K. Draft Study Plan Consultation 

L. References 

M. Mailing List 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1: Project Location and Features Map .................................................................... 2 

Figure 2: Project Alternatives being considered ................................................................ 3 

Figure 3: Alternative Design 1 (PAD-2) ............................................................................ 4 

Figure 4: Alternative Design 2 (PAD-3) ............................................................................ 5 

Figure 5: Alternative Design 3 (PAD-4) ........................................................................... 7 

Figure 6: Alternative Design 4 (PAD-5) ........................................................................... 8 

Figure 7: Photo – Cruise Ships Docked in Skagway Creating Blue Smog ......................11 

Figure 8: Comparison of Drainage Areas ....................................................... .................14 

Figure 9: Chilkoot River Valley Wetlands .................. ....................................................16 

Figure 10: Photo Collage of Upper Chilkoot River Valley ..............................................18 

Figure 11: Logging Road and Fish Sampling Locations ..................................................20


Figure 12: New bridge for Field Studies ...........................................................................21 

Figure 13: Chilkoot River Valley Wetlands with Important Fish Habitat Overlay ..........22 

Figure 14: USF&WS Map of Bald Eagle Nests................................................................26 

Figure 15: Photo – Stereoscopic view of Connelly Lake; North Facing Cliffs ................30 

Figure 16: Photo – View Across Connelly Lake at North Facing Cliffs ..........................30 

Figure 17: Major Stellar Sea Lion Haulouts of Lynn Canal .............................................33 

Figure 18: Land Management and Ownership Map .........................................................35 

Figure 19: Photo – View North of Chilkoot Lake from State Campground .....................37 

Figure 20: Photo – View North of Chilkoot Lake from State Campground .....................37 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1: Dam Height Options ........................................................................................... 6 

Table 2: Reservoir Size .................................................................................................... 9 

Table 3: Transmission Line Segment Lengths ................................................................ 10 

Table 4: Mean & Correlated Recorded Average Daily Flows.......................................... 15 

Table 5: Subunit 1-D Annual Moose Harvest By Community ........................................ 24 

ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY 

ACY 

ACMP 

ADCA 

ADEC 

ADF&G 

ADNR 

AEA 

AMHS 

ANB/ANS 

ANILCA 

ANCSA 

B.C. 

BLM 

BMP 

CFR 

Cfs 

DGGS 

DPOR 

DOTPF 

EIS 

FAA 

FEMA 

FERC 

GIS 

GLH 

acre-feet per year 

Alaska Coastal Management Program 

Alaska Division of Community Advocacy 

Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) 

Alaska Department of Fish & Game 

Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR) 

Alaska Energy Authority 

Alaska Marine Highway System 

Alaska Native Brotherhood/Alaska Native Sisterhood 

Alaska National Interest Land Conservation Act 

Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act 

British Columbia 

Bureau of Land Management 

Best Management Practices 

Code of Federal Regulations 

cubic feet per second 

Division of Geological and Geophysical Services 

Department of Parks and Outdoor Recreation 

Department of Transportation and Public Facilities 

Environmental Impact Statement 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (a.k.a. “Commission”) 

geographical information system 

Goat Lake Hydro, Inc.


GWh 

HCMP 

HL&P 

ILP 

IPEC 

IRA 

KWh 

MBF 

mg/L 

MHW 

MLLW 

NMFS 

NOAA 

MWh 

NRCS 

NSRAA 

ppm 

TLP 

TMDL 

TWC 

USACE 

USEPA 

USF&WS 

USGS 

gigawatt-hour (1,000 megawatt-hours) 

Haines Coastal Management Plan 

Haines Light & Power Company 

Integrated Licensing Process 

Inside Passage Electric Cooperative 

Indian Reorganization Act (Federally recognized Tribal entities) 

kilowatt-hour (1,000 watt-hours) 

Million Board Feet 

milligrams per liter 

mean high water 

Mean Lower Low Water 

National Marine fisheries Service 

National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration 

megawatt-hour (1,000 kilowatt-hours) 

National Resource Conservation Service 

Northern Southeast Regional Aquaculture Association 

parts per million 

Traditional Licensing Process 

total maximum daily load 

Takshanuk Watershed Council 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 

U.S. Geological Survey



P-14229 


1.0 INTRODUCTION 

The proposed Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project (Project) will be located in 

Southeast Alaska, approximately 14 miles northwest of the City of Haines and 10 miles 

southwest of the City of Skagway, as shown in Figure 1. Connelly Lake (formerly 

known as Upper Chilkoot Lake) is a 90 acre alpine lake that drains into the Chilkoot 

River. The project will be on state and private land, including the Haines State Forest 

and Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve. 1 

2.0 PROJECT DESIGN 

Four different project designs are currently being considered, listed below. Field 

studies including economic and geotechnical analysis will influence the choice of the 

final design. The project designs being considered are as follows (a more complete 

description can be found in the Preliminary Application Document (PAD): 

Alternative 1 – No dam, siphon intake, surface penstock, upstream powerhouse location. 

This alternative, shown in Figure 3, would be a project similar in design to Goat 

Lake Hydro (GLH) existing Goat Lake and Black Bear Lake Hydroelectric Projects. The 

active storage would be limited to that available from the existing lake with a siphon 

intake. Due to the limited storage, the project would not be able to serve either Haines or 

cruise ship loads with 100% reliability. 

Access Road 

The existing access road (RS 2477) would be rebuilt along the west side of 

Chilkoot Lake and above the lake. This road would be a built for long term use with a 

better surface and appurtenances, i.e. culverts, bridges, than a logging road. 

A section of new access road about 1/4 mile long would be constructed to connect 

the existing road to the powerhouse, including a bridge across the Chilkoot River. The 

Chilkoot River in that area is quite dynamic, and the road design would need to allow for 

channel migration, probably by including multiple bridge spans. 

Dam 

The existing lake storage would be utilized through construction of a siphon 

intake, rather than use a dam. The active storage would be limited to the 1,250 acre-feet 

available with a drawdown of 20 feet (from the existing lake level at El 2278 to El 2258). 

Work at the lake would be limited to excavation of a 1,500-foot-long drawdown trench 

for the siphon pipe through a saddle in the ground at the south end of the lake, installation 

of the intake screen structure in the lake and the siphon pipe in the trench, installation of 

1 Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve is managed by DNR Parks and Outdoor Recreation. 

Draft Study Plan – June 2012 p. 1 Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project


the siphon pump and control house, and construction of a small dam in the drawdown 

trench to prevent flow through that cut when the lake level is high. The saddle dam 

would be about 10 feet high and constructed of rock fill with an upstream concrete face. 

All equipment, materials, and personnel for the intake and saddle dam construction would 

be transported by helicopter to the intake site from a staging area near the powerhouse. 

Figure 1: Project Location and Features 



Figure 2: Project Alternatives being evaluated 

Penstock 

Buried 36-54 inch pipe in drawdown trench. The uppermost section of 

penstock would be about 2,300 feet long; of that length, 300 feet would be submerged in 

the lake, 1500 feet would be buried in the drawdown trench, and 500 feet would be 

buried on a bench cut into the hillside at the southern end of the drawdown trench. 

Surface penstock in cleared corridor. From the end of the uppermost penstock 

section described above (at about El 2250), the penstock would drop straight down the 

hillside for about 3,500 feet to about El 350. The pipe would be supported by fabricated 

steel saddles spaced about 40 feet apart. The ground would be excavated to bedrock at 

the saddle locations, and in a few areas a trench might be required for the pipe where 

there is a deep layer of soils or loose rock. Clearing width for the penstock corridor 

would be about 100 feet to decrease the risk to the pipe from falling trees. Penstock 

installation would be by a highline system. 

Buried penstock on excavated bench. From the end of the middle penstock 

section described above, the penstock would be located on a bench excavated into the 

hillside in a valley cut by a small tributary of the Chilkoot River referred to as Power 

Creek. This section of penstock would be about 900 feet long, and would end at the 



powerhouse at the base of the hillside. After installation, this section would be buried to 

protect the pipe from falling trees and rocks. 

Figure 3: Alternative Design 1 

Powerhouse 

The powerhouse would be a pre-engineered metal building with a reinforced 

concrete foundation, and would house either one or two generating units, depending on 

the installed capacity. With one unit, the powerhouse dimensions would be 

approximately 50 feet by 70 feet by 40 feet high above the top of the surrounding 

backfill. With two units, the powerhouse dimensions would be approximately 50 feet by 

100 feet by 40 feet high. The floor level of the powerhouse would be at about El 170. 

The powerhouse would be located on the east side of the Chilkoot valley 

approximately 1100 feet downstream of the confluence of Connelly Creek and the 

Chilkoot River and approximately 300 feet upstream of Power Creek. There is a 

floodplain terrace of varying width between the base of the hillside and the river channel. 

The powerhouse would be located partially on this terrace and partially on an excavation 

into the hillside. There are isolated bedrock exposures on the hillside, and GLH 

anticipates founding the major portion of the powerhouse on bedrock. 

Spoils from the powerhouse excavation would be used for backfill around the 

powerhouse. The fill would be as much as 20 feet deep. The fill slopes would be 

armored with riprap to protect it from erosion by floodwaters of the Chilkoot River. 



Tailrace 

The tailrace would be an excavated and riprap-lined channel from the powerhouse 

to the main channel of the Chilkoot River that runs near the base of the hillside. The 

tailrace would be about 200 feet long with a base width of 50 feet. The tailrace would 

not discharge into Power Creek, as was proposed by Haines Light & Power (HL&P) in 

their proposal for the project in the 1990s. 

Switchyard 

A switchyard would be located on the powerhouse fill over the existing floodplain 

terrace described above. The switchyard would have plan dimensions of approximately 

60 feet by 100 feet. The toe of the fill for the switchyard would be a minimum of 75 feet 

from Power Creek. 

Alternative 2 – Dam at Connelly Lake outlet, siphon intake, surface penstock, upstream 

powerhouse location. 

Alternative 2, shown in Figure 4, would be the same as Alternative 1 except that a 

dam would be constructed at the outlet of Connelly Lake to provide additional storage. 




Dam 

Dam Type: Because there would not be a road to the Connelly Lake dam site, 

GLH believes the most economical type of dam would be a rockfill dam, with the rockfill 

derived from a quarry near the dam site. 

GLH believes that the most suitable dam types would be either a concrete-faced 

rockfill dam or a rockfill dam with an upstream geomembrane protected by riprap; both 

options will be evaluated. Rockfill volumes would not be significantly different between 

the two types, and GLH does not expect any significantly differing environmental 

impacts. Both types can be developed with acceptable levels of safety for the seismic 

environment of the site. 

Dam Height: Compared to a low dam, a higher dam would provide more storage 

and greater generation, but at greater cost. GLH will evaluate the costs and benefits of 

four dam heights to provide a basis for the final selection, as shown in the following 

Table I. The highest dam (75 feet high with the crest at El 2350) is about the maximum 

that can be constructed using a rockfill type of dam with appropriate face slopes. GLH 

recommends that the highest dam option be the basis for study requests. 

Table I: Dam Height Options 

Dam height, feet 0 (1) 25 50 75 

Dam crest elevation, feet N.A. 2300 2325 2350 

Normal maximum water 

surface elevation, feet 

2278 (2) 2290 2315 2340 

Active storage, acre-feet (3) 1,250 2,640 6,380 10,630 

(1) Use existing lake only (no dam, i.e. Alternative 1) 

(2) Approximate existing lake elevation 

(3) Between El 2258 and the normal maximum water surface elevation 

Transportation: Construction materials, equipment, and personnel would need 

to be transported to the dam site from the powerhouse area. Initially, this would need to 

be accomplished by helicopter; a heavy-lift helicopter would be necessary for large 

pieces of equipment on a one-time basis, but personnel, materials, and tools would 

require only a smaller machine on a daily basis. 

GLH will also evaluate the feasibility of using the highline system for 

transportation to the dam site. Note that with the proposed rockfill type of dam, 

construction materials to be brought up to the dam site would be mostly cement, 

reinforcing steel, form plywood, diesel fuel, and explosives; rock, sand, and gravel would 

be derived from excavations up at the dam site. 

Spillway 

For reliability and ease of maintenance, GLH would use an ungated spillway with 

a concrete control weir. GLH believes that it would be appropriate to size the spillway to 

pass the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) with the water level at or below the dam crest. 



The concrete control weir would discharge into an excavated channel parallel to 

the toe of the dam, ultimately discharging into the existing stream channel below the 

dam. 

Intake and Outlet Works 

For all dam height options, GLH would construct a siphon intake to allow use of 

the storage volume of the existing lake. 

GLH also expects to install an outlet works facility to allow lowering of the lake 

level (in addition to the release through the power facilities) for dam inspection and 

maintenance. 

Alternative 3 – Dam at Connelly Lake outlet, siphon intake, tunnel and raise bore 

penstock, upstream powerhouse location. 

Alternative 3, as shown in Figure 5, is similar to Alternative 2 with regard to the 

dam, powerhouse, and access road, however the penstock would be replaced with a nearhorizontal 

tunnel into the hillside from the powerhouse and a near-vertical shaft (“raise 

bore”) to the dam site. The tunnel would be about 10-12 feet in horseshoe diameter, and 

5,000 feet long. 


With this arrangement for the penstock, the drawdown trench can be located 

through a lower small saddle closer to the lake outlet. The drawdown trench can end at 

the spillway channel, which would decrease its length significantly. Also, the outlet 

works could be located in the drawdown trench, and discharge into the spillway channel. 



Alternative 4 – Dam at Connelly Lake outlet, siphon intake, surface penstock, 

downstream powerhouse location. 

In the 1990’s, HL&P considered an alternative that placed the powerhouse about 

2 miles downstream of the confluence of Connelly Creek and the Chilkoot River, with a 

road and adjacent penstock up the hillside to the lake. They concluded that a road was 

possible up to a bench at about the 1500 feet elevation, but that steep cliffs and boulder 

fields precluded a road all the way to the lake. GLH has reviewed that information and 

agrees that road access to the lake is not possible with the route considered by HL&P. 

However, GLH believes that a different alignment for a road to the dam area may be 

feasible, as shown in Figure 6. 

Note that much of this alignment is based on the rather crude topography of the 

USGS 15 minute quadrangles. GLH will obtain more detailed topographic mapping of 

the proposed alignment if an initial evaluation and field reconnaissance determines there 

is significant economy to be gained. GLH understands that the road may have a 

substantial environmental impact. 


The preliminary road alignment shown in Figure 6 is 3.5 miles long, including 0.3 

miles at a nearly level grade in the Chilkoot Valley from the existing road to the 

powerhouse, 2.5 miles up the hillside at a nearly constant grade of 16%, and 0.7 miles at 

a nearly level grade to the dam area. The penstock would be similar to Alternatives 1 

and 2, with buried HDPE, ductile iron, or steel pipe in the upper section (about 6,000 feet 



long), and saddle supported steel pipe from the upper section to the powerhouse 

(about 4,100 feet long). The lower section of penstock would be installed with a highline 

system. 

The powerhouse would be similar in design to that described previously. 

Mapping by HL&P indicates there is a suitable terrace on which to locate the 

powerhouse. Aerial photography and the mapping indicates the Chilkoot River channel 

may be more stable in this area than the upper powerhouse location of Alternatives 1, 2, 

and 3, and thus a bridge over the river at this location may be more suitable. Other 

advantages to this downstream powerhouse location are the 1) a slightly higher head, 2) 

shorter length of transmission line, 3) shorter length of existing road rehabilitation, 

including avoidance of one particularly bad section that has all but been washed out by 

the river. 

Impoundment 

As noted above, GLH recommends that for the purposes of this PAD, the largest 

possible impoundment should be considered for study planning purposes: 

Table 2: Reservoir Size 




surface area, acres 

Gross storage capacity, 

acre-feet 

Normal minimum water 


Existing Lake 

Proposed Reservoir 

2278 2340 

90 183 

2140 11,520 

2278 2258 

Active storage, acre-feet NA 10,630 

Turbines and Generators 

Turbines 

As noted above, GLH has not yet determined the appropriate installed capacity, 

and is considering 6 MW and 12 MW installations. GLH recommends that for the 

purposes of this Draft Study Plan, that a 12 MW installation should be considered. If one 

or two generators are installed, both would have a minimum hydraulic capacity of 5 cfs 

and a maximum hydraulic capacity of 45 cfs. 

Primary Transmission Line 

With the upper powerhouse location (Alternatives 1, 2, and 3), the transmission 

line would be 12.8 miles long from the substation to an interconnection with GLH 

existing system approximately 4 miles north of Haines. With the lower powerhouse 

location (Alternative 4), the transmission line would be 10.9 miles long. Transmission 

voltage would be 34.5 kV. GLH expects that all of the line will be buried power cable 



due to the proximity to the Chilkoot Bald Eagle Preserve and avalanche chutes 

along Chilkoot Lake. Estimated lengths of various line segments are indicated below: 

Table 3 

Transmission Line Segment Lengths, miles 

Line Type 

Upper Powerhouse Lower Powerhouse 

(Alts. 1, 2, and 3) (Alternative 4) 

Buried cable adjacent to new 

road in Chilkoot Valley. 

0.3 0.1 

Buried cable adjacent to 

rehabilitated road in Chilkoot 

8.8 7.1 

Valley. 

Buried cable adjacent to 

highway along Lutak Inlet in 

existing conduit 

3.7 3.7 

Total 12.8 10.9 

Mode of Operation 

3.0 PROJECT OPERATIONS 

GLH expects to operate the Project solely for power generation, subject to the 

constraints to be determined during licensing. Because GLH’s Upper Lynn Canal (ULC) 

system is isolated with most existing generation from existing hydro units, the actual 

mode of operation would depend on the system loads. The Connelly Lake Project would 

be operated similarly to the Goat Lake project, with their generation varied as necessary 

to maintain comparable storage levels. Either Goat Lake or Connelly Lake could be 

operated in the lead position, with the other in lag if operated during the winter solely for 

Haines and Skagway power. 

If for some reason the submarine cable linking Haines and Skagway was out of 

service, the mode of operation would be similar to that described above, except that the 

Goat Lake and possibly the Kasidaya projects would not be available to meet Haines 

loads. The Connelly Lake Project would be in lead position, supplying all Haines loads 

in excess of those supplied by the Lutak, 10-Mile, and (possibly) Kasidaya projects. 

During the summer months, Haines and Skagway are destinations for large cruise 

ships. Currently, those ships run their on-board fossil-fuel generation systems to meet 

their ship loads, which are substantial (7-12 MW, depending on the size of the ship). If 

the installed capacity of the Project is sized appropriately, it would be possible to supply 

power to at least one ship, as is currently done in Juneau. The Applicant will investigate 

the feasibility of this type of operation, as it could have substantial benefits, as follows: 

 

It would supply a revenue stream for the Project during the early years of 

its operation when the native loads are modest. 



 

 

If priced appropriately, the cost of power to the cruise lines would be less 

than on-board generation, enhancing the cruise line’s economics and 

helping to maintain Haines and Skagway as desirable destinations. 

Air quality would improve, particularly in Skagway, where the stack 

exhaust from cruise ships frequently creates a smoggy condition and is 

adversely affecting hillside vegetation. 

Figure 7: Cruise Ships Docked in Skagway Creating Blue Smog 

The mode of operation in this scenario would be similar to that described above, 

except the loads would be increased. The cruise ship load itself is relatively constant, but 

intermittent. Therefore, there would be increased fluctuations of the power plant 

discharge compared to serving on the existing loads. Note though that the cruise ship 

load would occur during the summer months when streamflows are highest and the 

Project discharge would usually be only a small part of the overall flow of the Chilkoot 

River. 

Ramping Rates 

Ramping rates are likely to be a requirement for protection of the anadromous fish 

in the Chilkoot River. It is too early to define the exact ramping rates, typically they are 

in the range of 2-4 inches per hour. Preliminarily, GLH expects that the maximum plant 

discharge of 90 cfs (for a 12 MW installed capacity) represents about 3” of stage change 

in the Chilkoot River at low flows and less than 1” of stage change during high flows. 



Flushing Flows 

GLH does not expect that flushing flows will be a requirement of the license. The 

drainage area of the Project is only about 4% of the drainage area of the Chilkoot River. 

Thus, any flushing releases from the Project would have little effect. 

4.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT 

HL&P, which was purchased by Alaska Power & Telephone Company (AP&T), 

initiated field work on Connelly Lake, Chilkoot Lake, and along the access road, RS 

2477, in the 1990’s. A fish survey was conducted in 1995 by ADF&G (report enclosed) 

that found no fish in Connelly Lake or in its outlet stream (anadromous barrier found near 

its confluence with the Chilkoot River). 

The project boundary with project features is shown above in Figure 1. Figure 1 

also shows topography of Chilkoot Lake and Connelly Lake and the surrounding area, all 

of which are in the Haines State Forest. 

Below is background information about the Chilkoot River Valley and Chilkoot 

Lake. 

Geography of the Study Area 

The Skagway (B-2) Quadrangle, as shown in part in Figure 1, lies north of Haines 

and west of Skagway at the upper end of Lynn Canal. The region is very steep and 

rugged, with high dissected mountains, numerous high-gradient streams that discharge 

into rivers occupying broad glaciated valleys with an array of glaciers and glacier-related 

erosional and depositional features; at least eight major glacial cycles have occurred, 

carving out valleys, grinding down rock and depositing moraines and layers of glacial till. 

A warming of the climate caused a general retreat of late Pleistocene ice that ended 

approximately 6-7 thousand years ago. At that time Alaska's glaciers were reduced to 

their present size or smaller. 

Post-glacial rebound, the uplift of terrain after the weight of glaciation is 

removed, causes measurable elevation increases, especially along shorelines, mud flats, 

and riverine basins. The presence of emergent marine deposits several hundred feet 

above sea level demonstrates that the land has been uplifted relative to sea level since the 

last major deglaciation of the region about 10,000 years ago. The rate of rebound has 

been constant in this century and has been recorded at as high as 1.6 inches per year in 

the region and 0.9 inches in the Haines townsite area. 2 

Small glaciers are common on the higher peaks of the quadrangle, and glacial 

processes have been important in its recent history. Peaks below 4,000 feet show 

distinctively rounded summits and ridges that are indicative of burial by glacial ice, and 

rocks along the shore of Taiya Inlet have been well carved, scalloped, and polished by ice 

movement. The Takshanuk Mountain Range bordering the southwest side of the 

2 Information courtesy of the Haines Borough Comprehensive Plan – 2004. 



Chilkoot River Valley also shows this carving. Chilkoot Lake and the nearby 

Taiyasanka Harbor (visible at right on Figure 1 at the mouth of the Ferebee River) both 

formed behind terminal moraines. 

The Takshanuk Mountains, immediately northeast of Haines, constitute a steepsided 

northwest-trending ridge, which rises 3,000-6,000 feet above the Chilkoot River to 

the northeast. The Chilkoot River flows into Chilkoot Lake, which in turn empties into 

Lutak Inlet. Lutak Inlet is one of the northerly continuations of Chilkoot Inlet and the 

north end of Lynn Canal. 

Timberline is at approximately 2,000 feet; except on extensive gravel bars along 

the broad river valleys, areas below 2,000 feet support interspersed dense brush and lush 

forests, which are locally logged. Outcrops generally are good in the snow- or ice-free 

terrains above altitudes of 2,500 or 3,000 feet. The peaks in the Takshanuk Mountains 

range from 3,500 feet to 5,600 feet. Elsewhere, rock exposures are restricted largely to 

roadcuts and steep-walled valleys. The long, linear river valleys and inlets of the region 

divide the quadrangle into four topographic blocks, one of which is the Chilkoot River 

Valley. These topographic blocks are also related to linear fault lines in the area, of 

which the Chilkoot River Valley is a subsidiary fault. For the most part, these faults are 

concealed by water or valley floor deposits and their exact location can only be 

estimated. 

There are no known earthquake epicenters within the Project area; however, in 

November, 1987, an earthquake registering 5.3 on the Richter scale epicentered near 

Haines. This earthquake had several preliminary and after-shocks. 3 The linear river 

valleys and marine inlets of the region are controlled by major faults that are splays of the 

Lynn Canal-Chatham Strait fault, a major tectonic element in southeastern Alaska that 

connects the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte Islands fault with the Denali fault. 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has assigned the Haines area as seismic zone 

3, a zone where the largest expectable earthquakes would have magnitudes greater than 

6.0, where major damage to man-made structures could be expected. 

Ecology of the Study Area 

Chilkoot River and Lake 

When discussing the Chilkoot River Valley, it is often divided into three principal 

geographic features: (1) Lower Chilkoot River; (2) Chilkoot Lake; (3) Upper Chilkoot 

River. The Upper Chilkoot River flows about 20 miles southeast from its glacial source 

before entering the north end of Chilkoot Lake, which is 3.5 miles in length and 1.5 mile 

wide. The Lower Chilkoot River is the continuation of the river from the south end of 

Chilkoot Lake; flowing about 1.5 miles to Lutak Inlet. The Chilkoot River has no major 

tributaries; fed by runoff and glacial melt. 4 

The Upper Chilkoot River Valley bottom is a patchwork of many forest types 

above and around wetlands of grasses, sedges, ponds and riparian habitat of shrubs. 

Spruce woods dominate above the floodplain of the river with willow, alder, and 

3 Information courtesy of the Haines Borough Comprehensive Plan – 2004. 

4 Ibid. 



cottonwood occurring in areas subject to flooding. The wetlands are most predominating 

in the area just above Chilkoot Lake. 

Flow in the Chilkoot River is fed by 129 sq. miles of drainage area down to the 

south end of Chilkoot Lake. Connelly Lake has a drainage area of approximately 3.4 sq. 

miles; see Figure 8 below. The river is at its lowest and clearest in the winter months 

with heavy snow accumulating in the valley. When warmer temperatures arrive the 

glaciers melt and the clear river and lake water become clouded with silt; the river 

becomes opaque and the lake turns an aquamarine color. 

Figure 8: Comparison of drainage areas 

The Chilkoot River Valley serves as a migration route and spawning ground for 

coho, sockeye, chum and pink salmon, and Dolly Varden char. It is a waterfowl nesting 

area and a bald eagle feeding ground during salmon runs. Eagle nests are found along the 

river. Chilkoot Lake and its tributaries support large runs of sockeye, pink and coho 

salmon. There is a small tributary stream near the north end of the lake that contains a 

salmon spawning area known as the Glory Hole. 



The salmon have a significant impact on the wildlife present (bear, eagle) and the 

vegetation that receives nutrition from fish carcasses by enriching the soil. 

Bear, moose, mountain goats and furbearers are distributed throughout the 

Chilkoot River Valley. 

Water Resources 

All fresh water in the Haines area drains into Lynn Canal. Stream flow is 

lowest in winter when precipitation at higher elevations is stored as snow, and greatest in 

summer when melting snow and glacier ice augment flow. Springs and groundwater 

seeps flowing from alluvial fans contribute to stream flow year-round. As is typical with 

snowmelt-fed drainages, a strong seasonal fluctuation in discharge, not strongly 

correlated with precipitation, occurs. Peak runoff occurs in the summer months and 

lowest flows in January, February and March. 

The Chilkoot River flows about 20 miles southeast from its source before entering 

Chilkoot Lake, which is 3.5 miles in length and 1.5 mile wide. The Chilkoot River 

continues its course from Chilkoot Lake for about 1.5 miles to Lutak Inlet. The Chilkoot 

River has no major tributaries; fed by runoff and glacial melt. 5 

The Project would be located on the outlet stream of Connelly Lake, a tributary of 

the Chilkoot River. Connelly Lake, at the outlet, has a drainage area of 4.4 sq. miles, as 

shown in Figure 8, according to the USGS gage 15056280. The USGS gage was in 

operation at the lake outlet from August 1, 1993, to September 30, 1997. Average mean 

and correlated flow is shown in Table 4. The Chilkoot River has a drainage area of 129.1 

square miles, including Chilkoot Lake. The drainage area of the Chilkoot River at the 

tailrace discharge is about 90 square miles for the upper powerhouse location and 93 

square miles for the downstream powerhouse location. The Connelly Lake drainage is 

3.4% of the total drainage in this basin. 

Table 4 

Mean and Correlated Recorded Average Daily Flows Comparison, cfs 

Connelly Creek 

(recorded) 

Flows, cfs (1) 

Connelly Creek 

Correlated Flows, 

cfs (2) 

Chilkoot River 

(recorded) Flows, cfs 

(3) 

Mean Mean Mean 

January 2.7 3.7 138 

February 3.0 3.4 117 

March 2.9 2.6 124 

April 3.1 2.5 194 

May 27.1 22.6 1062 

June 87.2 93.0 1777 

5 Information courtesy of the Haines Borough Comprehensive Plan. 



July 102 118 1898 

August 106 119 1667 

September 78.5 77.4 1112 

October 32.9 28.9 727 

November 8.3 7.6 296 

December 4.9 6.4 170 

Annual 38.6 40.7 778 

(1) USGS Gage 15056280 (Upper Chilkoot Lake outlet near Haines), for Water Years (WY) 1994-97 

(2) Average flows for WY 1987-2002 by correlation with USGS Gage 15039900 (Dorothy Lake outlet 

near Juneau) 

(3) ADF&G Gage 11901, for WY 2008-10 

Surface waters in the Chilkoot River Valley in the form of wetlands are shown in 

Figure 9. This wetland delineation is from the USF&WS website. Further wetland 

delineation will be necessary for more complete information. Beaver dams have had a 

significant influence in the creation of wetlands above the ‘Glory Hole’ above Chilkoot 

Lake. 

Figure 9: Chilkoot River Valley Wetlands 6 

6 Wetlands map courtesy of USF&WS Website: Wetland Mapper.


In addition to stream gaging, GLH installed a water temperature datalogger 

between Hydro and Power creeks in September 2011. Water temperatures were also 

periodically recorded in the mid-90s when this site was previously considered for 

hydropower development. Water quality sampling also began in September 2011 with a 

second quarterly sample taken in February 2012. 

Impacts to Affected Waters 

The waters affected or potentially affected by the Project are Connelly Lake and 

its outlet stream, the lower part of the Upper Chilkoot River (3.5-4.0 miles), and Chilkoot 

Lake. Water from Connelly Lake will be diverted through a penstock or power tunnel to 

the powerhouse, run through a turbine and discharged into the Chilkoot River; wetlands 

along the lake outlet stream on a bench midway between the lake and river (approximate 

El. 1425), could be impacted by reduced spill from the lake and/or placing a penstock 

saddle in it. Until water temperature data is collected and comparisons can be made 

between river temps and Connelly Lake outflow temps, affects by the Project on river 

water temperatures at different times of the year below the point of discharge will not be 

known. However, based on the above gage data this project could make a considerable 

contribution to the river flow during the winter months compared to the average monthly 

flow and therefore water temperature will be an important factor. 

Project construction and operation may redirect some surface flows above 

Chilkoot Lake where beaver ponds have flooded large areas, including the access road 

corridor. The Project also has the potential to contribute sediment to these waters. 

A more site specific wetlands delineation will be conducted in the summer of 

2012, as described below in the study plan. Water temperatures will be recorded for 1 

year and water quality samples will be collected for a total of one year (two quarters 

already completed). 

Fisheries Resources 

The Chilkoot River is listed as Anadromous Stream No. 115-33-10200 and is 

known to have Chum, Coho, Pink, Sockeye, Cutthroat Trout, Dolly Varden, and 

Eulachon. Only Coho, Sockeye, Pinks, Chum, and Dolly Varden are listed as being 

above Chilkoot Lake. Only Coho, Sockeye, Dolly Varden and Cutthroat Trout are listed 

as using Chilkoot Lake. All other species come up the lower Chilkoot River, but do not 

enter the lake. Coho, Sockeye, and Dolly Varden go beyond the Chilkoot River and 

Connelly Creek (Connelly Lake outlet stream) confluence. 

Salmon from the Chilkoot River system are harvested by commercial fishermen, 

sports fishermen, and for subsistence. All three methods of take are an important part of 

the areas economy and lifestyle. 

As described previously, the Chilkoot River has significant salmon runs. This 

project when previously considered by Haines Power and Light Company, Inc. in the 

1990’s contracted with the Alaska Department of Fish & Game to completed a fishery 

survey of the upper Chilkoot Valley during the summer and fall of 1995 in anticipation of 

licensing and developing the Connelly Lake Hydro project. A report was completed 

entitled “Fish and fish habitat surveys conducted in the upper Chilkoot Valley near 



Haines Alaska, during 1995 (Randy Ericksen, Mike Gaede, and Eric Holle, 

ADF&G, Division of Sport Fish). The study was completed to gather fishery data related 

to the potential development of the Connelly Lake Hydro project. However, there has 

been no additional fisheries fieldwork done in the upper drainage since this original 

report in 1995. 

The ADF&G report substantiated that Connelly Lake is fishless, and that 

Connelly Creek also does not support fish; a fish barrier exists just upstream of the 

confluence of this creek with the Chilkoot River. Of the remaining 11 streams and water 

bodies sampled, nine contained fish, eight contained juvenile fish, and two appeared to be 

fishless. However, in the intervening 15 years the drainage has changed in character due 

to vegetation regrowth after logging and beaver activity on the river valley floor, which 

has also had an effect on local fisheries. There is anecdotal information that some 

streams have changed course, and there has been a substantial increase in beaver activity 

altering stream courses and creating backwater ponded areas. It is likely that there is 

substantially more rearing habitat now in the Chilkoot River valley just above Chilkoot 

Lake than when the original fishery survey was conducted in 1995. The area as it 

appears today is shown in Figure 10. 

Figure 10: View from head of Chilkoot Lake up the Upper Chilkoot River drainage 

in the left photo; View down the Upper Chilkoot River drainage looking south 

towards Chilkoot Lake in upper right photo (Lutak Inlet is in the distance); and 

View of the Powerhouse site proposed in Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 in the lower 

right photo. 



The logging road is only partially, or intermittently, visible from the air. A 

homestead that existed near Reeves Creek has completely collapsed and is no longer 

occupied. Beaver dams, above Chilkoot Lake, have flooded sections of the logging road 

and inundated several of the bridges. In other sections beaver dams have redirected 

stream flows across the river valley floor. And near the Alternative 1, 2, and 3 

powerhouse site a major side channel has developed on the west side of the river that 

extends at least a ½ mile through the woods before reentering the main channel of the 

Chilkoot River. Bear Creek now empties into this side channel of the Chilkoot River. 

Fish Surveys 

Part of GLH efforts to evaluate the project includes updating information on the 

fisheries of the Upper Chilkoot River Valley with the exception of Connelly Lake and 

Connelly Creek (Called Hydro Creek in the report), which were documented to be 

fishless in the original survey work. GLH contractor, Shipley, initiated a fisheries study 

in the fall of 2011 to repeat to the extent practical the fisheries survey conducted in 1995, 

as well as to sample other streams and beaver ponds that may not have been present in 

1995, but would be potentially valuable fisheries habitat today. 7 The objectives of the 

fishery studies were to: 

• Update the fisheries study results originally conducted by ADF&G in 1995; 

• Extend that fisheries database to cover both spring and fall timeframes; 

• Collect data on rearing habitat not surveyed in 1995, and new rearing habitat 

that may have developed in the drainage since the 1995 survey; 

• Assess the potential of adult salmon spawning within the lower 4 miles of the 

Upper Chilkoot River; and 

• Establish an energy profile for potential spawning and over-wintering habitat 

in the Chilkoot River. 

The logging road system that was in place in 1995 had degraded substantially 

since that time and no longer provided access to the streams sampled in 1995. Initial 

field work by Shipley and GLH staff involved reestablishing access along the logging 

road above Chilkoot Lake; shown in Figure 11. A total of 4.2 miles of abandoned 

logging road from the head of Chilkoot Lake to a washed out bridge on a stream on the 

west side of the Chilkoot River opposite Connelly Lake, was cleared of brush so that it 

was drivable on an ATV. 

There were three locations along the old logging road that may not be capable of 

supporting ATV traffic. The first was a large beaver dam complex that had flooded the 

old road. However, local residents were able to drive the beaver dam so it is passable 

under certain conditions. Another stream channel was too deep to cross with ATV’s so a 

bridge was built (see Figure 11 ‘New Bridge’) to span this stream crossing near Reeves 

Creek; see Figure 12. A side channel of the Chilkoot River directly across from the 

proposed powerhouse site had grown considerably in size since 1995. This stream 

7 For complete record, see the Connelly Lake Hydro Fisheries Report for Field survey work conducted 

September 20 through October 1, 2011. The Shipley Group. March 2012. Located in the PAD Appendix. 



channel blocks ATV travel to the end of the road under high flow conditions. 

However, the roadbed was cleared up to stream #13 across from Connelly Creek, which 

is now an easy 20 minute walk after wading across this side channel. 8 Following this 

side channel for approximately 200 yards will bring you to the Chilkoot River across 

from the powerhouse site in Alternatives 1, 2, and 3. 

Figure 11: Logging Road and Fish Sampling Locations 9 

8 Roadway was cleared during the 2011 field studies. 

9 Draft 2011 Fish Survey Report by The Shipley Group. 



Figure 12: Bridge made for Field Studies at stream crossing noted in Figure 12 10 

Fish Survey Results 

Both Coho Salmon and Dolly Varden show a similar distribution within the 

lower Upper Chilkoot River drainage. Both species occur within specific locations, or 

high value habitat, within the lower Upper Chilkoot drainage; these areas are shown in 

Figure 13. The flooded lake wetlands adjacent to the Glory Hole area were particularly 

important for juvenile Coho Salmon. 

A total of eight days were spent sampling fish habitat within the lower Upper 

Chilkoot River drainage by ADF&G and Shipley field teams. This effort resulted in the 

capture of 2,357 fish, of which 75% were Coho Salmon, 15% were Dolly Varden, and 

10% were three-spined Sticklebacks. In addition, adult Coho and Sockeye salmon were 

observed within the Chilkoot River, the Glory Hole area and the lower reaches of Reeves 

Creek. Carcasses were rarely seen in the drainage possibly due to the number of bears 

moving throughout the drainage. 

The sampling effort by ADF&G identified a total of seven areas of important fish 

habitat between Chilkoot Lake and Connelly Creek at Connelly Lake (Figure 13). Two 

of these sites were discovered during the September survey by the ADF&G field crew on 

the east side of the river. In addition, Takshanuk Watershed Council has identified an 

area of important fish habitat (noted in yellow in Figure 13) that was under-sampled in 

our September field effort. Juvenile Coho Salmon and Dolly Varden were present at all 

of the important fish habitat areas. Tatshanuk Watershed Council also reported juvenile 

Sockeye Salmon present at the yellow area, Reeves Creek, and the new Chilkoot River 

side slough across from Connelly Creek, as well as Sockeye Salmon spawning at sites 

further upstream beyond our survey area. The Tatshanuk Watershed Council also 

10 Activity was permitted by Haines State Forest. Source: Draft 2011 Fish Survey Report by Shipley Group. 



recorded the presence of Chum and Pink Salmon at the Glory Hole area and Pink Salmon 

at the Beaver Pond complex near Chilkoot Lake. These two species appear to be absent 

from important habitat sites further up river. 

Figure 13: Chilkoot River Valley Wetlands with Important Fish Habitat Overlay 11 

Both ADF&G and Shipley sampled within the mainstem and side channels of the 

Chilkoot River. Our results show that both Dolly Varden and Coho Salmon are found 

within this habitat type wherever it was sampled. 

Shipley attempted to find and trap at all of the locations that had been surveyed in 

1995 by ADF&G (Ericksen, et. al. 1995). We were able to relocate eight of the eleven 

sites. Stream number 13 was not found. Both Bear Creek and the stream above # 13 

were not specifically identified with respect to the sampling locations used in 1995, but 

our sampling was believed to be close to the original sites. Stream flows had changed in 

these areas sufficiently, due to the development of a major side slough on the Chilkoot 

River, that the original sites are no longer recognizable. Sampling results for these 

11 Wetlands map courtesy of USF&WS Website: Wetland Mapper. Fish data from Draft 2011 Fish Survey 

Report by The Shipley Group. 



locations are summarized in Table 1 of the fish survey report that can be found in 

Appendix C along with the original results obtained by ADF&G in 1995; Appendix H. 

In general our results were similar to their original findings. 

Impacts to Fish Resources 

Impacts to fish habitat could occur for the following reasons: 

 

 

 

Sediment from erosion of the access road 

Dewatering of important fish habitat by diverting flow 

Project discharge changes winter water temperature at river confluence 

Fish surveys will continue this spring as described in the study plan below. 

Terrestrial Resources 

Wildlife habitats in the Haines State Forest support species as small as the red 

back vole to those as large as moose. The most important species to the local economy 

and personal use are moose, mountain goat, brown and to lesser extent black bear, fur 

bearers, and eagles. These species are important for wildlife viewing, sport hunting, 

subsistence, recreation, and trapping. Also, beaver activity in the Haines State Forest has 

increased dramatically in recent years. 12 

Bears 

During the reporting period for the 2009 Brown Bear Management Report, 

approximately 42% of the Game Management Unit (GMU) 1 brown bear harvest 

occurred in Subunit 1-D (Haines area). The remainder of the harvest taken in other areas 

included 23% in Subunit 1-A (Ketchikan area), 19% in Subunit 1-B (Petersburg area), 

and 16% in Subunit 1-C (Juneau area); these harvest percentages were similar to the last 

reporting period and the long-term averages. 13 

A larger percentage of bears are probably harvested along the Haines Highway 

system in the adjacent Chilkat River Valley because of easier access. 

Moose 

Most Subunit 1-D moose inhabit the Chilkat River watershed and the Chilkat 

Peninsula. Within this area there is an estimated 200-250 sq. mi. of winter range, 

including 80 sq. mi. of preferred winter range. Small areas of moose habitat are also 

located in the Chilkoot, Katzehin, and Warm Pass valleys, and along the western shore of 

Lynn Canal (ADF&G 1990). In Subunit 1-D, the residents of Haines harvest the most 

moose annually, as shown below in Table 5. 

12 Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Haines State Forest Management Plan, Division of Mining, 

Land & Water, Resource Assessment & Development Section, Division of Forestry, August 2002. 

13 Brown Bear Management Report of Survey Inventory Activities 1 July 2006-30 June 2008, ADF&G, 

Funded through Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Grants W-33-5 and W-33-6. 



Table 5: Subunit 1-D annual moose harvest by community of residence, 

1995-2008 14 

Year 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 

Total 27 22 17 19 21 17 17 22 21 19 17 27 22 30 

Harvest 

Haines 26 22 16 18 19 16 16 21 18 18 15 25 20 30 

Skagway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 

Juneau 1 0 1 1 2 1 0 0 3 0 2 1 1 0 

Sitka 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 

Mountain Goat 

In the Haines/Skagway area, GMU Subunit 1-D, goat populations are estimated to 

be stable and capable of additional harvesting pressure (ADFG survey report, 1998). 

Mountain goat habitat includes coniferous forests, brushy slopes, alpine tundra, 

permanent ice and snow, and cliffs. 

Subsistence harvest of mountain goats is long established and includes the taking 

of animals for their meat, wool, and parts that are used for a variety of traditional native 

purposes including blanket making, utensils, and ornamentation. 

Mountain goat hunting is very popular in Subunit 1-D. Unlike many areas of 

Alaska where goats are hunted as a trophy species, the majority of goats harvested in Unit 

1-D are for consumption. An extensive road system in the Haines area provides access to 

goat hunting areas and the majority of the remaining hunting occurs from boats. 15 

Harvest was 30 goats in 2005 and 31 in 2006 for Haines. Aerial surveys are conducted 

by ADF&G as permitted given resources. Helicopter activity – flight-seeing and heliskiing 

– has increased, raising concerns about goat responses to disturbances. 

Impacts to Large Mammals 

Large mammals in the Project area will likely temporarily avoid the construction 

area due to noise. Habitat fragmentation or loss may occur if the species avoids roads. 

Down in the valley, species likely to be present are brown and black bears, moose, and 

occasionally wolves. Moose could be affected by the access road and avoid the area 

altogether. Bears will use road corridors for access and should only be temporarily 

impacted due to construction. During operations interruptions will be intermittent, 

perhaps once or twice a week for inspections and maintenance by a single vehicle. 

Mountain goats likely use the Connelly Lake area, at least intermittently as a part 

of their range. Construction at the lake will most likely cause them to avoid the Connelly 

Lake basin during the summer for the duration of construction at the lake only. 

Operations will rarely impact mountain goats; infrequent helicopter noise when on 

inspections and maintenance trips to the lake; which would be less frequent than visits to 

the powerhouse. If Alternative 4 project design is implemented, helicopters would rarely 

14 Moose Management Report of Survey Inventory Activities 1 July 2003-30 June 2005 and Report 1 July 

2007-30 June 2009, ADF&G. Numbers adjusted to only include SE Alaska communities. 

15 2010 Mountain Goat Management Report of Survey Inventory Activities, ADF&G. 



be used because a road would exist for hiking or ATV up to the lake for 

maintenance and inspections. 

Impacts to Small Mammals 

Access for trappers and hunters is likely to improve with the Projects 

improvement of RS 2477. The Department of Natural Resources, Division of Parks and 

Outdoor Recreation (DNR-DPOR) and the DNR-Haines State Forest will need to address 

what type of public access they want to allow once the Project is in place. Project 

construction will remove some preferential habitat for small furbearers, such as beaver, as 

some of the damming that has flooded the RS 2477 right-of-way (ROW) may be 

removed. The deciduous forest that has grown around and on the RS 2477 ROW may 

also have become preferred habitat for certain small furbearers, but only a small portion 

of the deciduous forest habitat will be removed for clearing the ROW and potentially a 

staging area near the bridge crossing of the river. Noise from construction may 

temporarily disrupt small mammal movement. The narrow ROW corridor of the Project 

should not create any significant fragmentation of small mammal habitat. 

Due to the unlikelihood of this project having a significant impact on small 

mammal species within the Chilkoot River Valley, due to the small access corridor, a 

finding of no significant impact is recommended and no studies of small mammals is 

proposed. 

Avian Species 

Lynn Canal and the Chilkat and Klehini River Valleys provide a major migration 

route to and from the Interior of Alaska and Canada. Dabbling ducks including mallards, 

green winged teal, American widgeon and pintail, and Canada or occasional snow geese 

are most commonly found in the marshes, ponds, and sloughs in the Chilkat River valley 

and therefore may occasionally be present in the adjacent Chilkoot River valley. 

Common diving ducks, sea ducks, mergansers, trumpeter swans and sand hill 

cranes also utilize the Chilkat River basin during migrations. Loons, grebes, cormorants, 

gulls, terns, murres, and murrelets are the most common seabirds observed along the 

coastlines of the inlets. Great blue herons are also common. These species may also 

migrate through the Chilkoot River watershed and seasonally use its aquatic habitat. 

However, more noteworthy to Haines is the Bald Eagle. Bald Eagles commonly 

nest along the coastline of the inlets in upper Lynn Canal and the major river valleys. 

Each fall, major concentrations of eagles gather in the lower Klehini River and the 

Chilkat River near the confluence with the Tsirku River to feed on the carcasses of the 

late fall chum salmon run. This is the largest known concentration of Bald Eagles in the 

world. Although the greatest numbers occur in the late fall, many eagles remain along the 

Chilkat River throughout the winter. Bald Eagles are also present in the Chilkoot River 

Valley during the fall and possibly during the winter months as well [at least through 

December for the Coho run]. 

Bald Eagles 

This project is partially located in the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve (Preserve), part 

of which is in the Chilkoot River Valley at the north end of Chilkoot Lake. Of the 49,000 

acres in the Preserve, only approximately 9,000 acres are in the Chilkoot River Valley 



portion. A small portion of the northern part of Chilkoot Lake is also included 

within this part of the Preserve. The Chilkoot River has an important run of salmon, 

which also supports a significant bald eagle population. The Haines State Forest, 

similarly, surrounds this portion of the Preserve. 

The USF&WS last surveyed the Chilkoot River valley on May 8, 2012, for eagle 

nests, as shown in Figure 14. They identified four (4) bald eagle nests in the Upper 

Chilkoot River Valley; 2 of which were active and two were not. Avoidance of forest 

stands with an existing eagle nest will be foremost in our consideration of the access 

route and construction activity will stay a minimum of 600 feet from an active nest. 

Figure 14: USF&WS Identified Bald Eagle Nests in May 2012 Survey 

Many of the previous eagle nests no longer exist; evidently due to avalanches, the 

weight of snow on tree limbs and eagle nests, and the dynamic valley in general. 



Impacts to Avian Species 

Utilizing RS 2477, an existing corridor, for the access road will reduce potential 

impacts to avian species. Many avian species may migrate through the river valley and 

possibly nest as well. Bald Eagles presently have only four nests and they are above 

Chilkoot Lake in the river valley. Only two nests are in use in 2012. A survey for active 

eagle nests and existing eagle nest trees would take place again just before construction 

starts to make sure an active nest is not disturbed. Bald Eagle roosting trees will also be 

noted in order to avoid impacting them. 

Four project designs are presently under consideration, some of which reduce the 

length of the road, which would reduce the amount of clearing necessary and thus less 

habitat removal. Avoidance of Bald Eagle nests will be a priority as well as retaining tree 

stands their nests are present in. If nesting activity is observed, construction within 600 

feet may not be allowed until they have left the nest. 

Due to the unlikelihood of this project having a significant impact on avian 

species, a finding of no significant impact is recommended and no studies for avian 

species other than the Bald eagle are proposed. 

Marine Mammals 

Humpback and killer whales, dolphin, seals and sea lions are often seen in the 

region. Two of the most relevant marine mammals to be mentioned here are the Harbor 

seal and Harbor porpoise. 

Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina richardsi) 

Because of a significant population decline of seals in the Gulf of Alaska versus 

the stable population in Southeast Alaska and the apparent stability of the population in 

the Bering Sea, three separate stocks are recognized in Alaskan waters: Southeast Alaska, 

Gulf of Alaska, and Bering Sea. In the 1900’s, fur traders hunted harbor seal pups for the 

fine coats they have when they are less then four weeks old. They were also hunted by 

salmon fisherman because of fishing competition. Hunting was so extensive that many 

harbor seal populations abandoned traditional haul-out areas. Indigenous Arctic peoples 

legally hunt harbor seals for food, clothing, and other raw materials. For centuries, 

hunting harbor seals has been an important part of their culture and traditions. In 

addition, marine debris is a threat to harbor seals, they can become entangled in nylon 

fishing nets or plastic packaging materials, causing severe injury or drowning. Harbor 

seals are preyed upon by killer whales, sharks, polar bears, Stellar sea lions, walruses, 

coyotes, and eagles. 

Harbor seals are present in Lynn Canal, Chikoot Inlet, and up Taiya Inlet to 

Skagway. Harbor seals also likely come into Lutak Inlet in pursuit of salmon. 

Harbor Porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) 

In the eastern North Pacific Ocean, the harbor porpoise ranges from Point Barrow, 

along the Alaskan coast, and down the West Coast of North America to southern 

California (Gaskin 1984). The harbor porpoise is basically an inshore species, 

frequenting coastal waters and the mouths of large rivers, harbors, and bays, sometimes 

ascending freshwater streams. Relatively high densities of harbor porpoise have been 

recorded along the coast of Washington, and Northern Oregon and California; yet, 



distinct seasonal changes in abundance in these areas have been noted, possibly 

due to a shift in distribution to deeper offshore waters during winter (Barlow 1987, Dohl 

et al. 1983). 

The Alaskan stocks of harbor porpoises are distinct from the stocks present along 

the Pacific coast of the continental U.S. The minimum population estimate for the 

Alaskan stock is 24,635. 16 The fisheries for which the majority of incidental take 

occurred were the salmon gillnet fisheries in Southeast Alaska, Copper and Bering River 

district, Kodiak, and Alaska Peninsula. The estimated annual mortality rate incidental to 

commercial fisheries is greater than 10% of the Potential Biological Removal (PBR) 17 , 

and, therefore, can not be considered insignificant. There are no reports of subsistence 

take of harbor porpoise in Alaska. 

Harbor porpoises are known to be present in Lynn Canal, though the Canal is not 

considered critical habitat. 

Impacts to Marine Mammals 

Marine mammals would only be indirectly impacted if the Project has an impact 

on salmon sustainability for the Chilkoot River watershed. 

Botanical Resources 

Most of the forests in the Haines area are in the sub-climax stage of ecological 

succession and consist of old growth, uneven aged hemlock and spruce stands, with trees 

averaging 100-150 feet in height and 2 to 3 feet in diameter. The project area was logged 

in the 1990’s and now has a fair amount of deciduous second growth. In Figure 9 above 

is the wetland delineation from the USF&WS website. Further wetland delineation will 

be necessary that would include a rare plant survey. 

Impacts to Botanical Resources 

Impacts to vegetation by the Project can be minimized by utilizing the existing RS 

2477 corridor on the west side of Chilkoot Lake, which is already established, although in 

poor shape along certain segments. Similarly, following the existing RS 2477 corridor 

above the lake will primarily only remove second growth of various deciduous species. 

Old growth stands will be avoided, if practical. Floodplain vegetation will be the primary 

class of vegetation removed with small areas of hemlock/spruce forest where necessary. 

Their removal should not have a significant impact on the biological diversity of the 

forest because of the Projects small footprint and because it was previously logged. 

Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species 

Below is a preliminary list of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Candidate (C) 

species that may need to be addressed during investigations into project feasibility. 

16 Source: www.nmfs.gov/tmcintryr/mammals/sa_rep/alaska/harbporp.html, November 18, 1997. 

17 The PBR is defined as the product of the minimum population estimate (NMIN), one-half the maximum 

theoretical net productivity rate, and a recovery factor: PBR=NMIN x 0.5RMAX x FR. The recovery 

factor (FR) for this stock is 0.5, the value for cetacean stocks with unknown population status. Thus, for 

the Alaska stock of harbor porpoise, PBR=(24,635 x 0.02 x 0.5), or 246 animals. 



The USF&WS, 18 help us narrow down the TEC species we need to evaluate for 

this document. We were advised to review potential project impacts to the Kittlitz’s 

murrelet and Yellow-billed loon, both Candidate species. 

Status 

C 

C 

U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE SPECIES LIST 

Species/Listing Name 

Kittlitz's Murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostris) 

Yellow-billed Loon (Gavia adamsii) 

Waterfowl and shorebirds are abundant in the marine environments and the lakes, 

marshes, and streams of Southeast Alaska. Millions of waterfowl and shorebirds 

migrating to and from their northern Alaska and Canadian breeding grounds use parts of 

southeast Alaska as staging and stop-over areas. Approximately 20 species of falcons, 

hawks, eagles, and owls inhabit Southeast Alaska (USFS, 1990). 

Below are descriptions of the avian species listed as Threatened, Endangered, and 

Candidate Species by the USF&WS. 

Yellow-billed Loon (Gavia adamsii) 

The USFWS listed yellow-billed loons as a Candidate species under the 

Endangered Species Act in 2009 due to concerns that subsistence harvest of this species 

was unsustainable. Subsistence harvest surveys continue to be redesigned in an effort to 

more accurately estimate the numbers of yellow-billed loons taken annually. 

Loons are harvested for subsistence purposes by Alaska Natives. The loons are 

taken during their seasonal migrations, mostly in the Bering Strait region and the North 

Slope. Though they are not generally used for food, their feathers and skin are used for 

ceremonial purposes. Their eggs, however, are collected for food. 

Because yellow-billed loons breed on the North Slope and Bering Strait regions 

they are unlikely to be impacted by this project. Yellow-billed loons may over-winter in 

some areas around Haines, however Chilkoot and Connolly Lakes freeze over, making 

them unlikely locations for the loon. 

Due to the unlikelihood of this project impacting the yellow-billed loon, and 

therefore a finding of no significant impact, no studies of the yellow-billed loon are 

proposed. 

Kittlitz's Murrelet (Brachyramphus brevirostris) 

This species is closely associated with glacially influenced marine habitats. 

During the past 50 years, glaciers have been melting at rates that cannot be explained by 

recent historical trends, likely due to increases in temperature caused by increased 

concentration of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere. They nest on steep unvegetated 

mountainsides or slopes above the timberline near glaciers and cirques. It is thought that 

they are monogamous and lay one egg in June. The eggs hatch in July, and the young 

fledge in August. They nest in solitary pairs in low densities and may exhibit site fidelity 

for their nesting grounds. 

18 Personal e-mail communication with Steve Brockman, USF&WS, on March 8, 2012. 



The Chilkoot Valley’s proximity to Glacier Bay could mean the Kittlitz murrelet 

utilize the general area for nesting; although perhaps more the Chilkat River Valley, 

which is larger, than the Chilkoot. There are also many north facing slopes near glaciers 

in northern Southeast Alaska, of which Connelly Lakes is a small sample. The Project 

could temporarily disturb potential Kittlitz’s murrelet nesting during the construction 

phase in the Connelly Lake basin; see Figure 15 below that shows the north facing cliffs 

at the lake, which are just at timberline. However, the area between the Project and 

Glacier Bay (which they are thought to use) has plentiful alpine habitat, glaciers, and 

cliffs or slopes facing north and the potential impact at Connelly Lake will be short term 

related to noise and activity. If the Kittlitz’s murrelet uses the north facing cliffs at 

Connelly Lake, the Project construction activity could temporarily displace them. 

The USF&WS advised GLH to review potential project impacts to the Kittlitz’s 

murrelet, a Candidate species under the Endangered Species Act. The species is closely 

associated with glacially-influenced marine habitats, and has been observed in marine 

environments in the region. Six opportunistic observations have been recorded by 

USF&WS between the late 1980s and March 2012. 19 Of these observations, all were on 

or flying above the water in a marine environment. USF&WS surveys in Lynn Canal in 

1994 and Berner’s Bay in 2000-2001 did not identify any Kittlitz’s murrelet individuals. 

Nesting may also occur on unvegetated glacial moraines, grassy ledges of island 

sea cliffs, and barren ground on coasts (Ehrlich et al. 1988).” 20 

Figure 15: Stereoscopic View of Connelly Lake; North Facing Cliffs at bottom of 

photo 

19 Michelle L. Kissling, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USF&WS) – “Kittlitz’s Murrelets in Lynn Canal.” 

May 2012. 

20 Polk Inlet Timber Sale Final Environmental Impact Statement, Vol.. III, Appendix J - Biological 

Assessment and Biological Evaluation, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Tongass 

National Forest, R10-MB-292c, April, 1995. 



As seen in Figures 15-16, the project site at Connelly Lake offers some north 

facing cliffs, but they predominantly face west, or northwest. 

Figure 16: View Across Connelly Lake at a few North Facing Cliffs (majority 

facing west) 

Project biologists attempting to plan a field survey contacted several resource 

agencies to determine the most effective manner to conduct the survey. Agency 

biologists have had difficulty finding nests and confirming the presence or absence of 

Kittlitz’s murrelets due to their scarcity, similarity to marbled murrelets, and cryptic 

physical appearance. 21 USF&WS biologists suggested that a foot survey would not be 

productive or cost-effective. 22 Academic research at the University of Victoria, Canada 

has attempted radar surveys and vocalization recordings to attempt to identify Kittlitz’s 

murrelet presence. These studies are not recommended for the Connelly Lake Project. 

GLH will continue to communicate with USF&WS regarding this Candidate species and 

potential project impacts. No field surveys are planned at this time due to the 

unavailability of a reasonable, scale-appropriate survey methodology to determine the 

presence or absence of Kittlitz’s murrelet. 

The NMFS, 23 help us narrow down the TEC species we need to evaluate for this 

document. We were advised to review potential project impacts to Humpback whales, 

and the Eastern and Western Stellar sea lions. 

21 Personal communication with Tom Van Pelt, former USGS Kittlitz’s Murrelet Coordinated Observation 

Program Contact, May 16, 2012, by HDR, Inc. 

22 Personal communication with Kathy Kuletz, USFWS, May 3, 2012, by HDR, Inc. 

23 Personal e-mail communication with Sue Walker, NMFS on February 9, 2012. 



NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE SPECIES LIST 

Status 

Species/Listing Name 

T Sea-lion, Steller eastern pop. (Eumetopias jubatus) 

E Sea-lion, Steller western pop. (Eumetopias jubatus) 

E Whale, humpback (Megaptera novaeangliae) 

Humpback whales, seals and sea lions are often seen in the Haines region. Part of 

their food source, all five species of pacific salmon (kings, pink, sockeye, chum, and 

coho [silver]) and eulachon and herring are found in Haines area waters. 

Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) 

The local distribution of humpbacks in Southeast Alaska appears to be correlated 

with the density and seasonal availability of prey, particularly herring and euphausiids. 

Important feeding areas include Glacier Bay and adjacent portions of Icy Straight, 

Stephens Passage/Frederick Sound, Seymour Canal, and Sitka Sound. Other areas of 

Southeast Alaska may also be important for humpbacks. These include: Cape 

Fairweather, Lynn Canal, Sumner Strait, Dixon Entrance, the west coast of Prince of 

Wales Island, and off-shore banks such as the Fairweather Grounds. 24 

Humpback whales inhabit shallow coastal areas and are known to use Lynn Canal 

and Taiya Inlet and may enter Lutak Inlet in pursuit of food. However, this project 

should not impact critical habitat for Humpback’s, food sources, or impact their use of 

the surrounding marine waters because this project is away from the marine environment 

and should have no significant impacts on herring and euphausiids. 

Due to the unlikelihood of this project impacting the Humpback whale, and 

therefore a finding of no significant impact, no studies of the Humpback whale are 

proposed. 

Steller Sea Lion (Eumetopias jubatus) 

Steller sea lions forage predominantly in near-shore areas and over the continental 

shelf. Important sea lion food resources include wallage, pollock, salmon, eulachon, and 

cephalopod mollusks. 

The NMFS provides a summary of factors affecting the Steller sea lion (Federal 

Register April 5, 1991). These factors include reductions in the availability of food 

resources, especially pollock, which is the most important prey species for sea lions; 

commercial harvests of sea lion pups; harvests for subsistence and for public display and 

scientific research purposes; predation by shark, killer whales, and brown bears; disease; 

the inadequacy of existing regulations regarding quotas on the incidental harvesting of 

sea lions during commercial fishing operations; and other natural or human incidences 

such as shooting adult sea lions at rookeries, haulout sites, and in the water near boats. 

24 Polk Inlet Timber Sale Final Environmental Impact Statement, Vol.. III, Appendix J - Biological 

Assessment and Biological Evaluation, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Tongass 

National Forest, R10-MB-292c, April, 1995. 



The Steller sea lion is the only sea lion species known to exist in the Haines area. 

The eastern Steller sea lion is the species expected to be found in the Haines area. The 

western species are unlikely to be in the Haines area, and therefore should not be 

impacted by this project. This project also will not have any impacts on Pollock 

populations, the sea lions main food source. 

The Stellar sea lion is found year round but most commonly during the spring and 

fall in the mouths of anadromous fish streams. During April and May when pupping 

takes place, female sea lions seek isolated locations. An important sea lion use area is the 

haul-out at the "Sea Lion Rocks" on the east shore of the Lynn Canal at the latitude of 

Flat Bay, where hundreds of sea lions are known to congregate especially during the 

spring and summer. 

Figure 17: Major Stellar Sea Lion Haulouts of Lynn Canal 25 

According to the NMFS website, the Steller sea lion has two major haulouts on 

Lynn Canal, but no major rookery; see Figure 17. The closest major haulout is 

approximately 35 miles away from the project. Because the Chilkoot River supports 

salmon species, which is a part of the sea lions diet, it will be important that fish habitat is 

25 Map courtesy of NMFS; cut and pasted to focus on the Project area. 



not impacted or that impacts are kept to a minimum. The use of Best Management 

Practices in road construction will help prevent the potential to impact critical salmon 

habitat. 

Due to the unlikelihood of this project having a direct impact and a low 

probability of an indirect impact on the Stellar sea lion, and therefore a finding of no 

significant impact, no studies of the Stellar sea lion are proposed. 

Recreation and Land Use 

Recreation 

The Haines Borough’s spectacular setting has made it a popular destination as 

visitors come to see and experience the mountains, fjords, glaciers, fishing, eagle viewing 

and other abundant sea and land wildlife in the area. The Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve, 

Haines State Forest, Chilkat State Park, Chilkat Lake State Recreation Site, and the 

Chilkoot State Park are all within the Haines Borough boundaries. History enthusiasts 

enjoy the Fort William Seward, Alaska’s first permanent army post constructed in Alaska 

in 1903. The post was decommissioned following World War II and was designated a 

National Historic Landmark in 1973. Of additional historic interest are the mining 

district of Porcupine, Pleasant Camp (Dalton Trail Post) at the Canadian border, 

Government Indian School, Eldred Rock Lighthouse, the Charlie Anway Cabin, and 

original historic buildings located in the center of Haines business district. The Sheldon 

Museum is dedicated to the history of Haines and its rich Tlingit native cultures. 

Although the Haines Borough is considered remote in some aspects, it is fully accessible 

by land via the Haines Highway, by air service from Juneau, and by water through its 

deep water, year-round port. 

It is clear that the recreational opportunities for the area are focused on the more 

easily assessable Chilkat River Valley and the area around Haines. However, Lutak has 

already experienced a growth in both personal and commercial tourism and recreation. 

An emphasis on increased access to the more remote areas around Chilkoot Lake has 

been suggested as well as expanded visitor opportunities in the form of fishing and higher 

alpine access. A possible trail from Chilkoot to Skagway has also been proposed. 26 

Haines Borough residents and visitors participate in many varied forms of 

recreation. Just some of these activities are fishing, camping, hiking, hunting, rafting, 

kayaking, boating, photography, cross county skiing, snow-shoeing, snow-machining, 

dog-mushing, heli-skiing, snowboarding, golf, rock climbing, and mountaineering. A 

challenge is balancing the demand for areas where either personally or for their business, 

people seek a semi-remote or wilderness experience, versus the demand for areas where 

literally hundreds of visitors a day can be given a glimpse of the ‘remote’ and ‘wild’ 

country and resources in the Borough. These large, so called ‘industrial’ recreational 

enterprises occur in the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve, the Chilkoot River, Chilkat Lake, 

Davidson Glacier, and other locations. Attitude surveys show broad support (68%) for 

tourism growth among Borough residents, but land use must be carefully managed to 

ensure this support continues. 27 

26 Haines Borough Comprehensive Plan March 30, 2004, p. 63. 

27 Ibid, p. 63-64. 



Land Use 

The Project will be on lands managed by the Department of Natural Resources 

(DNR) and private land parcels. The DNR lands are managed by several subdepartments: 

 

 

Haines State Forest 

Dept. of Parks and Outdoor Recreation, which includes the Chilkat Bald Eagle 

Preserve 

Figure 18: Land Management and Ownership 

The portion of the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserves total acreage (49,000 acres) that 

is in the Chilkoot River Valley consists of approximately 9,000 acres. This includes the 

Chilkoot River, its adjoining floodplain, and a small portion of the northern part of 

Chilkoot Lake. The Chilkoot River has an important run of salmon, which also supports 

significant bald eagle and bear populations. The Haines State Forest, similarly, surrounds 

this portion of the Preserve. An un-maintained road (RS 2477) provides access to a 



number of private in-holdings. Conveyance by BLM to the state for lands in the 

Chilkoot Watershed occurred in 2010. 28 

Figure 18 shows the boundaries to the Haines State Forest (dark green), Chilkat 

Bald Eagle Preserve (light green), private land holdings (yellow), and RS 2477, the 

access route into the Chilkoot River Valley. The Project would make improvements to 

the right-of-way of RS 2477 to get up the valley and to the river across from the 

powerhouse site where a bridge would span the river. 

Impacts to Recreation and Land Use 

Rehabilitating RS 2477 as the Project access road may increase use of the Upper 

Chilkoot River Valley, putting more pressure on private land owners as well as the 

natural resources. The flip side is that this access improvement may provide significantly 

more recreation, subsistence, and commercial activity by the viewing, trapping, fishing, 

or hunting of these natural resources; which could be to the area communities’ benefit. 

The private land owners may also appreciate easier access to their holdings. Until we 

know what the Haines State Forest and/or the DNR Department of Parks and Outdoor 

Recreation would prefer to do with this improved access, we can not fully appreciate the 

degree of impact this access may have on recreation and land use. 

Aesthetic Resources 

The Chilkoot River Valley, including Chilkoot Lake, falls under Unit 8 of the 

Haines State Forest Management Plan. This unit includes state land in the Chilkoot River 

Valley and contains a variety of identified resources including scenic values. 

The Chilkoot River valley is a scenic valley with limited access. Currently, 

because access to the river valley is limited to either a boat using Chilkoot Lake, a drive 

out on the dilapidated FS 2477 roadway, or occasional helicopters taking tourist through 

the valley on their way to Glacier Bay or the Chilkat River Valley, not many view the 

river valley above the lake. Views from the State campground at the south end of 

Chilkoot Lake show a forested landscape in the background with snowcapped mountain 

ranges beyond; see Figures 19-20. The valley has a combination of forest, wetlands, 

river, subalpine and alpine, and steep slopes and sheer cliffs of bedrock. Scenic wildlife 

in the valley includes moose, both brown and black bears, bald eagles, and spawning 

salmon. 

This Project would have limited impacts to the views shown in Figures 19-20 due 

primarily to the distance from project features, the natural vegetation that will screen 

project features, and the topography of the land. The Project bridge, powerhouse, 

tailrace, penstock, and dam will all be around the topography from the view in Figures 

19-20. Due to the distance involved in the views in Figures 19-20 to the Project, i.e. 3.5 

miles, the clearing for the access road may or may not be slightly visible, and if so, due to 

the flat valley floor the clearing for the road would only be visible as a narrow point. The 

access road along the west side of the lake may show more of a linear feature than 

currently exists because of road improvements, which will include removing some 

hazardous trees; however, this linear feature has existed for two or more decades. With 

the transmission line buried in the roadbed, the clearing along the road will only be 

28 Haines State Forest Resource Management Area in 1982. 



required for vehicular traffic rather than a wider space that includes an overhead 

transmission line. 

Figure 19: View North of Chilkoot Lake from State campground 

Figure 20: View North of Chilkoot Lake from State campground 

Unless recreational opportunities are improved for the Upper Chilkoot River 

Valley, aesthetic resource impacts are primarily limited to what would be visible from the 

State park and campground at the south end of Chilkoot Lake. At present, due to the 

poor access presently available to the Upper Chilkoot River Valley, guided tours for 

wildlife and scenic viewing most likely either do not occur or are limited in nature. 

However, the design of our projects typically includes consideration for aesthetics, and 

therefore, whether tourism comes to the Upper Chilkoot River Valley or not, the project 

will be designed with aesthetics in mind as much as possible. 

The Project impacts to the aesthetic resources if present in the Upper Chilkoot 

River valley potentially include: 



Access road – would create a linear clearing through vegetation; however, by 

using the existing FS 2477 right-of-way, the amount of clearing will be 

significantly reduced. The road clearing has existed for two or more decades and 

has been a feature of the landscape, although time has reduced evidence of its 

presence; but the road improvement should have minimal visual impacts. If DNR 

determines that improved access into the Upper Chilkoot River Valley is in the 

local community’s best interest, this would help counterbalance any aesthetic 

impacts. 

Powerhouse – will require clearing vegetation and rock excavation for its 

placement; the building can be colored to blend in and will likely be placed 

behind some vegetation to screen from view as much as possible. 

Tailrace – will require clearing vegetation for its placement, although because of 

the flow of water it may be considered somewhat aesthetically neutral. 

Bridge – will be a visible feature crossing the river, but only observable from 

close by due to trees in the area preventing long unobstructed views of the valley. 

Due to the scale of the landscape, the bridge should appear fairly small from 

higher elevations across the valley that are only available after a difficult hike or 

by helicopter. 

Penstock – if on the surface all the way down the slope, there would be a linear 

opening through the vegetation that would be visible from points around the 

Upper Chilkoot River Valley; would be the most visible feature of the project. 

The penstock corridor would also be evident from the Takshanuk Mountain east 

facing alpine slope. However, due to natural features of this valley having long 

vertical lines, this clearing would mimic natural lines of the valley walls to some 

degree. If the penstock is placed in a tunnel, there would be no visual impacts; 

except for the excavated rock which would likely find a use in other parts of the 

project as fill, reducing its potential visual impact. Geology and economics will 

be determining factors in this decision. 

Aerial tramway – would have temporary visibility during project construction and 

would require temporary clearing for some aspects, i.e. ROW down at river and 

tower location(s). The tramway would only be visible from above Chilkoot Lake 

and Takshanuk Mountain alpine views east. 

Dam – the dam would be visible from the air and possibly some alpine locations 

from across the valley on the Takshanuk Mountains range, but would be small 

and similar to rock in color. The dam would not be visible from within the river 

valley due to the areas topography, vegetation, and the dam color that will be 

faced with rock. 

Transmission Line – the transmission line will be buried in the access road bed 

and therefore should not present any additional aesthetic impacts other than what 

the access road will cause. 

The main factor as to whether this project will have aesthetic resource impacts 

will be determined by what the future use of the Upper Chilkoot River Valley will be. If 

the Projects access road will become an open corridor for others to use the valley, then 



there will be a heightened concern for aesthetics. We will be looking for 

guidance from the Haines State Forest and the Department of Parks and Outdoor 

Recreation on this issue. 

Based on the Upper Chilkoot River Valley’s current uses, or lack thereof, we do 

not believe the project will have a significant impact on the aesthetics of the valley. 

However, aesthetics will be taken into account when sitting and coloring certain project 

features. 

Cultural Resources 

The Haines Borough’s long and rich native and military history as well as the 

former City’s status as one of the first cities established in Alaska (Incorporated 1910), 

ensure the presence of a number of important cultural, historic and prehistoric places of 

significance. 

The State of Alaska defines cultural resources as historic, prehistoric, and 

archaeological remains, from existing buildings to fossils, which provide information 

about the culture of people or the natural history of the state. According to the State, 

cultural resources can include the traditions and memories of the longtime residents of an 

area, and, in fact, can be thought to include the people themselves. 

In general, there are three types of cultural sites: archaeological sites, historic sites 

(both native and non-native) from the period of exploration and early settlement, and sites 

corresponding with the period of U.S. influence. 

It is expected that cultural resources are focused around the Haines community 

and at the south end of Chilkoot Lake. However, due to the history of the Haines area 

going back thousands of years, a cultural resource survey will be conducted along the 

right-of-way for Project features. If cultural or historical artifacts were discovered during 

construction, activity would stop in that area and a Cultural Resource Management Plan 

would be developed in coordination with the SHPO, local Native Alaskan organizations, 

and the Haines Borough. 



5.1 PREVIOUS STUDIES 

5.0 DRAFT STUDY PLAN 

Previous Studies Conducted 

Stream gaging – the USGS installed a stream gage at the outlet of Connelly Lake 

in July 1993 and collected data for slightly over one year. ADF&G is currently 

gaging at or near the outlet of Chilkoot Lake for the past several years; which will 

end in 2013. GLH installed a stream gage at the Connelly Lake outlet in 

September 2011 and a stream gage just above the Connelly Creek confluence with 

the Chilkoot River in May 2012. 

 

 

 

 

 

Water temperature – a temperature datalogger was placed in the Chilkoot River 

below Connelly Creek’s confluence with the river and with the stream gage at the 

Connelly Lake outlet. 

Fish habitat survey – conducted by ADF&G in 1995 through a contract with 

Haines Light & Power, the utility at that time. No fish were found in Connelly 

Lake or in the outlet stream down to the Chilkoot River. Fish surveys were 

conducted between September 25 and September 28, 2011, by The Shipley 

Group, a contractor for GLH. The surveys took place along the access road 

streams and above Chilkoot Lake. At the time of these surveys ADF&G was also 

surveying the Chilkoot River Valley above Chilkoot Lake. 

Geotechnical survey – a preliminary geotech survey was conducted in 1993 and 

found that: 

o The dam axis is characterized by massive, relatively solid diorite bedrock 

at each abutment. Between the abutments, an overburden of boulders, 

peat, and sand were found to a depth of up to 36-inches. 

o The powerhouse site (upper riverside site [Northerly]) is situated on an 

inactive floodplain terrace. The upper 2’ of soil consists of clean sand, 

which is underlain by sandy gravel and the terrace as seen in a riverbank 

cut consists of dense course gravel in a sand matrix. The terrace soil abuts 

steeply sloping diorite bedrock which would be a good source of borrow 

for rip rap and embankment construction. 

Hydrology evaluation – a preliminary evaluation to determine average annual 

and average monthly stream flow for energy production was made in 1993. 

Figure 8 above shows the difference between the Chilkoot River drainage and 

Connelly Lakes drainage, which is significantly smaller. The PAD also contains a 

table comparing the Connelly Lake USGS gage data with ADF&G gage data at 

the river mouth and correlation with other nearby drainages. The hydrology 

evaluation will continue until more gage data is collected. 

Baseline environmental assessment – The USF&WS, 29 helped us narrow down 

the TEC species we need to evaluate for this document. We were advised to 

29 Personal e-mail communication with Steve Brockman, USF&WS, on March 8, 2012. 



review potential project impacts to the Kittlitz’s murrelet and Yellow-billed loon, 

both Candidate species. The NMFS, 30 also helped us narrow down the TEC 

species we need to evaluate for this document. We were advised to review 

potential project impacts to Humpback whales, and the Eastern and Western 

Stellar sea lions. These TEC species were evaluated above. Only the Kittlitz’s 

murrelet has the potential to be impacted; which would potentially be for the 1-2 

construction seasons at Connelly Lake. 

5.2 DRAFT STUDY PLAN 

Studies begun in 2011: 

1. Water Quality Testing – Water temperature monitoring will occur for 

approximately one year to determine seasonal variations. Three water quality 

samples have been collected to-date (Sept., Feb., and March). Water quality 

sampling will continue on a quarterly basis for one year. Water quality samples 

were also collected in the mid-90s. No unusual water quality is expected due to 

the remote location; however, this sampling will help determine if there are any 

unique chemical characteristics of the water in this basin before construction 

begins as well as for use as a baseline to measure potential project impacts. 

2. Stream Gaging – Stream gaging began in September 2011 with a gage installed 

at the Connelly Lake outlet. A stream gage was also installed in May 2012 just 

above the Connelly Creek confluence with the river. Stream gaging is expected to 

continue until construction begins. 

3. Fish Habitat survey – Fish surveys first began in September 2011. Fish surveys 

consisted of habitat mapping and presence / absence surveys, with the use of 

minnow traps. 

4. Geotechnical analysis – A geotech contractor was hired to conduct a feasibility 

analysis of the project sites geology. A draft report was completed in March 

2012, which is included in Appendix D. 

The following are the resource studies we propose to conduct in 2012: 

1. Geotechnical Survey (seismic refraction) 

2. Water Quantity and Quality including Temperature (continued 

from 2011) 

3. Wetlands Delineation Survey & Botanical Survey 

4. Fish Habitat Survey (continued from 2011) 

5. Bald Eagle Survey (conducted by USF&WS on May 8, 2012) 

6. Mountain Goat Survey (contract with ADF&G) 

7. Wildlife Habitat Survey 

8. Botanical Survey (description can be found under Wetland Survey) 

9. Recreation and Subsistence Use Survey of Haines Residents 

10. Timber Inventory 

30 Personal e-mail communication with Sue Walker, NMFS on February 9, 2012.


The following are the resource studies we propose to conduct in 2013: 

1. Cultural Resource Survey 

2. Complete any unfinished surveys from 2012 

Study Descriptions: 

1. Geotechnical Survey 

GLH will hire a qualified geology firm to evaluate the geology and dam design. 

Such studies would include geologic mapping in the dam and powerhouse areas, 

geophysical surveys of the powerhouse, spillway, and dam abutment areas, and office 

studies to provide preliminary design parameters for the project structures. 

Seismic Refraction: Seismic refraction studies will be conducted in 2012 to 

better define the bedrock surface in the dam and powerhouse locations. Seismic 

refraction studies involve: 1) placing a string of geophones along straight lines of interest, 

2) setting off small explosive charges at certain points along the line, 3) recording the 

time that the energy waves from the explosions reach each geophone, 4) measuring the 

elevations along the line at each geophone, and 5) analyzing the results to determine 

characteristics of the subsurface layers. A brief description of the mathematics involved 

and the location of charge placement is included in Appendix D; as well as the 2011 

Geotechnical Survey report. 

Each seismic line is generally a few hundred feet long, with 24 geophones 

uniformly spaced along the line (230 feet long with 10’ spacing, 345 feet long with 15’ 

spacing, etc.). Each geophone consists of a metal probe about 6 inches long and a fistsized 

head. The probe is inserted into the ground so that it makes firm contact with soil 

or rock, which may require a small amount of digging in loose or peaty soils or where 

there are tree roots. Undergrowth is cleared as required along the line for ease of access. 

On average, a crew can complete 1-2 complete profiles each day. 

The explosive charges are generally 1/3 lb ANFO (ammonium nitrate fuel oil), 

but in some deep soil conditions 1 lb charges are used. All charges are handled strictly in 

conformance with applicable state and Federal laws by certified technicians. Each line 

requires 5-7 separate shots (at each end of the line, the middle of the line, an off-end shot 

at each end, and possibly shots at the ¼ and ¾ points along the line). Each charge is set 

off in a hole 2-3 feet deep wedged into the ground, repacked with suitable soil material so 

that as much energy as possible is directed into the ground. Depending on the ground 

conditions and size of charges used, each shot disturbs a circular area from 1 to 5 feet in 

diameter, with the disturbance ranging from just a small hump in the ground to a shallow 

crater. In rocky or peaty soils, some material may be ejected up to 50 feet away from the 

shot location. 

The proposed studies for the Connelly Lake Project will include the 10 seismic 

refraction profiles listed below. Because of the expected shallow bedrock conditions, the 

Applicant expects that 1/3 lb charges will be used to minimize ground disturbance, with 

the possible exception of lines at the powerhouse location that may be on deep alluvial 

soils. 



These studies will include the following seismic refraction profiles: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Along the main dam axis (460’ length) 

Along the saddle dam axis (230’ length) 

Along the upstream toe of the main dam near the lake outlet (230’ length) 

Along the alignment of the drawdown trench (345’ length approximately 

perpendicular to the dam axis) 

Along the alignment of the outlet works (345’ length) 

Along the axis of the spillway channel (345’ length) 

Along the long axis of the powerhouse at the upper location (230’ length) 

Along the short axis of the powerhouse at the upper location (230’ length) 

Along the long axis of the powerhouse at the lower location (230’ length) 

Along the short axis of the powerhouse at the lower location (230’ length) 

The 2011 geotechnical reconnaissance did not include the lower powerhouse area 

or the potential road to the dam, described in Alternative 4. An additional reconnaissance 

will be conducted in 2012 to address those areas. 

Core Drilling Program: If a preliminary economic evaluation of the tunnel-andshaft 

penstock arrangement indicates that is preferable, GLH will conduct a limited core 

drilling program. At this time, GLH expects only a single core hole at the dam site at the 

location of the top of the shaft. A core hole at that location will also provide 

confirmation of the results of the seismic refraction studies at the dam. The core hole 

will be a minimum of 100 feet deep, or until cores with a Rock Quality Designation 

(RQD) greater than 90% are obtained. Depending on the results of the seismic refraction 

studies in the powerhouse areas, GLH may also have core holes drilled at the intersection 

of the seismic lines to provide confirmation. The core drilling program will be conducted 

in 2013. 

2. Water Quantity and Quality 

a. Quantify Flow 

i. Continue stream gaging at Connelly Lake outlet channel with trips 

to the lake to calibrate the recorded flow 

ii. Install stream gage above Connelly Creek confluence with river 

iii. Use data from ADF&G Gaging station at Chilkoot River mouth 

b. Water Quality Sampling on a quarterly basis 

1. Connelly Lake outlet stream 

2. Chilkoot River above lake outlet stream confluence 

Hydrology: In order to accurately depict the amount of energy this site will 

provide and what amount of water would potentially be discharged and when, a stream 

gage was installed at the Connelly Lake outlet in September 2011. This data along with 

the previous Connelly Lake USGS gage data (1994-1997) will be correlated with data 



from ADF&G’s stream gage at the mouth of the Chilkoot River as well as with gage data 

from Lake Dorothy (1987-2002) to provide a 16-year record of stream flows. This will 

be used to determine how seasonal operational changes in stream flow from Connelly 

Lake would affect the Chilkoot River flow and potentially fish habitat down stream. 

Flood Magnitudes: GLH will conduct studies to determine appropriate flood 

magnitudes for the preliminary design. Probabilistic floods (e.g. the 100-year flood) will 

be determined from regional correlation studies as well as factoring and transposition of 

the flood frequency curve of the Dorothy Lake outlet. The Probable Maximum Flood 

(PMF) will be determined according to Hydrometeorological Report No. 54, Probable 

Maximum Prescription and Snowmelt Criteria for Southeast Alaska, 1983. 

Water Quality: Water quality samples will be taken on a quarterly basis from 

the Chilkoot River, above its confluence with Connelly Creek and also from Connelly 

Creek. This will provide a baseline on the seasonal characterization of the watershed. 

Water quality sampling began in September 2011, was repeated in February 2012, 31 and 

in March 2012, and will continue quarterly for one year. 

Water Temperature: Water temperature is also being recorded in the river. An 

additional temperature datalogger was installed in Connelly Creek along with the stream 

gage near the lake to compare with river temps. Water temperatures will also be 

measured in Connelly Lake for comparison with the river to determine what impacts a 

winter discharge could have on the river temperature regime. 

3. Wetlands Delineation Survey & Botanical Survey (including rare and sensitive 

plants) 

The wetlands delineation will be conducted by a qualified botanist (the same one 

conducting the botanical survey for vegetation habitat mapping, and rare plants) and will 

cover all the right-of-ways of the project. The wetlands survey will be of the potential 

road routes, road corridor to Connelly Lake (Alternative 4), surface penstock right-ofway, 

powerhouse site and tailrace, and area to be flooded by the dam. The survey will be 

suitable for permitting the project with the US Army Corps of Engineers. 

Wetland scientists and botanists will identify plants on-site or collect unknown 

plants encountered incidentally during surveys focused on wetlands, vegetation, and 

habitat; identify (at least to genus) collected plants in the office; prepare a full list of 

plants identified during the surveys; and determine whether any of the species is shown 

on the Alaska Natural Heritage Program’s tracked plants list. 

4. Fish Habitat Survey of Chilkoot River above Chilkoot Lake (continuation of 

2011 survey) in Spring (May) and Fall 2012 

Fish Survey 

In 2011, an expanded version of the 1995 ADF&G fish habitat survey was 

conducted during September to check for presence, absence, and distribution. 

The objectives of the fishery studies are to: 

Update the fisheries study results originally conducted by ADF&G in 1995; 

31 Due to heavy snow, the samples were taken from the river about ½ mile below previous water sample in 

Sept. 2011. 



 

 

 

 

 

Extend that fisheries database to cover both spring and fall timeframes; 

Collect data on rearing habitat not surveyed in 1995, and new rearing habitat that 

may have developed in the drainage since the 1995 survey; 

Assess the potential of adult salmon spawning within the lower 4 miles of the 

Chilkoot River; and 

Establish an energy profile for potential spawning and over-wintering habitat in 

the Chilkoot River. 

During the spring 2012 survey (occurred in May), using a qualified fishery 

biologist (The Shipley Group), the sampling effort was intensified in the 

mainstem of the Chilkoot River as compared to tributary streams and beaver 

ponds. The survey had to be completed as early in the spring as possible. The 

intent was to establish the value of mainstem over-wintering versus that available 

in tributaries for Coho Salmon and Dolly Varden. We have a good picture of 

summer/fall; now we needed to get the late winter/spring distribution. 

Specific changes were incorporated into the study plan for this spring, and for fall: 

Add fyke net sampling at two locations for migrating juvenile sockeye salmon 

Sample Power Creek 

o Below forks to mouth in Power Creek 

o At least one trap in each fork of Power Creek 

Sample Chilkoot River at lower powerhouse site (Alternative 4) on both banks of 

river for spawning activity (redds/eggs) in the late fall at low water 

Conduct a sediment armor and particle size survey of the downstream reach at 

Alternative 4 

Conduct an adult sockeye salmon survey in late summer to determine where 

spawning occurs 

Sample more locations along Chilkoot River for over-wintering fish 

o Near the mouths of tributaries 

o Away from tributaries in good habitat 

Repeat Chilkoot Lake stations, but extend to overnight sampling 

Sample Chilkoot Lake tributaries at road crossing as well 

Repeat fall survey to extent practical to determine if there is a different abundance 

and location of fish. 

During the Preliminary Permit Public Notice period, there were concerns raised 

about sockeye salmon. The only data collected in the fall of 2011 for Sockeye was the 

use of the Glory Hole area for spawning, and the sighting of schools of sockeyes in the 

river migrating upstream. There was no evidence of spawning or dead sockeye salmon 

elsewhere in the tributaries surveyed. This is because the Sockeye salmon are spawning 

in the drainage, but young of the year migrate into Chilkoot Lake and rear there. In order 

to collect data on Sockeye salmon, we will look at juvenile sockeye migration 

downstream into Chilkoot Lake as an extra study component. 

 

Use small Fyke nets to trap emergent juvenile sockeye smolt that are moving 

down to Chilkoot Lake. Establish one station above the hydro project, and 



another near the lake. It will be necessary to determine the run timing in order to 

be there at the right time for sampling and then sample throughout that window to 

catch migrating juvenile fish. If we compare the catch rates from the two 

locations we should be able to establish relative value of habitat for sockeye 

salmon above and below the power site. This sampling would be conducted 

intermittently over several weeks to be close to the peak migration. 

During the Preliminary Permit Public Notice period, there were concerns raised 

about the potential for increased sediment in Chilkoot Lake and its impact on spawning 

and rearing sockeye salmon along the lakes west shore. In order to address this concern, 

GLH proposes to: 

 

 

 

 

Conduct a biomass sampling survey on a quarterly basis (or as close to this as we 

can) (June, July, September, winter) for one year to provide a baseline of plankton 

in the lake for comparison during and after construction, if required. 

A lab would be asked to conduct a total biomass analysis of the samples. 

Some samples would be archived for possible later use. 

GLH personnel would be trained by the projects fish biologist to take samples 

with a plankton net, Imhoff cones, Cline meter, Rose Bengal stain, and 

preservative. Samples would be stored in plastic bottles. Two hours per day for 

three consecutive days would be spent collecting these samples each quarter. 

Access will be a combination of helicopter, ATV, boat and walking to complete 

the survey. 

5. Bald Eagle Survey along west side of Chilkoot Lake, along the Upper Chilkoot 

River, and along the access road paralleling the river 

A Bald eagle survey for nesting and roosting trees occurred on May 8, 2012, by 

the USF&WS; May was chosen because it is before trees fully leaf out so that nests are 

more visible; nesting activity should be occurring by this time. A helicopter was used to 

fly along the west side of Chilkoot Lake and then multiple times up and down the Upper 

Chilkoot River corridor. Four existing nests were found, but only two were active. 

There locations were marked using a GPS unit to be uploaded into GIS mapping 

software. This information can be overlaid onto the Project design to determine if any 

project features need to be realigned. Part of the analysis will be to assess the potential 

impacts of the project on the Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve. A final bald eagle nesting and 

roosting tree location survey will take place near the beginning of construction to make 

sure there are no new locations that could be impacted. 

6. Mountain Goat Survey (contract with ADF&G) 

GLH will contract with ADF&G to conduct a mountain goat survey of the 

Connelly Lake basin. 



7. Wildlife Habitat Survey 

A wildlife habitat survey of the access road corridor and valley above Chilkoot 

Lake will be conducted by a qualified biologist. The purpose of the survey will be to 

determine the quality, size, and different habitat types in the project area to determine 

what impacts the project would have. The survey will initially consist of high resolution 

aerial photograph analysis of the vegetation types present, which will then be groundtruth 

by foot surveys. 

8. Botanical Survey (including rare and sensitive plants) 

See Wetland Survey above. The survey will include timber, understory 

vegetation, rare and endangered plants, habitat/community types, dominant species and 

mapping to support impact assessment. 

9. Recreation and Subsistence Use Survey of Haines Residents 

Indications are that residents of Haines, Lutak, Upper Chilkat River Valley, and 

Canada utilize the Chilkoot River fishery for sport and subsistence fishing. Commercial 

fishermen harvest the Chilkoot River stocks up and down Lynn Canal. We plan to 

consult with the Haines State Forest and Dept. of Parks and Outdoor Recreation for help 

in developing a good recreation and subsistence questionnaire. 

The purpose of the questionnaire is to determine where the current recreation and 

subsistence use is taking place and how significant the use is as compared to other areas 

around Haines. The goal is to determine if the project will impact current use of the 

Upper Chilkoot River Valley and if the greater public sentiment is to increase access, or 

keep it limited. 

10. Timber Inventory 

A timber cruise will be conducted to determine that quality and market value of 

timber that would be removed during construction. The timber inventory will be based 

on the requirements of the Haines State Forest for this area. The actual field survey will 

be designed after consultation with the Haines State Forest to determine the level of 

accuracy required for the assessment. The survey is expected to take 10-14 days to 

complete. However, actual field time will depend on variability of timber in the area and 

requirements of the Haines State Forest. Most of the valuable timber on the west side of 

the Chilkoot River was removed 20-25 years ago. 

11. Cultural Resource Survey 

A cultural resource survey will be conducted to determine the likelihood of 

artifacts being present in the Upper Chilkoot River Valley. An archaeologist will discuss 

with SHPO what areas will require surveying, past surveys in the area, and other 

pertinent information prior to surveying the project site. 



A. 11x17 Project Diagrams 

B. Flow Duration Curves 


APPENDIX 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

C. 2011 Draft Fish Survey Report (incomplete without 2012 survey) 

D. 2012 Seismic Refraction Survey Charge Locations; Mathematics for 

Seismic Refraction; 2011 Geotechnical Reconnaissance Study / plus 

the 1990 HL&P Survey 

E. 1994-1997 USGS Gage Record for Connelly Lake 

F. Water Quality Sampling Results (2011-2012) 

G. Stream gaging Connelly Lake Outlet (GLH started September 2011) 

H. Connelly Lake, Outlet Stream, and Chilkoot River Fish Habitat 

Survey, (ADF&G, 1995) 

I. Catalog of Waters Important for the Spawning, Rearing or Migration 

of Anadromous Fishes (ADF&G – 2005) 

J. Connelly Lake Reconnaissance Photos, (GLH – 2008) 

K. Draft Study Plan Consultation 

L. References 

M. Mailing List

APPENDIX A 

11 x 17 PROJECT DIAGRAMS

APPENDIX B 

FLOW DURATION CURVES

MONTHLY FLOW DURATION CURVES 

(PRELIMINARY)

APPENDIX C 

2011 FINAL FISH SURVEY REPORT 

(INCOMPLETE WITHOUT 2012 SPRING/FALL SURVEY)

Connelly Lake Hydro Fisheries Report 

for Field survey work conducted 

September 20 through October 1, 2011 

Submitted to: 

Alaska Power & Telephone Company 

Post Office box 3222 

193 Otto Street 

Port Townsend, Washington 98368 

Attn: Glen Martin 

Submitted by: 

The Shipley Group 

56 North Main Street 

Post Office Box 908 

Farmington, Utah 84025 

February 23, 2012 

1

Table of Contents 

INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………………………. 1 

FIELD WORK ……………………………………………………………………………………. 7 

RESULTS …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 7 

DISCUSSION …………………………………………………………………………………… 12 

REFERENCES …………………………………………………………………………………… 15 

APPENDIX I ………………………………………………………………………………….. 18 

FIELD SURVEY PHOTOGRAPHS ……………………………………………. 18 

GLORY HOLE …………………………………………………………………………. 21 

BEAVER POND COMPLEX ………………………………………………………. 22 

FLOODED ROADBED ALONG OLD LOGGING ROAD ………………… 25 

REEVES CREEK ………………………………………………………………………….. 26 

POWER CREEK ………………………………………………………………………….. 28 

NEW CHILKOOT RIVER SIDE SLOUGH …………………………………………….. 30 

HELIPADS ……………………………………………………………………………………. 33 

APPENDIX II ……………………………………………………………………………………. 38 

FISHERIES DATA FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 20 TO OCTOBER 

1, 2011 FOR THE CHILKOOT RIVER DRAINAGE ………………………….. 38 

2 i

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1. Comparison of fish sampling results from 2011 with the original data 

from ADF&G in 1995 ……………………………………………………………………………………… 16 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1. A. View from head of Chilkoot Lake up the Chilkoot River drainage; B. View down 

the Chilkoot River drainage towards Chilkoot Lake; and C. View of the Powerhouse 

site and Power Creek. …………………………………………………………………………………………. 2 

Figure 2. Project vicinity, features, and boundary. The red line shows the distance cleared 

along the old logging road in 2011. ……………………………………………………………………………… 4 

Figure 3. Approximate locations of major features, and the old logging road and that was 

Cleared of brush during the field survey. …………………………………………………………………… 5 

Figure 4. Locations of streams sampled by ADF&G in 1995 in the lower Chilkoot River 

drainage (Ericksen, et. al. 1995). ……………………………………………………………………………… 6 

Figure 5. Locations sampled by ADF&G and Shipley Group between September 22 nd and 

29 th , 2011. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8 

Figure 6. Distribution of fish species captured in Chilkoot Lake in September 2011 ……….. 9 

Figure 7. Distribution of fish species captured in the lower Chilkoot River in September 

2011 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10 

Figure 8. Coho Salmon distribution at sampling sites in the Chilkoot River drainage, 

September 2011. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 12 

Figure 9. Dolly Varden distribution at sampling sites in the Chilkoot River drainage, 

September 2011. …………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13 

Figure 10. Important fish rearing areas identified within the Chilkoot River watershed. 

Orange colored areas identified by Shipley Group and Takshanuk Watershed Council; 

Yellow colored area identified by Takshanuk Watershed Council; white colored areas 

identified by ADF&G. (CO= Coho Salmon; CH= Chum Salmon; PS= Pink Salmon; 

SS= Sockeye Salmon; DV= Dolly Varden) …………………………………………………………………… 15 

3 

ii

INTRODUCTION 

In the summer and fall of 1995 the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) completed a fishery survey of 

the upper Chilkoot Valley for Haines Light and Power Company, Inc. in anticipation of licensing and developing 

the Connelly Lake Hydro project. A report was completed entitled “Fish and fish habitat surveys conducted in 

the upper Chilkoot Valley near Haines Alaska, during 1995 (Randy Ericksen, Mike Gaede, and Eric Holle, 

ADF&G, Division of Sport Fish). The study was completed to gather fishery data related to the potential 

development of the Connelly Lake Hydro project. However, there has been no additional fisheries fieldwork 

done in the upper drainage since this original report in 1995. The ADF&G report substantiated that Connelly 

Lake is fishless, and that Hydro Creek (outlet stream from Connelly Lake) also does not support fish. A fish 

barrier exists just upstream of the confluence of this creek with the Chilkoot River. Of the remaining 11 

streams and water bodies sampled, nine contained fish, eight contained juvenile fish, and two appeared to be 

fishless. However, in the intervening 15 years the drainage has changed in character due to vegetation 

regrowth after logging and beaver activity on the river valley floor, which has also had an effect on local 

fisheries. There is anecdotal information that some streams have changed course, and there has been a 

substantial increase in beaver activity altering stream courses and creating backwater ponded areas. It is likely 

that there is substantially more rearing habitat in the lower Chilkoot River valley now than when the original 

fishery survey was conducted in 1995. The area as it appears today is shown in figure 1. The logging road is 

no longer visible from the air. A homestead that existed near Reeves Creek has completely collapsed and is no 

longer occupied. Beaver dams have flooded sections of the logging road and inundated several of the bridges. 

In other sections beaver dams have redirected stream flows across the river valley floor. And near the 

Powerhouse site a major side channel has developed on the west side of the river that extends at least a ½ 

mile through the woods before reentering the main channel of the Chilkoot River. Bear Creek now empties 

into this side channel of the Chilkoot River. 

‐ 1 ‐

B 

Powerhouse 

A 

Chilkoot Lake 

C 

Power 

Creek 

Figure 1. A. View from head of Chilkoot Lake up the Chilkoot River drainage; B. View down the Chilkoot River 

drainage towards Chilkoot Lake; and C. View of the Powerhouse site and Power Creek. 

Alaska Power & Telephone Company (AP&T) is currently considering development of the Connelly Lake Hydro 

project to provide additional renewable energy to the City of Haines. Planned project features are shown in 

Figure 2. Part of their efforts to evaluate the project includes updating information on the fisheries of the 

upper Chilkoot Valley with the exception of Connelly Lake and Hydro Creek which were documented to be 

fishless in the original survey work. Shipley initiated a fisheries study in the fall of 2011 to repeat to the extent 

practical the fisheries survey conducted in 1995, as well as to sample other streams and beaver ponds that 

may not have been present in 1995, but would be potentially valuable fisheries habitat today. The objectives 

of the fishery studies were to: 

Update the fisheries study results originally conducted by ADF&G in 1995; 

Extend that fisheries database to cover both spring and fall timeframes; 

 

Collect data on rearing habitat not surveyed in 1995, and new rearing habitat that may have 

developed in the drainage since the 1995 survey; 

‐ 2 ‐

Assess the potential of adult salmon spawning within the lower 4 miles of the Chilkoot River; 

and 

Establish an energy profile for potential spawning and overwintering habitat in the Chilkoot 

River. 

The logging road system that was in place in 1995 had degraded substantially since that time and no longer 

provided access to the streams sampled in 1995. Initial field work by Shipley and AP&T staff involved 

reestablishing access along the logging road. A total of 4.2 miles of abandoned logging road from the head of 

Chilkoot Lake to a washed out bridge on a stream on the west side of the Chilkoot River opposite Connelly 

Lake, was cleared of brush so that it was drivable on an ATV (Figure 3). There were three locations along the 

old logging road that may not be capable of supporting ATV traffic. The first was a large beaver dam complex 

that had flooded the old road. However, local residents were able to drive the beaver dam so it is passable 

under certain conditions. Another stream channel was too deep to cross with ATV’s so a bridge was built to 

span this stream crossing near Reeves Creek (see cover photo). A side channel of the Chilkoot River directly 

across from the proposed powerhouse site had grown considerably in size since 1995. This stream channel 

blocks ATV travel to the end of the road under high flow conditions. However, the roadbed was cleared up to 

stream #13 across from Hydro Creek, which is now an easy 20 minute walk after wading across this side 

channel. Following this side channel for approximately 200 yards will bring you to the Chilkoot River across 

from the powerhouse site. 

‐ 3 ‐

Figure 2. Project vicinity, features, and boundary. The red line 

shows the distance cleared along the old logging road in 2011. 

‐ 4 ‐

Connelly Lake 

Powerhouse site 

New Chilkoot River 

side channel 

Power Creek 

Stream gage 

location 

Old logging road 


New Bridge 

Beaver Pond 

Complex 

Figure 3. Approximate locations of major 

features, and the old logging road that was 

cleared of brush during the field survey. 

Glory Hole 

Chilkoot 

Lake 

‐ 5 ‐

The area within the Chilkoot River drainage sampled by ADF&G in 1995 is shown in Figure 4 (Ericksen, et. al. 

1995). They sampled 11 locations in the summer and fall along a distance of 4 miles in the lower drainage 

and found anadromous fish (Coho, Sockeye, Dolly Varden) in nine of the streams. Results from their survey 

have been included in Table 1 (See Discussion section). 

Figure 4. Locations of streams sampled by ADF&G in 1995 in the lower Chilkoot River drainage (Ericksen, et. 

al. 1995). 

‐ 6 ‐

FIELD WORK 

Fish sampling under permit SF2011‐279 was conducted from September 25 through 28, 2011 from the mouth 

of Chilkoot Lake to a point upstream approximately 6 miles above the lake in the Chilkoot River drainage, ¼ 

mile above Hydro Creek (outlet of Connelly Lake). ADF&G personnel also sampled the drainage in the same 

area from approximately September 22 nd through 28 th using electro‐shocking, dip nets and minnow traps. 

ADF&G personnel included Tess Quinn and Matt Kearn from the Douglas ADF&G regional Office. AP&T 

provided helicopter support to them for their concurrent survey work in the Chilkoot River drainage. Shipley 

conducted survey work using small and medium sized minnow traps, baited with betadyne‐treated salmon egg 

skeins, obtained from a hatchery on Prince of Wales Island. Traps were fished overnight at all stations on the 

Chilkoot River and tributaries. Streams flowing into Chilkoot Lake were fished only for 3‐6 hours during the 

day using baited minnow traps. We attempted to locate all of the streams that were sampled in 1995. 

However, we were not sure that Bear Creek was sampled at the same location due to the changes in water 

flows in that area of the drainage. Also stream #13 was not found and may no longer be identifiable due to 

the changed flow regime in this area. All fish captured were identified, measured and released where they 

were captured. In a few cases fish were identified and then released without measurement of length. This 

accounted for approximately 10% of the total catch during the sampling period. Data has been reported in the 

fish permit data report for Fish Resources permit SF2011‐279 (separate attachment). 

RESULTS 

Shipley trapped a total of 67 locations during the field survey; with 61 locations on tributaries or the mainstem 

of the Chilkoot River, and 6 locations within tributaries to Chilkoot Lake (Figure 5). In addition, the ADF&G 

fished at 82 locations within the Chilkoot River and its tributaries (Figure 4). Both Shipley and ADF&G were 

targeting likely habitat for salmonids within the drainage. In addition Shipley was concentrating its efforts on 

sampling previously sampled streams from the ADF&G 1995 survey (Ericksen, et. al. 1995). Of the 143 

combined locations fished by Shipley and ADF&G above Chilkoot Lake no fish were captured at 60 of them 

(42%). Catches at the remaining 83 stations consisted of Coho Salmon, Dolly Varden and three‐spined 

stickleback. 

ADF&G captured a total of 1,847 fish using baited traps, dip nets and electro‐shocking. A total of 1,410 

juvenile Coho salmon were captured, along with 212 juvenile Dolly Varden, and 225 stickleback. Coho salmon 

were captured at 32 locations by ADF&G, with fish ranging in size from 40 to 130 mm. Dolly Varden were 

captured at 30 locations by ADF&G, with fish ranging in size from 40 – 180 mm. Coho salmon catch numbers 

per location ranged from 1 to 180, with an average catch rate of 44 fish per location. Dolly Varden catch 

numbers ranged from 1 to 37 per location, with an average catch rate of 7 fish per location. 

In contrast, Shipley, using only baited minnow traps, captured a total of 510 fish. A total of 362 Coho Salmon 

(71%), 143 Dolly Varden (28%) and 5 three‐spine Stickleback (1%) were captured at 38 locations. The average 

catch rate for Coho salmon was 13 fish, but ranged from a low of 1 to a high of 86 fish per trap. Coho Salmon 

ranged from 40 to 140 mm in total length, with the average size being 86.4 mm. The average catch rate for 

‐ 7 ‐

Dolly Varden was 3 fish, but ranged from 1 to a high of 24 fish per trap. Dolly Varden ranged in size from 70 to 

203 mm total length, with the average size being 111 mm. 

Connelly Lake 


Chilkoot 

Lake 

Figure 5. Locations sampled by ADF&G and Shipley Group between September 22 nd and 29 th , 2011. 

‐ 8 ‐

The distribution of fish captured by ADF&G and Shipley in the fall 2011 survey within the Chilkoot drainage is 

shown in Figures 6 and 7. Both Coho Salmon and Dolly Varden show a similar distribution within the lower 

drainage. 

Chilkoot 

Lake 

Figure 6. Distribution of fish species captured in Chilkoot Lake in September 2011. 

‐ 9 ‐

Connelly Lake 


Figure 7. Distribution of fish species captured in the lower Chilkoot River in September 2011. 

‐ 10 ‐

Both species occur within specific locations, or high value habitat, within the lower drainage. These areas are 

shown in Figures 8 and 9 for Coho Salmon and Dolly Varden, respectively. The flooded lake wetlands adjacent 

to the Glory Hole area were particularly important for juvenile Coho Salmon. 

‐ 11 ‐

Connelly Lake 


Figure 8. Coho Salmon distribution at sampling sites in the Chilkoot River drainage, September 2011. 

‐ 12 ‐

Connelly Lake 


Figure 9. Dolly Varden distribution at sampling sites in the Chilkoot River drainage, September 2011. 

‐ 13 ‐

The mainstem of the Chilkoot river yielded a total catch of 66 fish of which 18 (27%) were Coho salmon, while 

the remaining 48 fish (73%) were Dolly Varden. The total catch in tributaries to the Chilkoot River was 444 

fish, with Reeves Creek yielding 227 (51%) of the total catch. Coho salmon accounted for 77% of the catch in 

tributary streams, with Dolly Varden accounting for 21%. Stickleback accounted for 1% of the catch. The 

percentage ratio of Dolly Varden to Coho salmon was similar throughout all of the tributaries to the Chilkoot 

River. 

Only one Dolly Varden was caught in the Chilkoot Lake tributary sampling effort. However, the sampling effort 

was limited to only 3‐6 hours during daylight hours. 

DISCUSSION 

A total of eight days were spent sampling fish habitat within the lower Chilkoot River drainage by ADF&G and 

Shipley field teams. This effort resulted in the capture of 2,357 fish, of which 75% were Coho Salmon, 15% 

were Dolly Varden, and 10% were three‐spined Sticklebacks. In addition, adult Coho and Sockeye salmon were 

observed within the Chilkoot River, the Glory Hole area and the lower reaches of Reeves Creek. Carcasses 

were rarely seen in the drainage possibly due to the number of bears moving throughout the drainage. Bears 

were seen on numerous occasions, as well as destroying several traps that had been set overnight in the Glory 

Hole area. Bear tracks and bear sign was frequently encountered throughout the lower watershed. 

The sampling effort by ADF&G identified a total of seven areas of important fish habitat between Chilkoot 

Lake and Hydro Creek at Connelly Lake (Figure 9). Two of these sites were discovered during the September 

survey by the ADF&G field crew (Sites A and B, Figure 9). In addition Takshanuk Watershed Council has 

identified an area of important fish habitat (Site C, Figure 9) that was under‐sampled in our September field 

effort. Juvenile Coho Salmon and Dolly Varden were present at all of the important fish habitat areas. 

Takshanuk Watershed Council also reported juvenile Sockeye Salmon present at Site C, Reeves Creek, and the 

new Chilkoot River side slough, as well as Sockeye Salmon spawning at sites further upstream beyond our 

survey area. The Takshanuk Watershed Council also recorded the presence of Chum and Pink Salmon at the 

Glory Hole area and Pink Salmon at the Beaver Pond complex near Chilkoot Lake. These two species appear 

to be absent from important habitat sites further up river. Both ADF&G and Shipley sampled within the 

mainstem and side channels of the Chilkoot River. Our results show that both Dolly Varden and Coho Salmon 

are found within this habitat type wherever it was sampled. 

Shipley attempted to find and trap at all of the locations that had been surveyed in 1995 by ADF&G (Ericksen, 

et. al. 1995). We were able to relocate eight of the eleven sites. Stream number 13 was not found. Both Bear 

Creek and the stream above # 13 were not specifically identified with respect to the sampling locations used in 

1995, but our sampling was believed to be close to the original sites. Stream flows had changed in these 

areas, due to the development of a major side slough on the Chilkoot River, sufficiently that the original sites 

are no longer recognizable. Our sampling results for these locations are summarized in Table 1, along with the 

original results obtained by ADF&G in 1995. In general our results were similar to their original findings. 

‐ 14 ‐

New Chilkoot 

River side slough 

– CO, DV, SS 

Power Creek – CO, DV 


Site C – CO, DV, SS 

Site A – CO, DV 

Reeves Creek 

and meadow ‐ 

CO, DV, SS 

Site B – CO, DV 

Beaver Pond Complex – 

CO, PS, SS, DV 

Glory Hole/Marsh Complex – 

CO, CH, PS, SS, DV 

Figure 10. Important fish rearing areas identified within the Chilkoot River watershed. Orange colored areas 

identified by Shipley Group and Takshanuk Watershed Council; Yellow colored area identified by Takshanuk 

Watershed Council; white colored areas identified by ADF&G. (CO= Coho Salmon; CH= Chum Salmon; PS= 

Pink Salmon; SS= Sockeye Salmon; DV= Dolly Varden) 

‐ 15 ‐

However, we did not catch Coho Salmon in the Glory Hole. But ADF&G sampling in the flooded wetlands 

adjacent to the Glory Hole captured large numbers of juvenile Coho Salmon. This is obviously an important 

rearing area for this species. Also notable is the difference in catch within Reeves Creek. This result was due 

to a more extensive sampling effort conducted by Shipley throughout this stream than was conducted by 

ADF&G in 1995. 

Table 1. Comparison of fish sampling results from 2011 with the original data from ADF&G in 1995. 

ADFG 1995 

stream 

designation 

# 10 – Glory 

Hole outlet 

(# 2009) 

Tributary to 

outlet 

(# 2009) 

Glory Hole 

(#2009) 

# 11 

(# 2008) 

Stream 

below # 12 

(#2011) 

#12 Reeves 

Creek 

(#2011) 

Bear Creek 

(#2013) 

Species/life 

stages 

present 

1995 

Coho – R 

DV‐R 

Stickleback 

Adult fish 

count 1995 

Juvenile 

fish count 

1995 

1 stickleback 181 Coho 

10 DV 

R = rearing; DV = Dolly Varden; Coho = Coho salmon 

‐ 16 ‐ 

Species/life 

stages 

present 

2011 

Adult fish 

count 2011 

Juvenile 

fish count 

2011 

No fish 

caught 

DV‐R 1 DV No fish 

caught 

Coho – R 

DV – R 

Sockeye ‐ 

Spawning 

Coho – R 

DV ‐ R 

Coho – R 

DV ‐ R 

Coho – R 

DV – R 

Sockeye ‐ 

spawning 

171 64 Coho 

2 DV 

12 Coho 

12 DV 

6 Coho 

3 DV 

151 16 Coho 

9 DV 

Sockeye ‐ 

Spawning 

Coho – R 

DV ‐ R 

Coho – R 

Coho – R 

DV – R 

stickleback 

Coho – R 

DV – R 

(location 

changed) 

# 13 (Not found) 

Stream 

above #13 

#14 end of 

road 


Coho –R 

DV ‐ R 

15 Coho 

3 DV 

Coho – R 

DV – R 

(Location 

changed) 

151 No fish 

caught 

5 

Stickleback 

58 Coho 

15 DV 

9 Coho 

185 Coho 

24 DV 

14 Coho 

5 DV 

4 Coho 

28 DV 

adult 1 DV ‐ R 6 DV 

Coho – R 

DV ‐ R 

40 Coho 

44 DV 

Coho – R 

DV ‐ R 

25 Coho 

25 DV

REFERENCES 

Ericksen, R, M. Gaede, and E. Holle. 1995. Fish and fish habitat surveys conducted in the upper Chilkoot Valley 

near Haines, Alaska, during 1995. Alaska Department of fish and Game, Division of Sport Fish. 37 pp. 

‐ 17 ‐

APPENDIX I 

FIELD SURVEY PHOTOGRAPHS 

Brush clearing along the old logging road. 

18

Sockeye Salmon along banks of the Chilkoot River. 

Sockeye Salmon carcass on banks of the Chilkoot River. 

19

Juvenile Dolly Varden captured in Reeves Creek. 

Juvenile Coho /salmon from Reeves Creek. 

20

Glory Hole 

21

Beaver pond complex 

Site of 

helipad #1 

Aerial view of beaver pond complex. 

Backside of beaver pond complex. 

22


Backside of beaver pond complex looking towards Chilkoot River. 

Bridge on the old logging road at outlet of the beaver pond complex. 

23


Downstream view of the outlet from the beaver pond complex. 

Flooded wetlands below the beaver pond complex. 

24

Flooded road bed along old logging road 

25

Reeves Creek 

Lower end of Reeves Creek. 

Reeves Creek flowing through the meadow area. 

26

Reeves Creek 

Small side channel of Reeves Creek flowing through the meadow. 

Upper end of Reeves Creek in the woods. 

27


Mouth of Power Creek 

Levelogger location just upstream of the mouth of Power Creek. 

28


Power Creek at the end of the brushed trail from the powerhouse site. 

29

New Chilkoot River side slough 

Upstream view of the entrance to the new Chilkoot River side slough directly across from Helipad #4. 

Downstream view of the new Chilkoot River side slough 

30


Further downstream along the new side slough. 

a). View of New Chilkoot River side slough from north bank at end of logging road. 

31


View of New Chilkoot River side slough from north bank slightly upstream of view shown in [a)]. 

Bridge over new Chilkoot River side slough thought to be remnants of Bear Creek Location. 

32

Helipads 

# 5 

# 4 

# 3 

Chilkoot 

River 

# 2 

Homestead 

# 1 

#1 – ¼ mile north of Glory Hole on old logging road 

Homestead – on old logging road at abandoned homestead 

#2 – Near Reeves Creek at lower end of meadow (log platform at site) 

#3 – At bend on Chilkoot River (cleared sandy bank) 

#4 – On tip of island at powerhouse site (trail cleared to powerhouse site; rope crossing in place) 

# 5 – On creek at end of road, above forks and old bridge crossing 

33

Helipads 

Helipad #1 on road north of Glory Hole. 

Helipad #2 at edge of meadow on Reeves Creek. 

34

Helipads 

Helipad #2 log platform 

Homestead helipad next to road. 

35

Helipads 

Helipad #3 on west bank of Chilkoot River. 

Helipad #4 on Chilkoot River island adjacent to powerhouse site. 

36

Helipads 

Helipad #5 above fork in creek at end of road above old bridge. 

Old bridge crossing on logging road immediately below Helipad # 5. 

37

Appendix II 

Fisheries data for the period September 20 to October 1, 2011 from the Chilkoot River drainage 

Alaska Department of Fish & Game survey results 

waypoint Latitude Longitude 

stickle 

back 

juvenile 

coho 

salmon 

Juvenile 

dolly 

Varden 

adult 

pink 

salmon 

47 59.37451182 ‐135.6381059 1 13 0 

48 59.37295211 ‐135.6364143 81 38 0 

49 59.37297139 ‐135.6363037 0 0 

50 59.37308019 ‐135.636085 31 109 3 

51 59.37370766 ‐135.6355716 40 180 0 

56 59.37552117 ‐135.634129 x spawn 

60 59.37595912 ‐135.6373038 0 2 

63 59.37748563 ‐135.6399225 13 4 

64 59.37793851 ‐135.6407851 16 2 

69 59.37288531 ‐135.6363185 0 0 

70 59.37310835 ‐135.6368808 0 0 

71 59.37311766 ‐135.6369581 38 14 

72 59.37327683 ‐135.637242 9 0 

73 59.37338931 ‐135.6374443 0 0 

38 

adult 

coho 

salmon 

adult 

sockeye 

salmon 

unknown 

fish 

2 59.41898083 ‐135.6936773 0 0 

3 59.42051648 ‐135.6877325 0 0 

5 59.39402162 ‐135.6557401 0 1 

7 59.39427056 ‐135.6568893 0 0 

8 59.39419638 ‐135.6559164 7 1 

9 59.39318343 ‐135.6548949 7 1 

10 59.39339113 ‐135.6548141 0 5 

11 59.39348233 ‐135.6549221 5 5 

12 59.39363555 ‐135.6549362 5 5 

13 59.39369104 ‐135.6547919 0 5 

14 59.39384661 ‐135.654824 0 25 

15 59.39404098 ‐135.6550589 1 36 

16 59.39429169 ‐135.6549809 1 11 

17 59.39438825 ‐135.655069 0 24 

18 59.39456762 ‐135.6553021 0 24 

32 59.39639554 ‐135.6567504 0 1 

33 59.39655279 ‐135.6565655 0 1 

43 59.3975494 ‐135.6542715 1 

44 59.39760975 ‐135.6543791 0 8 

45 59.39761125 ‐135.6545251 0 0 

46 59.37579785 ‐135.6383253 0 0 

30+ 

spawn

74 59.37352133 ‐135.6378164 x spawn 

75 59.37373389 ‐135.6381001 x spawn 

76 59.37393917 ‐135.6379277 47 37 

78 59.37429884 ‐135.6381454 25 46 18 x spawn 

79 59.37431342 ‐135.6386659 1 9 5 

80 59.37445608 ‐135.6389782 1 14 3 

81 59.37458399 ‐135.6379589 1 12 3 

82 59.37441719 ‐135.6382482 14 0 

83 59.37434225 ‐135.6375365 66 9 0 

84 59.37400371 ‐135.637105 23 3 0 

85 59.37396456 ‐135.6368898 2 72 7 

91 59.3715572 ‐135.6201199 0 0 

92 59.37283142 ‐135.617827 0 0 

93 59.37297667 ‐135.6177018 0 0 

98 59.38846903 ‐135.6400023 77 2 

99 59.38880028 ‐135.6404562 1 97 6 

100 59.38940261 ‐135.641545 140 0 

102 59.38973763 ‐135.6422581 164 5 

103 59.39001155 ‐135.6428926 27 0 

105 59.39003259 ‐135.6434072 6 0 

106 59.38977552 ‐135.6455083 0 0 

107 59.38918434 ‐135.6462513 11 0 

108 59.38997199 ‐135.6459785 0 0 

110 59.3897673 ‐135.6488432 0 0 

111 59.38988322 ‐135.6462974 1 0 

113 59.39031313 ‐135.6463566 0 0 

114 59.39063181 ‐135.6470818 0 0 

116 59.39064573 ‐135.6474802 0 0 

119 59.39101914 ‐135.6471655 0 0 

120 59.39138367 ‐135.6478792 0 0 

122 59.39140563 ‐135.6483637 0 0 

124 59.39097614 ‐135.648552 0 0 

125 59.39045252 ‐135.6482757 0 0 

126 59.3915187 ‐135.6487986 0 0 

128 59.39190209 ‐135.6492339 0 0 

129 59.39296558 ‐135.6500133 0 0 

130 59.3930163 ‐135.6510271 0 0 

131 59.39341427 ‐135.6499158 0 0 

140 59.38881638 ‐135.6496635 63 3 

143 59.38865905 ‐135.6491699 0 0 

144 59.38863566 ‐135.6496542 0 0 

145 59.388895 ‐135.6498252 18 1 

147 59.38891788 ‐135.651126 32 3 

39

148 59.38892995 ‐135.6527002 78 3 

149 59.3890447 ‐135.6532264 0 0 

153 59.38904772 ‐135.6560167 1 0 

161 59.38993863 ‐135.653473 8 spawn 

Shipley Group survey results 

waypoint Latitude Longitude 

1 59.413207 ‐135.685936 

stickle 

back 

juvenile 

coho 

salmon 

40 

Juvenile 

dolly 

Varden 

adult 

pink 

salmon 

adult 

coho 

salmon 

adult 

sockeye 

salmon 

unidentifi 

ed fish 

fry 

observed 

2 59.392989 ‐135.656916 X X 

164 59.374583 ‐135.637941 150+ 1 carcass 

3 59.375785 ‐135.638193 0 0 

166 59.376285 ‐135.638853 0 0 

169 59.378722 ‐135.641785 0 0 

fry 

observed 

4 59.375793 ‐135.638457 0 0 

178 59.376074 ‐135.637864 0 0 

179 59.376366 ‐135.638731 0 0 

180 59.376321 ‐135.638871 0 0 

7 59.390361 ‐135.658027 0 0 

24 59.418605 ‐135.677164 0 0 

19 59.375219 ‐135.612031 0 0 

229 59.375405 ‐135.612668 0 0 

230 59.375618 ‐135.613112 0 0 

231 59.365897 ‐135.62534 0 0 1 carcass 

232 59.364708 ‐135.624227 0 0 

234 59.364034 ‐135.624268 0 0 

235 59.359754 ‐135.618015 0 0 

236 59.359948 ‐135.618652 0 0 

239 59.349584 ‐135.607437 0 0 

240 59.350004 ‐135.607744 0 0 

243 59.336737 ‐135.590808 0 0 

244 59.331688 ‐135.58724 0 0 

246 59.331642 ‐135.587661 0 0 

15 59.418567 ‐135.672318 0 0 

16 59.418605 ‐135.677164 

23 59.337145 ‐135.589971 0 0 

20 59.404245 ‐135.675416 0 0 

5a 59.377541 ‐135.640918 3 0 

25 59.405017 ‐135.677298 0 0 

5b 59.37754 ‐135.64092 10 0 

182 59.37816 ‐135.64241 15 0

187 59.37769 ‐135.63957 33 6 

188 59.37785 ‐135.6405 12 8 

6 59.378 ‐135.64054 13 1 

190 59.37883 ‐135.64177 2 0 

191 59.3778 ‐135.64205 12 0 

192 59.38915 ‐135.65519 9 0 

193 59.38921 ‐135.65616 5 3 0 

194 59.39017 ‐135.65831 5 0 

195 59.38982 ‐135.65471 37 0 

196 59.39001 ‐135.65519 12 0 

198 59.39018 ‐135.65841 5 0 

200 59.3895 ‐135.66014 62 24 

201 59.39033 ‐135.65929 44 0 

202 59.39017 ‐135.66663 8 0 

203 59.38891 ‐135.66397 21 0 

204 59.3821 ‐135.64424 9 3 

205 59.38176 ‐135.64427 5 2 

8 59.41439 ‐135.68445 8 13 

9 59.41211 ‐135.68297 1 2 

10 59.41266 ‐135.68318 4 0 

11 59.41265 ‐135.68228 4 7 

12 59.41322 ‐135.68224 9 12 

13 59.41301 ‐135.68236 8 6 

14 59.41558 ‐135.68352 2 1 

219 59.41765 ‐135.68715 2 8 

220 59.41332 ‐135.68719 2 16 

221 59.41242 ‐135.68761 0 4 

222 59.41294 ‐135.68554 1 2 

224 59.40449 ‐135.67452 1 2 

17 59.41878 ‐135.6944 0 2 

18 59.41905 ‐135.69324 0 4 

242 59.33715 ‐135.58997 0 1 

21 59.40478 ‐135.67721 3 17 

22 59.40441 ‐135.67553 11 3 

41

APPENDIX D 

2012 SEISMIC REFRACTION SURVEY 

1. LOCATIONS OF CHARGES 

2. MATHMATICS FOR SEISMIC REFRACTION 

2011 GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE STUDY 

(PLUS THE 1990 HL&P SURVEY)

ATTACHMENT A 

SEISMIC REFRACTION METHODOLOGY 

Overview 

The seismic refraction method is used to evaluate numerous subsurfrce conditions; including d"pth to and strargth 

(rippability) ofrock, deeth to water, and general subsurface stratigraphy. 

The seismic refraction method uses an induced shock wave. As the shock wave propagates through the earttL it is affected 

by the materials through urtrich it passes. Geophones placod on the groturd surhce record the grund motiur caused by 

the resultant wave. A seismograph measures the time required for the raultant wave to arrive at each geophore. These 

geophones are located at selected distances from the wave sour@. Analysis ofthe data (travel times and distances) 

provides seismic velocities of zubsurfrce material and depths to significant velocity interfices. 

Geologic conditions yielding higher seismic velocities include increased amounts ofwater, clay, cobbles, and rock 

fragnents, greater cornpaction of overburden materials, and greater competency of rock. Several frctas can affect the 

effectiveness ofthe seismic mdhod including the proximity ofcultural interferences (zuch as powerlines and traffic noise), 

srfrce conditions (such as loose soil), the size and depth ofthe target, and the seismic wave velocrty contrast between 

stratigraphic units. Seismic velocities must increase with depth for a reliable interpretation ofthe data. 

Calculations 

The description ofthe favel of seismic retaction waves through the earth uses the same equation that describes the 

refraction of light: Snell's Law. The following is a brief summary ofthe basic theory for a simple twolayer geologic 

model as discussed by Redpath (Redpath, 1973). 

Snell's Law is stated as: 

SINa :V, 

SINQ V z 

and at the critical angle of incidence lor a refracted 

seismic wave (9:90o), it becunes: 

SIl,{a -Y: 

Vz 

o 

.E 

t-- 

Intercept t ime , 

T. 

I 

Sfope :l/Y 

I 

Slope =l/Yz 

Criticol distonce, X 

Dirtonce X 

where V1 and Vz are the seismic wave velocities 

for the upper and lower layers, respectively. 

The seismic refraction method measures the amount of 

time it takes the seismic en€rS/ to travel from the 

energy sour@ to the geophones placed along the ground 

surhce. The arrival time for the seismic wave at each 

geophone is plotted corresponding to the distance ofthe 

geophone from the energy source, creating a time 

distance gaph (Figure l). 

Figure l:l'wolayer geologic model and associated 

timedistance 

t973 

The time required for the energy to reach the geophones 

near the source (direct wave arrivals) is based only on the seismic velocity of the enerry traveling though the upper (low 

velocity) layer. At a certain distance lrom the sourre, called the critical distance, the first seismic waves to reach the

geophones will be those that have refracted frorn a deeper, higher velocity layer. Although these waves have traveled a 

greater distance than the direct waves, they have kaveled at a grater velocity over most of their pattL and thus arrive 

befoe the slower direct arrivals to the geophones frrttrer 

frun the source. Successively deeper layers with higher 

velocities affect dretime"distance graph in a similar 

Using the timedistane gaph, the velocities ofthe 

layers can be calqrlated (basd on the slope ofthe 

arival times), and dre layer thicknesses can be 

calculated using the intercept times. The equation used 

in the time-intercept method to deennine thiclcresses 

is: 

Zt= 

ffi* 

TrVt 

SHOT DEPTH 

z 

Figure 2 is a skech of a multiple layer case and the 

ing time distance curye showing the intercept 

times. 

Fu more cunplex geologic models, as is usualty 

observed, additionl en€rgy source locations are 

required at both ends ofa seisrnic line as was done for 

this survey. The layer velocities are calculated using the 

data frwr all of the time'distance curv€s (delay-time 

method). 

Limitations 

Two gpes ofgeologic conditions can cause a hidden zorrc 

problem. One ffi ofhidden zure is alzyer with a lower 

velocitythan the layer above it. Energy approaching the 

layer at the criticat angle will pass through the layer, and 

will not be refracted back to the surfrce until it encounters a deeper layer with a higher velocity, so no first arrivals are 

observed from the low-velocity layer. The presence ofan urknown low-velocity layer will cause the calculated depths to 

be greter than the actual depths. 

The ottrer fpe of hidden zone is a layer with a gr.errter- velocity than the layer above it, but one that is too thin and/or does 

nd have a large enough velocity contrast. The effect of a thin layer will cause the calculated depths to be shatlower than 

the acfiral depths. 

In areas with hidden zones, the amurnt oferru can be determined basd on direct observations (zuch as test pits u 

boreholes), and can be cornpensated for over the rest ofthe seismic lines. 

Refqences 

Redpath, Bruce B. (1973). "seismic Refraction Exploration for Engineering Site Investigations." Tech. Report E-73-4, 

I,j.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station Explosive Excavation Research Laboratory, Livermore, CA

2011 GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE STUDY

8410 154 th Avenue NE 

Redmond, Washington 98052 

425.861-6000 

April 18, 2012 

Alaska Power & Telephone Company 

P.O. Box 3222 

193 Otto Street 

Port Townsend, Washington 98368 

Attention: Larry Coupe, Project Engineer 

Subject: Proposed Connolly Lake Hydroelectric Project 

Chilkoot River Basin 

Haines, Alaska 

File No. 18436-007-00 

INTRODUCTION 

This report summarizes the results of our preliminary engineering geologic evaluation of the proposed 

Connolly Lake Hydroelectric project near Lutak, in the Haines Borough of Alaska. Our understanding of 

the project is based on conversations with, and material provided to us by Larry Coupe from 

mid-September 2011 through to early December 2011. We understand that Alaska Power and 

Telephone Company (AP&T) is evaluating the feasibility of the Connolly Lake Hydroelectric project in 

comparison with another possible hydroelectric project. The selected hydropower project will replace the 

power presently supplied to Haines by a transmission line from Skagway. The new power generating 

facility would also alleviate the need to use an existing diesel-powered generation plant located within the 

town limits of Haines during power outages. 

Craig Erdman of GeoEngineers visited the Connolly Lake site on September 27, 2011, along with 

Larry Coupe (AP&T) and other scientists. The purpose of the site visit was to observe the surface 

conditions of the project area and to assess the potential feasibility of constructing a new hydroelectric 

facility at the site. 

Connolly Lake site is located at approximate Elevation 2,280 feet at the crest of the east valley wall of the 

Chilkoot River. The project would include construction of a rock-fill dam with an upstream membrane 

along the west side of the lake, ultimately increasing the pool to maximum Elevation 2,340 feet 

(see Figures 1 and 2). As presently proposed, flow from the pool would be routed through an unlined rock 

penstock to a power plant located along a slightly elevated terrace adjacent to the Chilkoot River 

(see Figure 3). The project would have a hydraulic head of approximately 2,200 feet.

Alaska Power & Telephone | April 18, 2012 Page 2 

REGIONAL GEOLOGY 

A number of geologic maps, reports and documents were reviewed to understand the local geology. 

These documents are listed in the bibliography section. The bedrock geology of the region is mapped in 

greatest detail by Dusel-Bacon et al. (1996). March (1982) provides photointerpretive mapping of the 

surficial geology of the project area and vicinity. A summary of the engineering geology of the 

Haines, Alaska area is provided by Yehle and Lemke (1972). 

According to Dusel-Bacon et al. (1996), the Connolly Lake area is underlain by igneous intrusive bedrock 

consisting of late Cretaceous to early Tertiary granitic rocks. Gehrels and Berg (1992) describe the rocks 

as tonalite, though others have referred to similar rocks as quartz diorite or granodiorite (Barker, 1952; 

Beikman, 1975). Also mapped in the area by Dusel-Bacon and others are metamorphic rocks mapped as 

migmatites, a strongly foliated (a rock with minerals aligned in the same direction) metamorphic rock. 

Surficial geology of the area by March (1982) indicates that most of the area is mapped as bedrock, with 

colluvium (loose soil and rock transported down slope by gravity) mapped along the steep rock bluffs 

around Connolly Lake and along a portion of the west-facing slopes of the Chilkoot River, west of 

Connolly Lake. March also maps deltaic deposits on the east side of Connolly Lake at the mouth of the 

stream that flows into the lake. The west side of the Chilkoot River valley bottom and slope are mapped 

as covered by glacial till, inactive alluvial deposits and colluvial fan deposits. 

The engineering geologic study (Yehle and Lemke, 1972) does not appear to have extended to 

Connolly Lake, though a lineament (landscape scale linear feature on the ground surface) was mapped 

along the west side of the Chilkoot River valley. This lineament is discussed further below. 

SEISMICITY 

The site is located in an area that is considered seismically active. According to Plafker et al. (1993), the 

Denali fault is mapped to the west trending north along the Chilkat River valley. The Denali fault is 

mapped as connecting with the Chatham Strait fault in the Lynn Canal south-southeast of Haines, Alaska. 

At that time, the Denali and Chatham Strait faults were considered to be “suspicious” with the possibility 

of displacement in the Neogene (within approximately the last 24 million years). This appears to be 

supported by recent seismicity along the Denali fault trace from 1982 and 1987 reported by Rogers and 

Horner (1991) and 2002 earthquake activity along the Denali fault to the north. 

As referenced in the Regional Geology section, Yehle and Lemke (1972) identified a lineament that was 

inferred to be a potential fault that trends up the west side of the Chilkoot River valley. Neither Plafker 

et al. (1993), Rogers and Horner (1991) or Wesson et al. (2007) indicate a fault in the Chilkoot River 

valley, but the possibility remains that the Chilkoot lineament is seismically active. 

Wesson et al. (2007) consider the Chatham Strait – Denali fault system to be active. They provide an 

update to ground motions in Alaska and anticipate peak ground accelerations with a 2 percent probability 

of exceedance in 50 years of greater than about 0.4 to 0.6 g (estimated from a small scale map). 

Peak ground accelerations having a 10 percent chance of exceedance in 50 years are greater than about 

0.14 to 0.17 g. 

File No. 18436-007-00


PREVIOUS STUDIES 

At least three separate geotechnical reports were completed in the early to mid-1990s for the Haines 

Light & Power Company in support of developing a hydroelectric power project using Connolly Lake. 

The dam axis for the project was being developed with a dam axis proposed in the early 1990s was 

located just west of the currently proposed dam. These reports include: 

R&M Engineering Inc., 1993, “Haines Hydro Project, Reconnaissance Level Geotechnical Report,” 

prepared for Haines Light & Power. R&M Project No. 931758. 

R&M Engineering Inc., 1994, “Upper Chilkoot Power Project, Preliminary Geotechnical 

Reconnaissance,” prepared for Haines Light & Power. R&M Project No. 941172. 

R&M Engineering Inc., 1995, “1995 Haines Light & Power Geotechnical Investigation, Connolly 

Lake Alternative Dam Site & Drawdown Trench,” prepared for Haines Light & Power. R&M Project 

No. 951124. 

The 1993 report summarizes the results of three site reconnaissance visits to observe surface and 

shallow subsurface (less than 3 feet below the ground surface) conditions along the (previously) proposed 

dam axis, the proposed overland penstock alignment, two options for siting the power plant, and to 

identify potential borrow areas. Hand tools were used to evaluate the near surface soil conditions. 

The report copy we were provided included only Sheet 1 of 5 that showed the topographic map for the 

lake area with a plan view of the proposed dam. The results of the first visit to look at the downslope 

portion of the approximate alignment for the southerly penstock option was summarized in a short letter, 

dated August 16, 1993, and attached to the report. A reconnaissance of the southerly alternative for the 

powerhouse was completed during the second visit. A reconnaissance of the dam, the delta at the inlet 

of Connolly Lake for a borrow source, and the northerly powerhouse alternative were also completed. 

The ground surface upslope from the Chilkoot River along the southerly penstock alignment was 

described as covered with boulders. Bedrock is described as diorite with a medium to coarse texture. 

Where observed, the soil horizon is described as being less than 6 inches thick and composed of organic 

rich sand and gravel. The boulders were “separate” (we infer they mean “isolated”) and up to 20 feet in 

diameter from approximate Elevation 250 feet to approximate Elevation 750 feet. From approximate 

Elevation 250 feet to approximate Elevation 1,000 feet, the boulders were described as being stacked 

2 to 3 boulders high with boulders up to 10 feet in diameter. 

Between approximate Elevation 1,000 feet and approximate Elevation 1,600 feet, there were reported to 

be about four cliffs up to 150 feet high with boulder fields at the toe of the cliffs and a ground surface 

inclined at gradients of 30 to 40 percent. A muskeg was present at approximate Elevation 1,600 feet, 

with a steeply inclined rock slope upslope to the east. 

Jointing was reported in the rock with spacing of 10 to 20 feet. In the upper rock slope, the jointing is 

reported to strike N20°–30°W and dip 70° to 80°SW. 

File No. 18436-007-00


Geologic conditions along the previously proposed dam axis were described as consisting of diorite 

bedrock at each proposed abutment. Overburden was reported as consisting of boulders, peat and sand 

up to 36 inches deep between the abutments. High areas were inferred to be bedrock “knobs” with a 

thin (10 to 18 inches) soil layer consisting of peat and sand. 

The inlet delta was described as being composed of rounded to subrounded well graded gravel with fine 

to coarse sand. The material was reported as a good concrete aggregate source. 

Both powerhouse sites were described as being on an “inactive floodplain terrace” that abuts a steeply 

sloping surface composed of diorite bedrock. The terrace deposits observed in hand-dug holes were 

reported to consist of clean sand. Cobbles and gravelly layers were encountered below the upper sand 

horizons or observed in the river bank. 

In the 1994 and 1995 studies, a total of nine borings were completed in the vicinity of the dam and 

intake structure. Two hand-dug test pits were excavated in 1994 to a maximum depth of 7 feet. 

Eight shallow hand holes were completed in 1995 to maximum depths of 36 inches below the ground 

surface. 

The four borings completed in 1994 (CD-1, CD-2, CD-3A and CD-3B) were completed in material 

described as diorite bedrock to a maximum depth of 15 feet below the ground surface. Glacial deposits 

encountered in the explorations ranged from less than 1 to approximately 9 feet thick before terminating 

at the bedrock surface. Two excavated test pits were completed on the right bank abutment to a 

maximum depth of 3.5 feet. Glacial deposits consisting of silty sand, gravel, cobbles and boulders were 

encountered before reaching practical refusal and without encountering bedrock (A-Pit and B-Pit as 

shown on Figure 2). Bedrock was described as diorite. 

Five borings completed in 1995 by R&M Engineering were completed to a maximum of 16 feet below the 

ground surface or the bottom of the lake. Five feet of silty sand was encountered in boring DH-1, 

completed near a deep hole near the outlet of the lake. About 6.5 feet of silty sand, silt or cobbles were 

encountered in DH-2 before encountering bedrock. The boring was advanced a maximum of 4.5 feet into 

bedrock. About 15 feet of soil, including material described as “Glacial Till” or “Sand with Glacial Till,” 

was encountered in boring DH-3. The boring advanced about 1.5 feet into bedrock described as diorite. 

In boring DH-4, about 4.6 feet of sandy silt was encountered overlying about 1.6 feet of “Glacial Till” 

before terminating on bedrock. There was 1 foot of organic soil overlying bedrock encountered in DH-5. 

The boring was advanced 1.5 feet into bedrock. 

SITE RECONNAISSANCE 

General 

A site reconnaissance was completed by GeoEngineers on September 27, 2011. The weather was sunny 

with temperatures ranging from the low 40s to upper 50s (F). Travel to the site was accomplished by 

helicopter, which allowed us to complete an aerial reconnaissance of the lake perimeter, the slope 

between the powerhouse and the dam site and provided access to the dam and powerhouse sites. 

File No. 18436-007-00


Dam and Lake Area 

The proposed dam site is located on the west side of Connolly Lake. The ground surface is irregular and 

covered by moss, grasses, shrubs and generally widely spaced, low growing conifers. Boulders are 

present across most of the surface, although bedrock crops out along the banks of the outlet stream and 

along portions of the lake at the water level. The rock consists of a coarse-grained igneous rock 

composed of feldspar, quartz, hornblende and mica, consistent with mapped diorite or granodiorite. 

Steep rock bluffs adjacent to the lake typically have significant accumulations of talus consisting primarily 

of boulder-sized rock, consistent with mapping by March (1982). These are primarily located along the 

east and south sides of the lake. 

Powerhouse Site 

The proposed powerhouse site is located on an elevated terrace about 10 feet above the existing channel 

(see Figure 3). The terrace is tree covered with an understory of consisting of ferns, devils club and 

shrubs. The upstream edge of the terrace is presently on the inside bend of the Chilkoot River, but 

towards the downstream end, the main channel is directed into and along the terrace. A high flow 

channel, occupied by water at the time of our visit, was present along the toe of the terrace on the inside 

of the point bar. 

Based on available topographic mapping, aerial imagery and published geologic mapping, the terrace has 

been located along a relatively straight segment to a transition between the inside and the outside of a 

bend. The channel can be characterized as a braided, sediment rich system that is prone to avulsion and 

channel migration. The power house site could potentially be affected by either or both processes and 

mitigation alternatives to address those issues should be evaluated. 

The river has shifted since the late 1940s when the main channel of the river was flowing parallel to the 

left (east) bank where the terrace was located. Based on aerial photographs in the early 1970s (U.S. Air 

Force, 1972), the left bank was fairly linear, though it appears that a bend in the channel was developing 

such that flows would directly impinge on the terrace. 

In the photographs from the 1990s provided to us by AP&T, the edge of the terrace has a curvilinear 

shape in plan view. It appears that perhaps tens of feet of erosion has occurred along the bank, and the 

downstream edge of the terrace is located along the outside of a bend. 

Based on review of historical maps and aerial photographs, it appears that the river has migrated 

significantly and is likely to continue shifting due to the influx of sediment from valley walls and eroded by 

the river from older alluvial and colluvial deposits. The bedrock that crops out in the area will resist 

erosion, but the terrace deposits are susceptible to erosion. The western side of the valley appears to be 

underlain by older alluvium, colluvium and alluvial fan deposits, consistent with general mapping by 

March (1982) that can be eroded and contribute to the bedload. 

Granitic rock with veins or possible inclusions of metamorphic rock was observed east of the powerhouse 

site. The outcrops were observed in along bluffs at the slope break and at or upslope of the toe of the 

slope that descends to the terrace. The slope ascending to the east is inclined at 50 to 70 percent, with 

prominent rock outcrops projecting from the slope. It was not possible to identify bedrock outcrops in the 

aerial photographs taken of the site in the early 1990s. 

File No. 18436-007-00


Penstock 

The proposed penstock alignment underlies the steep valley wall that has at least two prominent benches 

as can be seen in the plan view in Figure 1 and the profile shown in Figure 4. Bedrock observed during 

the aerial reconnaissance appears to be granitic rock, similar to that seen at the dam site and in the 

vicinity of the powerhouse. Steep boulder covered slopes were also observed, consistent with reporting 

by R&M Engineering. 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

GENERAL 

From a preliminary engineering geologic perspective, the proposed Connolly Lake project appears to be 

feasible for hydropower development. Geologic conditions we observed appear to be consistent with 

those reported by R&M Engineering. The possibility of a fault or shear zone that crosses the penstock 

alignment will need to be evaluated, as described below. Bedrock appears to be present at or near the 

ground surface along the proposed alignment of the dam. Bedrock is also present at or near the ground 

surface in the slope ascending from the river terrace to the east. The river system is actively migrating 

and has, in our opinion, a high potential during the anticipated life of the project to cause erosion of the 

terrace where the powerhouse and switchyard are planned, and could affect the fill for the planned bridge 

on the west (right) bank of the river. 

Preliminary Recommendations for the Dam 

Overburden consisting of soil and boulders will need to be removed to prepare the bedrock subgrade for 

the dam fill. Borings completed by others are located near the southern end of the currently planned 

dam location and encountered bedrock at relatively shallow depths. Overall, the overburden appears to 

be less than 10 feet thick, with an estimated average of about 5 feet in areas where glacial deposits are 

present. The boulders range from 1 to potentially 10 feet or more in diameter and may need to be 

broken into manageable sizes using mechanical means, non-explosive methods or by blasting. 

Once broken, it may be possible to re-use the material for fill. It is anticipated that a keyway will need to 

be excavated into the stripped bedrock surface to key in backfill. Excavation of the keyway will require 

controlled blasting to loosen the rock. 

Preliminary Recommendation for the Powerhouse 

Depending on anticipated bearing loads, the life cycle of the proposed plant and the subsurface 

conditions at the terrace, it may be possible to found the power plant on alluvial deposits where it is 

presently planned (see Figure 3). Siting of the powerhouse will also need to consider the potential for 

migration of the Chilkoot River. From that perspective, it may be desirable to found the powerhouse on 

bedrock. It may also be feasible to construct the power plant in the horizontal gallery planned for the 

penstock (as has been completed at a number of installations in Norway). It is anticipated that armoring 

the bank adjacent to the powerhouse will be required to protect the powerhouse and switchyard as well 

access and other facilities. 

File No. 18436-007-00


Preliminary Recommendation for the Penstock 

It is anticipated that the nearly horizontal portion of the penstock will be constructed using conventional 

drill and blast methods or perhaps by using a tunnel boring machine (see Figure 4). 

The alignment of the inclined portion of the penstock completed with unlined rock will need to consider 

the gradient of the Connolly Creek valley in combination with other factors using the guidance developed 

by Bergh-Christensen and Dannevig (1971): 

∙∙ 

∙ cos 

Where: 

■ = the shortest distance between the surface and the point studied, 

■ = the static water head at the point studied, 

■ = the density of water, 

■ = the factor of safety, 

■ = the density of rock, and 

■ = the average slope of the valley wall. 

Profiles should be constructed perpendicular to the contour lines and protrusions in the valley slope 

should be ignored (Broch, 1982). 

We have completed a preliminary evaluation of the overburden requirements for the project based on the 

profile shown in Figure 4. We ignored protrusions and roughness in the valley wall and assumed an 

average slope of approximately 25 degrees for the valley wall, a unit weight of water of 62.4 pounds per 

cubic foot (pcf), a unit weight of rock of 170 pcf and a factor of safety of 1.5 for planning purposes. 

This results in a penstock inclined steeper than 45 degrees and a minimum distance of approximately 

1,330 feet from the average slope for the valley wall at the tie-in between the raised bore and the tunnel 

(see Figure 4). 

We understand that the lower gallery will be tied to the outlet from Connolly Lake using raised bore 

method. Since the pilot hole will be drilled at an angle, the sag of the drill stem in the hole should be 

considered during design and construction of the penstock. 

Depending on the dimensions of the raised bore, an enclosed air surge chamber could be constructed to 

mitigate rapid changes in hydrostatic pressures in the penstock. This would likely be constructed using 

conventional drill and blast methods. 

The granitic rock excavated from the gallery using drill and blast methods should be suitable for use as 

riprap or processed and used for road surfacing or structural fill. 

File No. 18436-007-00


Future Work 

The following are geotechnical studies that should be completed to address feasibility issues with respect 

to the project: 

1. Complete geophysical studies to evaluate the potential presence of a shear or fault zone near 

Station 48+00 along the penstock alignment. We suggest using seismic refraction along a line 

approximately 1,000 feet long. This line would also be used to evaluate the thickness of sediments 

overlying bedrock along the ridge top. 

2. Complete geophysical studies to evaluate the depth to bedrock in the vicinity of the proposed 

powerhouse. We suggest using seismic refraction along a line approximately 500 feet long. 

3. Complete a geophysical study along the axis and upstream (lake) side of the proposed dam to help 

identify potential undulations in the bedrock surface underlying the glacial deposits. Three to four 

lines would be completed totaling about 1,850 lineal feet. 

4. Complete one boring approximately 400 feet deep angled down to the east at an inclination of about 

45 degrees to evaluate the potential for a shear zone near Station 48+00 along the penstock 

alignment. This could be completed after the geophysical survey is performed and the data is 

reduced to optimize location and depth. 

5. Complete one boring approximately 50 feet below the ground surface to evaluate subsurface 

conditions of the terrace deposits in the vicinity of the powerhouse. 

6. Complete at least one boring up to 50 feet below the ground surface along the axis of the dam and 

one up to 50 feet below the ground surface near the toe of fill on the upstream (lake) side, 

7. Complete one vertical boring to a depth of 200 feet circa Station 54+00 along the penstock 

alignment to evaluate thickness of any overburden and to help characterize the rock. 

8. Complete packer tests to evaluate permeability of rock and for hydraulic jacking. 

9. Revise the overburden requirements of the raised bore, taking into consideration irregularities in the 

valley wall slope along Connolly Creek. 

Additional efforts for final design should include: 

1. Complete subsurface evaluations for thickness of soil deposits in low-lying areas (e.g. in muskegs) 

where fill for the dam is proposed. This may consist of peat probes or shallow hand auger 

explorations. 

2. Complete additional borings in the vicinity of the proposed dam to facilitate design. 

3. Complete an oriented camera survey of the pilot bore hole to confirm geologic conditions. 

4. Complete hydraulic jacking testing to evaluate the in-situ stress and susceptibility for hydraulic 

fracturing. It may be possible to complete this in the pilot bore hole. This requires installing packers 

and pressurizing the sealed segment of pipe. Pressures are typically increased to greater than the 

anticipated in-situ stresses to evaluate how the rock responds to pressurization and depressurization 

and to gain a better understanding of the in-situ stresses to evaluate the bore path. 

5. Develop geotechnical criteria for construction of the siphon. 

File No. 18436-007-00


6. Complete laboratory analyses of rock samples to evaluate strength, Cherchar hardness and 

petrographic analyses for use in selection of bits for boring equipment. 

7. Evaluate the development of seiche from seismically induced failure of colluvial (boulder) slopes 

along the margin of Connolly Lake. 

8. Evaluate the potential for channel migration in the vicinity of the powerhouse, switchyard, the bridge, 

other facilities and in areas where the access road may be impacted. 

9. Complete hydraulic analyses for scour in the vicinity of the bridge in support of design. 

10. Design bank stabilization for the powerhouse area, bridge and access road areas. 

11. Evaluate bracing for the steel liner for the penstock tunnel. 

12. Evaluate site-specific seismic design criteria. 

LIMITATIONS 

The opinions and preliminary recommendations presented in this report are based on review of limited 

information and on a relatively brief reconnaissance of portions of the project area. The information 

presented herein is intended for feasibility assessment only and is not adequate for design. 

Further geotechnical site studies and subsurface explorations will be needed before developing final 

design recommendations. 

REFERENCES 

Beikman, H.M., comp., 1975, Preliminary geologic map of southeastern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey 

Miscellaneous Field Studies Map 673, 2 sheets, scale 1:1,000,000. 

Bergh-Christensen, I., and Dannevig, N.T., 1971, “Engineering Geological Consideration for an Unlined 

Pressure Shaft at Mauranger Hydro Power Station”, Unpublished report in Norwegian, Geoteam A/S, 

Oslo, Norway; 1971. 

Broch, Einar, 1982, “The Development of Unlined Pressure Shafts and Tunnels in Norway”, Wittke, W. 

(ed): “Rock Mechanics: Caverns and Pressure Shafts”, A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands; 1982. 

Dusel-Bacon, Cynthia, Brew, D.A., and Douglass, S.L., 1996, Metamorphic facies map of Southeastern 

Alaska; distribution, facies, and ages of regionally metamorphosed rocks: U.S. Geological Survey 

Professional Paper 1497-D, p. 1-42, 2 sheets, scale 1:1,000,000. 

March, G.D., 1982. Photointerpretive map of the surficial geology of the Skagway B-2 quadrangle, Alaska. 

1:63,360. Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, Open-File Report 161. 

Plafker, George, Gilpin, L.M., and Lahr, J.C., 1994. Neotectonic map of Alaska, (Plate 12) in Plafker, 

George, and Berg, H.C., eds., Geology of Alaska, Volume G-1 of the Geology of North America. Geological 

Society of America. Boulder, Colorado. 

File No. 18436-007-00


Rogers, Garry C., and Horner, Robert B., 1991. An overview of western Canadian seismicity, in Slemmons, 

D.B, Endahl, E.R., Zoback, M.D., and Blackwell, D.D., eds., Neotectonics of North America. Decade Map 

Volume 1. Geological Society of America. Boulder, Colorado. 

U.S. Air Force, 1972. Aerial photograph, Frame AF-71-40-1E R-2 194. 30,000 ft above sea level. July 3, 

1972. 

Wesson, R.L., Boyd, O.S., Mueller, C.S., Bufe, C.G., Frankel, A.D., and Petersen, M.D., 2007. Revision of 

time-independent probabilistic seismic hazard maps for Alaska. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

2007-1043, 33 p. 

Yehle, Lynn A., and Lemke, Richard W., 1972. Reconnaissance engineers geology of the Skagway area, 

Alaska, with emphasis on evaluation of earthquake and other geologic hazards. Open-File Report 72- 

0454, 108 p. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Brew, D.A., and Ford, A.B., 1998, The Coast Mountains structural zones in Southeastern Alaska; 

descriptions, relations, and lithotectonic terrane significance, in Gray, J.E., and Riehle, J.R., eds., Geologic 

studies in Alaska by the U.S. Geological Survey, 1996: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1595, p. 

183-192. 

Brew, D.A., 1995, The Coast Mountains Complex of Southeastern Alaska and adjacent regions, in U.S. 

Geological Survey, Stratigraphic notes, 1994: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 2135, p. 21-28. 

Brew, D.A., 1988, Latest Mesozoic and Cenozoic igneous rocks of southeastern Alaska; a synopsis: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 88-405, 29 p. 

Brew, D.A., and Ford, A.B., 1985, Preliminary reconnaissance geologic map of the Juneau, Taku River, 

Atlin, and part of the Skagway 1:250,000 quadrangles, southeastern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 85-395, 23 p., 1 sheet, scale 1:2,500,000. 

Brew, D.A., and Morrell, R.P., 1980, Intrusive rocks and plutonic belts of southeastern Alaska, U.S.A.: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 80-78, 34 p 

Brew, D.A., and Morrell, R.P., 1980, Preliminary map of intrusive rocks in southeastern Alaska: U.S. 

Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map 1048, 1 sheet, scale 1:1,000,000. 

Buddington, A.F., and Chapin, Theodore, 1929, Geology and mineral deposits of southeastern Alaska: 

U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 800, 398 p., 2 sheets, scale 1:500,000. 

Combellick, R.A., and Long, W.E., 1983, Geologic hazards in southeastern Alaska: an overview: Alaska 

Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys Report of Investigation 83-17, 17 p. 

Gehrels, G.E., and Berg, H.C., 1992, Geologic map of southeastern Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey 

Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map I-1867, 24 p., 1 sheet, scale 1:600,000. 

File No. 18436-007-00


Gray, J.E., and Riehle, J.R., eds., 1998, Geologic studies in Alaska by the U.S. Geological Survey, 1996: 

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1595, 200 p. 

U.S. Geological Survey, 1995, Stratigraphic notes, 1994: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 2135, 28 p. 

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project and look forward to working with you 

on this and future projects. Please contact Craig Erdman or Galan McInelly at 425.861.6000 if you have 

questions or comments regarding this report. 

Sincerely, 

GeoEngineers, Inc. 

Craig F. Erdman 

Senior Engineering Geologist 

Galan W. McInelly 

Principal, Engineering Geologist 

CFE:GWM:lc 

Copyright© 2012 by GeoEngineers, Inc. All rights reserved. 

List of Figures: 

Figures 1 through 3. Site Plan 

Figure 4. Penstock Profile 

Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any attachments are only a 

copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. 

File No. 18436-007-00

N 

W 

E 

S 

120 0 

120 

FEET 

Notes 

1. The locations of all features shown are approximate. 

2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to assist in 

showing features discussed in an attached document. 

GeoEngineers, Inc. can not guarantee the accuracy and content of 

electronic files. The master file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. 

and will serve as the official record of this communication. 

Reference: CAD files "OG R&M.dwg, General arrangement.dwg and 

Topo Supplemental.dwg, ga3.dwg provided by 

Site Plan 

Connolly Lake Hydro Project 

Connolly Lake, Alaska 

Figure 3

Notes 

1. The locations of all features shown are approximate. 

2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to assist in 

showing features discussed in an attached document. 

GeoEngineers, Inc. can not guarantee the accuracy and content of 

electronic files. The master file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. 

and will serve as the official record of this communication. 

Reference: CAD files "OG R&M.dwg, General arrangement.dwg and 

Topo Supplemental.dwg, ga3.dwg provided by 

HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"= 500' 

VERTICAL SCALE: 1"= 500' 

VERTICAL EXAGGERATION: 1X 

500 0 

500 

FEET 

Penstock Profile 

Connolly Lake Hydro Project 

Connolly Lake, Alaska 

Figure 4

APPENDIX E 

1994-1997 USGS GAGE RECORD FOR CONNELLY LAKE

APPENDIX F 

WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RESULTS 

(2011-2012)

Analytica Anchorage 

4307 Arctic Boulevard 

Anchorage, AK 99503 

Phone: 907-258-2155 

Fax: 907-258-6634 

Environmental Laboratories 

4/3/2012 

Shipley Group 


PO Box 908 

Farmington, UT 84025-0908 

Attn: Paul Rusanowski 

Work Order #: A1203250 

Date: 4/3/2012 

Work ID: Connelly Lake Hydro 2012 

Date Received: 3/21/2012 

Proj #: None 

Sample Identification 

Lab Sample Number 

Client Description 

A1203250-01 Chilkoot Lake Outlet 



Enclosed are the analytical results for the submitted sample(s). Please review the CASE NARRATIVE 

for a discussion of any data and/or quality control issues. Listings of data qualifiers, analytical codes, 

key dates, and QC relationships are provided at the end of the report. 

Sincerely, 

Claire Toon 


"The Science of Analysis, The Art of Service"

Case Narrative 

Analytica Alaska Inc. 

Work Order: A1203250 

Samples were prepared and analyzed according to EPA or equivalent methods outlined in the 

following references: 

Methods for the Determination of Metals in Environmental Samples, EPA/600/R-94/111, May 

1994. 

Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 20th Edition, 1998. 

SAMPLE RECEIPT: 

One (1) sample was received on 3/21/2012 8:10:00 AM, at a temperature of 2.1°C, at 

Analytica-Anchorage. The samples were received in good condition. The Chain of Custody 

form was filled out by the lab based on the sample container information. 

The sample was transferred for various analyses to Analytica Environmental Laboratories 

(AEL), 12189 Pennsylvania St., Thornton, Colorado 80241, where it was received at a 

temperature of 3.8°C, in good condition and in order per chain of custody on 3/23/2012. 

REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ANALYTICA QA PLAN 

A summary of our review is shown below. 

All analytical results contained in this report have been reviewed under Analytica's 

internal quality assurance and quality control program. Any deviations in quality control 

parameters for specific analyses are noted in the following text. A complete quality 

assurance report, including laboratory control, matrix spike, and sample duplicate 

recoveries is kept on file in our office and is available upon request. 

All method specifications were met for the following tests, unless otherwise noted: 

Test Method: 200.7 - Metals by ICP - Total Metals ug/L - Aqueous 

Test Method: Hardness, Hardness by Calculation - Total Hardness - Aqueous 

Test Method: SM 2320B - Total Alkalinity - Aqueous 

Test Method: SM2130B - Turbidity, Nephelometric Method - Turbidity - Aqueous 

Test Method: SM2510B - Conductivity - Aqueous 

Test Method: SM2540C - Total Dissolved Solids dried at 180°C - TDS - Aqueous 

Test Method: SM2540D - Solids, Total Suspended Solids Dried at 103-105 C - TSS - Aqueous 

Test Method: SM2540F Imhoff cone volumetric solids - Settleable Solids - Aqueous 

Test Method: SM4500-NH3C - Titrimetric Method - Ammonia, Dist./Titrati - Aqueous 

Test Method: SM4500-NO3E - Nitrogen (Nitrate), Cadmium Reduction Method - Nitrate+Nitrite 

pres - Aqueous 

Test Method: SM4500-PE - Total Phos - Aqueous




(continued) 

Test Method: SM4500-H-B Electrometric pH Method - pH - Aqueous 

HOLDING TIMES: 

pH is a field test requiring immediate analysis. This analysis was performed as soon as 

possible upon laboratory receipt. 

HOLD TIMES MISSED: 

Sample Chilkoot Lake Outlet,A1203250-01B 

Sampled: 3/20/2012 10:25:00 AM, Prepped: 3/21/2012 10:15:00 AM 

Sampled: 3/20/2012 10:25:00 AM, Analyzed: 3/21/2012 10:15:00 AM 

Regulatory hold time: 0 Hrs

Workorder (SDG): 

Project: 

Client: 

Detailed Analytical Report 

Client Project Number: 

Report Section: 

Client Sample Name: 

Matrix: 

A1203250 

Connelly Lake Hydro 2012 

Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 

Client Sample Report 

Chilkoot Lake Outlet 


Collection Date: 

3/20/2012 10:25:00AM 

The following test was conducted by: Analytica - Anchorage 

Lab Sample Number: A1203250-01A 

Analysis Date: 3/21/2012 9:00:00AM 

Prep Date: 3/21/2012 

Instrument: SCALE 

Analytical Method ID: SM2540F Imhoff cone volumetric solids - Settleable Solids File Name: 

Prep Method ID: 2540F 

Dilution Factor: 1 

Prep Batch Number: A120330006 

Report Basis: As Received 

Analyst Initials: KM 

Sample prep wt./vol: 1,000.00 ml 

Prep Extract Vol: 1,000.00 ml 

Analyte CASNo Result Flags Units PQL MDL 

run #: 

Total settleable solids ND 

mL/L 0.10 0.10 

1 


Lab Sample Number: A1203250-01D 


Prep Date: 3/26/2012 

Instrument: Thermospectr 

Analytical Method ID: SM4500-NO3E - Nitrogen (Nitrate), Cadmium Reduction Method - NFile Name: 

Prep Method ID: Dilution Factor: 1 

Prep Batch Number: 

Report Basis: 

Sample prep wt./vol: 

A120327002 

As Received 

Analyst Initials: MC 

25.00 ml 

Prep Extract Vol: 25.00 


run #: 

Nitrate-Nitrite as Nitrogen ND 

mg/L 0.10 0.015 

1 


Lab Sample Number: A1203250-01B 

Analysis Date: 3/28/2012 3:25:00PM 

Prep Date: 3/28/2012 

Instrument: Probe 

Analytical Method ID: SM2510B - Conductivity 

File Name: 



Report Basis: 


A120329001 

As Received 


50.00 ml 



run #: 

Conductivity 54.1 

umhos/cm 5.0 1.0 

1 




Prep Date: 3/21/2012 

Instrument: Turbidometer 

Analytical Method ID: SM2130B - Turbidity, Nephelometric Method - Turbidity File Name: 

Prep Method ID: 2130B 





Sample prep wt./vol: 1.00 ml 

Prep Extract Vol: 1.00 ml 


run #: 

Turbidity 0.853 

NTU 0.20 0.050 

1 

Page 4 of 12 

ml 

ml


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1203250 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 





3/20/2012 10:25:00AM 




Prep Date: 3/26/2012 


Analytical Method ID: SM2540D - Solids, Total Suspended Solids Dried at 103-105 C - TS File Name: 

Prep Method ID: 2540D 








run #: 

Total Suspended Solids ND 

mg/L 10 5.0 

1 




Prep Date: 3/27/2012 


Analytical Method ID: SM2540C - Total Dissolved Solids dried at 180°C - TDS File Name: 

Prep Method ID: 2540C 








run #: 

Total Dissolved Solids 35.0 

mg/L 20 6.0 

1 




Prep Date: 3/21/2012 


Analytical Method ID: SM4500-H-B Electrometric pH Method - pH 

File Name: 

Prep Method ID: 4500-H-B 








run #: 

pH 7.1 

pH 0.0 0.0 

1 




Prep Date: 3/30/2012 

Instrument: Titrametric 

Analytical Method ID: SM 2320B - Total Alkalinity 

File Name: 









run #: 

Alkalinity, Total 9.60 

mg/L CaCO 4.0 0.77 

1 

Page 5 of 12


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1203250 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 





3/20/2012 10:25:00AM 

The following test was conducted by: Analytica - Thornton 

Lab Sample Number: A1203250-01C 


Prep Date: 3/28/2012 

Instrument: ICP_2 

Analytical Method ID: 200. 7 - Metals by ICP - Total Metals ug/L 

File Name: 

032912 

Prep Method ID: 200.7 


Prep Batch Number: T120328005 


Analyst Initials: TE 




run #: 

Aluminum 7429-90-5 ND 

ug/L 50 14 

2 

Arsenic 7440-38-2 ND 

ug/L 100 15 

Barium 7440-39-3 13.0 

ug/L 10 0.16 

Beryllium 7440-41-7 ND 

ug/L 1.0 0.060 

Cadmium 7440-43-9 ND 

ug/L 6.0 0.51 

Calcium 7440-70-2 7,060 

ug/L 100 13 

Chromium 7440-47-3 ND 

ug/L 10 1.8 

Iron 7439-89-6 ND 

ug/L 50 2.7 

Lead 7439-92-1 ND 

ug/L 50 11 

Magnesium 7439-96-4 410 

ug/L 100 12 

Manganese 7439-96-5 ND 

ug/L 10 0.66 

Molybdenum 7439-98-7 ND 

ug/L 10 1.8 

Nickel 7440-02-0 ND 

ug/L 40 2.7 

Potassium 7440-09-7 ND 

ug/L 1,000 310 

Silver 7440-22-4 ND 

ug/L 15 0.66 

Sodium 7440-23-5 ND 

ug/L 3,000 28 

Tin 7440-31-5 ND 

ug/L 50 13 




Prep Date: 4/2/2012 

Instrument: N/A 

Analytical Method ID: Hardness, Hardness by Calculation - Total Hardness 

File Name: 









run #: 

Hardness, Total 19 

mg/L 1.0 1.0 

1 


Page 6 of 12


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1203250 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 





3/20/2012 10:25:00AM 

Lab Sample Number: A1203250-01E 


Prep Date: 3/23/2012 

Instrument: Hach 2500 Col 

Analytical Method ID: SM4500-PE - Total Phos 

File Name: 

Prep Method ID: 4500-PB 




Analyst Initials: JKK 




run #: 

Phosphorus, Total and Ortho ND 

mg/L 0.051 0.026 

1 




Prep Date: 3/30/2012 

Instrument: Bubbles K370 

Analytical Method ID: SM4500-NH3C - Titrimetric Method - Ammonia, Dist./Titrati File Name: 

Prep Method ID: 4500-NH3B 




Analyst Initials: TL 




run #: 

Ammonia as N 7664-41-7 ND 

mg/L 0.40 0.11 

1 

Page 7 of 12


Project: 

Client: 



A1203250 


Shipley Group 

None 


QC BATCH ASSOCIATIONS - BY METHOD BLANK 

Lab Project ID: 136,145 Lab Project Number: A1203250 

Lab Method Blank Id: 

Prep Batch ID: 

Method: 

SampleNum 

A120322003-MB 

A120322003 

SM2130B - Turbidity, Nephelometric Method - Turbidity 

This Method blank and sample preparation batch are associated with the following samples, spikes, and duplicates: 

ClientSampleName 

DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/21/2012 

A1203250-01B Chilkoot Lake Outlet 3/21/2012 1:35:00PM 

A120322003-LCS LCS 3/21/2012 1:35:00PM 

A120322003-LCSD LCSD 3/21/2012 1:35:00PM 

A1203250-01B-DUP DUP 

3/21/2012 1:35:00PM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

T120326001-MB 

T120326001 

SM4500-PE - Total Phos 



DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/23/2012 

A1203250-01E Chilkoot Lake Outlet 3/23/2012 5:30:00PM 

T120326001-LCS LCS 3/23/2012 5:30:00PM 

A1203250-01E-DUP DUP 3/23/2012 5:30:00PM 

A1203250-01E-MS MS 3/23/2012 5:30:00PM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A120327002-MB 

A120327002 

SM4500-NO3E - Nitrogen (Nitrate), Cadmium Reduction Method - 



DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/26/2012 

A1203227-02G Batch QC 3/26/2012 11:05:00AM 

A1203250-01D Chilkoot Lake Outlet 3/26/2012 11:05:00AM 

A120327002-LCS LCS 3/26/2012 11:05:00AM 

A1203227-02G-DUP DUP 

3/26/2012 11:05:00AM 

A1203227-02G-MS MS 3/26/2012 11:05:00AM 

Page 8 of 12


Project: 

Client: 



A1203250 


Shipley Group 

None 






Method: 

SampleNum 

T120328005-MB 

T120328005 

200. 7 - Metals by ICP - Total Metals ug/L 



DataFile 

B1203146-01A Batch QC 

032812 

T120328005-LCS LCS 

032812 

B1203146-01A-DUP DUP 

032812 

B1203146-01A-MS MS 

032812 

B1203146-01A-MSD MSD 

032812 

A1203250-01C Chilkoot Lake Outlet 

032912 

T120328005-LCS LCS 

032912 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A120329001-MB 

A120329001 

SM2510B - Conductivity 



DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/28/2012 

3/28/2012 1:27:55PM 

3/28/2012 12:28:13PM 

3/28/2012 1:32:30PM 

3/28/2012 1:37:04PM 

3/28/2012 1:41:39PM 

3/29/2012 12:30:06PM 

3/29/2012 12:25:32PM 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/28/2012 


A120329001-LCS LCS 3/28/2012 3:25:00PM 

A1203250-01B-DUP DUP 

3/28/2012 3:25:00PM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A120329003-MB 

A120329003 

SM2540C - Total Dissolved Solids dried at 180°C - TDS 



DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/27/2012 


A120329003-LCS LCS 3/27/2012 2:50:00PM 

A1203250-01B-DUP DUP 

3/27/2012 2:50:00PM 

A1203250-01B-MS MS 3/27/2012 2:50:00PM 

Page 9 of 12


Project: 

Client: 



A1203250 


Shipley Group 

None 






Method: 

SampleNum 

T120330007-MB 

T120330007 

SM4500-NH3C - Titrimetric Method - Ammonia, Dist./Titrati 



DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/30/2012 

A1203250-01E Chilkoot Lake Outlet 3/30/2012 11:00:45AM 

B1203178-01B Batch QC 3/30/2012 11:00:45AM 

T120330007-LCS LCS 3/30/2012 11:00:45AM 

B1203178-01B-DUP DUP 3/30/2012 11:00:45AM 

B1203178-01B-MS MS 3/30/2012 11:00:45AM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A120402001-MB 

A120402001 

SM2540D - Solids, Total Suspended Solids Dried at 103-105 C - T 



DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/26/2012 

A1203250-01B Chilkoot Lake Outlet 3/26/2012 11:00:00AM 

A1203288-04A Batch QC 3/26/2012 11:00:00AM 

A120402001-LCS LCS 3/26/2012 11:00:00AM 

A1203288-04A-DUP DUP 

3/26/2012 11:00:00AM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A120402004-MB 

A120402004 

SM 2320B - Total Alkalinity 



DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/30/2012 

A1203240-01B Batch QC 3/30/2012 2:50:00PM 


A120402004-LCS LCS 3/30/2012 2:50:00PM 

A1203250-01B-DUP DUP 

3/30/2012 2:50:00PM 

A1203240-01B-MS MS 3/30/2012 2:50:00PM 

Page 10 of 12


Project: 

Client: 



A1203250 


Shipley Group 

None 


DATA FLAGS AND DEFINITIONS 

The PQL is the Method Quantitation Limit as defined by USACE. 

Reporting Limit: Limit below which results are shown as "ND". This may be the PQL, MDL, or a value between. See 

the report conventions below. 

Result Field: 

ND = Not Detected at or above the Reporting Limit 

NA = Analyte not applicable (see Case Narrative for discussion) 

Qualifier Fields: 

LOW = Recovery is below Lower Control Limit 

HIGH = Recovery , RPD, or other parameter is above Upper Control Limit 

E = Reported concentration is above the instrument calibration upper range 

Organic Analysis Flags: 

B = Analyte was detected in the laboratory method blank 

J = Analyte was detected above MDL or Reporting Limit but below the Quant Limit (PQL) 

Inorganic Analysis Flags: 

J = Analyte was detected above the Reporting Limit but below the Quant Limit (PQL) 

W = Post digestion spike did not meet criteria 

S = Reported value determined by the Method of Standard Additions (MSA) 

Several ways of defining the limit of detection and quantitation are prevalent in the laboratory industry and may appear in Analytica reports. These 

include the following: 

MRL = "minimum reporting level", from the EPA Safe Drinking Water program (SDW) 

PQL = "practical quantitation limit", from SW-846 

EQL = "estimated quantitation limit", from SW-846 

LOQ = "limit of quantitation", from a number of authoritative sources 

In Analytica's work, all of these terms have the same meaning, equivalent to the EPA definition of the MRL. This reporting level is supported by a 

satisfactory calibration data point which is at that level or lower, and also is supported by a method detection limit (MDL) determined by the 

procedure in 40CFR. The MDL is lower than the MRL and represents an estimate of the level where positive detections have a 99% probability of 

being real, but where quantitation accuracy is unknown. 

The MRL as defined by Analytica is the lowest demonstrated point of known quantitation accuracy. 

The MRL should not be confused with the MCL, which is the EPA-defined "maximum contaminant level" allowed for certain regulated targets 

under specific regulations, such as the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. Normally, the MRL is set at a level which is much lower than 

the MCL in order to ensure that levels are well below those limits. Not all target analytes have MCL levels established. 

Other Flags may be applied. See Case Narrative for Description 

Page 11 of 12


Project: 

Client: 



A1203250 


Shipley Group 

None 


REPORTING CONVENTIONS FOR THIS REPORT 

A1203250 

TestPkgName 

Basis 

# Sig Figs 

200.7/200.7 (Aqueous) - Total Metals ug/L As Received 3 

2130B/2130B (Aqueous) - Turbidity As Received 3 

2320B/2320B (Aqueous) - Total Alkalinity As Received 3 

2340B/2340B (Aqueous) - Total Hardness As Received 2 

2510B (Aqueous) - Conductivity As Received 3 

2540C/2540C (Aqueous) - TDS As Received 3 

2540D/2540D (Aqueous) - TSS As Received 3 

2540F/2540F (Aqueous) - Settleable Solids As Received 3 

4500-H-B/4500-H-B (Aqueous) - pH As Received 2 

4500-NH3C/4500-NH3B (Aqueous) - Ammonia, Dist./TAs Received 2 

4500-NO3E (Aqueous) - Nitrate+Nitrite pres As Received 3 

4500-PE/4500-PB (Aqueous) - Total Phos As Received 2 

Reporting Limit 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Page 12 of 12




Phone: 907-258-2155 

Fax: 907-258-6634 


3/16/2012 

Shipley Group 


PO Box 908 




Date: 3/16/2012 

Work ID: Connelly Lake Hydro 2012 


Proj #: None 






A1203026-01 Upper Chilkoot River A1203026-02 Chilkoot Lake 




Sincerely, 

Claire Toon 









1994. 



Two (2) samples were received on 3/2/2012 4:30:00 PM, at a temperature of 0.9°C, at 

Analytica-Anchorage. The samples were received in good condition and in order per chain 

of custody. 

The samples were transferred for various analyses to Analytica Environmental Laboratories 

(AEL), 12189 Pennsylvania St., Thornton, Colorado 80241, where they were received in two 

coolers, at temperatures of 1.9°C and 16.3°C (metals), in good condition and in order per 

chain of custody on 3/6/2012. 















Test Method: SM4500-NH3C - Titrimetric Method - Ammonia, Dist./Titrati - Aqueous 



Test Method: SM4500-PE - Total Phos - Aqueous 

Test Method: SM2130B - Turbidity, Nephelometric Method - Turbidity - Aqueous




(continued) 


The samples shown below were received and analyzed for Turbidity outside the method 

specified holding time, per client request. 


Sample Upper Chilkoot River,A1203026-01A 

Sampled: 2/29/2012 1:00:00 PM, Prepped: 3/2/2012 6:00:00 PM 

Sampled: 2/29/2012 1:00:00 PM, Analyzed: 3/2/2012 6:00:00 PM 

Regulatory hold time: 48 Hrs 

Sample Chilkoot Lake,A1203026-02A 






The samples shown below were received and analyzed for Settleable Solids outside the 

method specified holding time, per client request. 


Sample Upper Chilkoot River,A1203026-01E 




Sample Chilkoot Lake,A1203026-02E 






The samples shown below were received and analyzed for pH outside the method specified 

holding time, per client request. 


Sample Upper Chilkoot River,A1203026-01A 




Sample Chilkoot Lake,A1203026-02A 





Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


Upper Chilkoot River 



2/29/2012 1:00:00PM 















run #: 


mL/L 0.10 0.10 

1 









Report Basis: 


A120309002 

As Received 


25.00 ml 



run #: 

Nitrate-Nitrite as Nitrogen 0.151 

mg/L 0.10 0.015 

1 




Prep Date: 3/15/2012 



File Name: 



Report Basis: 


A120316015 

As Received 


50.00 ml 



run #: 



1 















run #: 

Turbidity ND 

NTU 0.20 0.050 

1 

Page 4 of 16 

ml 

ml


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 





2/29/2012 1:00:00PM 















run #: 


mg/L 10 5.0 

1 















run #: 


mg/L 20 6.0 

1 







File Name: 









run #: 

pH 7.4 

pH 0.0 0.0 

1 




Prep Date: 3/13/2012 



File Name: 









run #: 


mg/L CaCO 4.0 0.77 

1 

Page 5 of 16


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 





2/29/2012 1:00:00PM 







File Name: 

030712 









run #: 


ug/L 50 14 

1 


ug/L 100 15 

Barium 7440-39-3 21.4 

ug/L 10 0.16 


ug/L 1.0 0.060 


ug/L 6.0 0.51 

Calcium 7440-70-2 10,700 

ug/L 100 13 


ug/L 10 1.8 

Iron 7439-89-6 93.5 

ug/L 50 2.7 

Lead 7439-92-1 ND 

ug/L 50 11 

Magnesium 7439-96-4 608 

ug/L 100 12 


ug/L 10 0.66 


ug/L 10 1.8 


ug/L 40 2.7 


ug/L 1,000 310 


ug/L 15 0.66 


ug/L 3,000 28 

Tin 7440-31-5 ND 

ug/L 50 13 







File Name: 









run #: 


mg/L 1.0 1.0 

1 


Page 6 of 16


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 





2/29/2012 1:00:00PM 






File Name: 









run #: 


mg/L 0.051 0.026 

1 




Prep Date: 3/13/2012 











run #: 

Ammonia as N 7664-41-7 4.1 

mg/L 0.40 0.11 

1 

Page 7 of 16


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


Chilkoot Lake 



2/29/2012 3:30:00PM 















run #: 


mL/L 0.10 0.10 

1 









Report Basis: 


A120309002 

As Received 


25.00 ml 



run #: 


mg/L 0.10 0.015 

1 




Prep Date: 3/15/2012 



File Name: 



Report Basis: 


A120316015 

As Received 


50.00 ml 



run #: 



1 















run #: 


NTU 0.20 0.050 

1 

Page 8 of 16 

ml 

ml


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


Chilkoot Lake 



2/29/2012 3:30:00PM 















run #: 


mg/L 10 5.0 

1 















run #: 


mg/L 20 6.0 

1 







File Name: 









run #: 

pH 7.3 

pH 0.0 0.0 

1 




Prep Date: 3/13/2012 



File Name: 









run #: 


mg/L CaCO 4.0 0.77 

1 

Page 9 of 16


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


Chilkoot Lake 



2/29/2012 3:30:00PM 







File Name: 

030712 









run #: 


ug/L 50 14 

1 


ug/L 100 15 

Barium 7440-39-3 13.7 

ug/L 10 0.16 


ug/L 1.0 0.060 


ug/L 6.0 0.51 

Calcium 7440-70-2 7,070 

ug/L 100 13 


ug/L 10 1.8 

Iron 7439-89-6 59.7 

ug/L 50 2.7 

Lead 7439-92-1 ND 

ug/L 50 11 

Magnesium 7439-96-4 396 

ug/L 100 12 


ug/L 10 0.66 


ug/L 10 1.8 


ug/L 40 2.7 

Potassium 7440-09-7 1,160 

ug/L 1,000 310 


ug/L 15 0.66 


ug/L 3,000 28 

Tin 7440-31-5 ND 

ug/L 50 13 







File Name: 









run #: 


mg/L 1.0 1.0 

1 


Page 10 of 16


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


Chilkoot Lake 



2/29/2012 3:30:00PM 






File Name: 









run #: 


mg/L 0.051 0.026 

1 




Prep Date: 3/13/2012 











run #: 


mg/L 0.40 0.11 

1 

Page 11 of 16


Project: 

Client: 



A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 






Method: 

SampleNum 

T120307011-MB 

T120307011 




DataFile 

A1203019-03A Batch QC 

030712 

A1203026-01C Upper Chilkoot River 

030712 

A1203026-02C Chilkoot Lake 

030712 

T120307011-LCS LCS 

030712 

A1203019-03A-DUP DUP 

030712 

A1203019-03A-MS MS 

030712 

A1203019-03A-MSD MSD 

030712 



Method: 

SampleNum 

T120308013-MB 

T120308013 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/7/2012 

3/7/2012 3:47:54PM 

3/7/2012 4:25:27PM 

3/7/2012 4:30:48PM 

3/7/2012 3:37:12PM 

3/7/2012 3:53:15PM 

3/7/2012 3:58:36PM 

3/7/2012 4:03:57PM 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/9/2012 

A1202330-01C Batch QC 3/9/2012 4:45:00PM 

A1203026-01B Upper Chilkoot River 3/9/2012 4:45:00PM 

A1203026-02B Chilkoot Lake 3/9/2012 4:45:00PM 

T120308013-LCS LCS 3/9/2012 4:45:00PM 

A1202330-01C-DUP DUP 

3/9/2012 4:45:00PM 

A1202330-01C-MS MS 3/9/2012 4:45:00PM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A120309002-MB 

A120309002 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/8/2012 

A1203026-01D Upper Chilkoot River 3/8/2012 10:05:00AM 

A1203026-02D Chilkoot Lake 3/8/2012 10:05:00AM 

A120309002-LCS LCS 3/8/2012 10:05:00AM 

A1203026-01D-DUP DUP 

3/8/2012 10:05:00AM 

A1203026-01D-MS MS 3/8/2012 10:05:00AM 

Page 12 of 16


Project: 

Client: 



A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 






Method: 

SampleNum 

A120312006-MB 

A120312006 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/7/2012 

A1203026-01A Upper Chilkoot River 3/7/2012 12:30:00PM 

A1203026-02A Chilkoot Lake 3/7/2012 12:30:00PM 

A1203071-02A Batch QC 3/7/2012 12:30:00PM 

A120312006-LCS LCS 3/7/2012 12:30:00PM 

A1203071-02A-DUP DUP 

3/7/2012 12:30:00PM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

T120313013-MB 

T120313013 

SM4500-NH3C - Titrimetric Method - Ammonia, Dist./Titrati 



DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/13/2012 

A1203026-01B Upper Chilkoot River 3/13/2012 2:00:09PM 

A1203026-02B Chilkoot Lake 3/13/2012 2:00:09PM 

B1203031-01B Batch QC 3/13/2012 2:00:09PM 

T120313013-LCS LCS 3/13/2012 2:00:09PM 

B1203031-01B-DUP DUP 3/13/2012 2:00:09PM 

B1203031-01B-MS MS 3/13/2012 2:00:09PM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A120316007-MB 

A120316007 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/2/2012 



A120316007-LCS LCS 3/2/2012 6:00:00PM 

A120316007-LCSD LCSD 3/2/2012 6:00:00PM 

A1203026-01A-DUP DUP 

3/2/2012 6:00:00PM 

Page 13 of 16


Project: 

Client: 



A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 






Method: 

SampleNum 

A120316011-MB 

A120316011 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/7/2012 



A120316011-LCS LCS 3/7/2012 3:10:00PM 

A1203026-02A-DUP DUP 

3/7/2012 3:10:00PM 

A1203026-02A-MS MS 3/7/2012 3:10:00PM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A120316015-MB 

A120316015 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/15/2012 



A120316015-LCS LCS 3/15/2012 4:10:00PM 

A1203026-01A-DUP DUP 

3/15/2012 4:10:00PM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A120316016-MB 

A120316016 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

3/13/2012 



A1203145-01H Batch QC 3/13/2012 2:45:00PM 

A120316016-LCS LCS 3/13/2012 2:45:00PM 

A1203145-01H-DUP DUP 

3/13/2012 2:45:00PM 

A1203145-01H-MS MS 3/13/2012 2:45:00PM 

Page 14 of 16


Project: 

Client: 



A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 






Result Field: 





























Page 15 of 16


Project: 

Client: 



A1203026 


Shipley Group 

None 



A1203026 

TestPkgName 

Basis 

# Sig Figs 










4500-NH3C/4500-NH3B (Aqueous) - Ammonia, Dist./TAs Received 2 




Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Page 16 of 16




Phone: 907-258-2155 

Fax: 907-258-6634 


10/18/2011 

Shipley Group 


PO Box 908 




Date: 10/18/2011 

Work ID: Connelly Lake Hydro 


Proj #: None 






A1110017-01 CHIL R-1 A1110017-02 CON LK-1 




Sincerely, 

Claire Toon 









1994. 



Two (2) samples were received on 10/3/2011 1:20:00 PM, at a temperature of 5.6°C, at 

Analytica-Anchorage. The samples were received in good condition and in order per chain 

of custody. 

The samples were transferred for various analyses to Analytica Environmental Laboratories 

(AEL), 12189 Pennsylvania St., Thornton, Colorado 80241, where they were received at a 

temperature of 1.9°C, in good condition and in order per chain of custody on 10/5/2011. 














Test Method: SM4500-NH3D - Ammonia, Selective Electrode Method - Ammonia - Aqueous 



Test Method: SM4500-PE - Total Phos - Aqueous 


CLOSING CONTINUING CALIBRATIONS: 

There are BC flags applied to some of the metals results due to the fact that associated




(continued) 

continuing calibration blanks had detections above the MDL, but below the PQL. The 

reported results for samples flagged with BC could be biased slightly high. 

Test Method: SM2130B - Turbidity, Nephelometric Method - Turbidity - Aqueous 


The samples shown below were received and analyzed for turbidity outside the method 

specified holding time, per client request. 


Sample CHIL R-1,A1110017-01B 

Sampled: 9/29/2011 11:15:00 AM, Prepped: 10/6/2011 5:45:00 PM 

Sampled: 9/29/2011 11:15:00 AM, Analyzed: 10/6/2011 5:45:00 PM 


Sample CON LK-1,A1110017-02B 






The samples shown below were received and analyzed for settleable solids outside the 

method specified holding time, per client request. 


Sample CHIL R-1,A1110017-01E 




Sample CON LK-1,A1110017-02E 






pH is a field test requiring immediate analysis. This analysis was performed as soon as 

possible upon laboratory receipt. 


Sample CHIL R-1,A1110017-01B 




Sample CON LK-1,A1110017-02B




(continued) 

Sample CON LK-1,A1110017-02B 





Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1110017 

Connelly Lake Hydro 

Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


CHIL R-1 



9/29/2011 11:15:00AM 




Prep Date: 10/4/2011 











run #: 

Total settleable solids 0.200 

mL/L 0.10 0.10 

1 




Prep Date: 10/12/2011 





Report Basis: 


A111013001 

As Received 


25.00 ml 



run #: 


mg/L 0.10 0.015 

1 




Prep Date: 10/4/2011 



File Name: 



Report Basis: 


A111016004 

As Received 


50.00 ml 



run #: 



1 




Prep Date: 10/6/2011 











run #: 


NTU 0.20 0.050 

1 

Page 5 of 17 

ml 

ml


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1110017 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


CHIL R-1 



9/29/2011 11:15:00AM 




Prep Date: 10/6/2011 











run #: 

Total Suspended Solids 12.0 

mg/L 10 5.0 

1 




Prep Date: 10/6/2011 











run #: 


mg/L 20 6.0 

1 




Prep Date: 10/3/2011 



File Name: 









run #: 

pH 6.9 

pH 0.0 0.0 

1 




Prep Date: 10/4/2011 



File Name: 









run #: 


mg/L CaCO 4.0 0.77 

1 

Page 6 of 17


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1110017 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


CHIL R-1 



9/29/2011 11:15:00AM 




Prep Date: 10/14/2011 



File Name: 

101711 









run #: 

Aluminum 7429-90-5 228 

ug/L 50 14 

1 


ug/L 100 15 

Barium 7440-39-3 13.6 BC ug/L 10 0.16 


ug/L 1.0 0.060 

Cadmium 7440-43-9 8.27 BC ug/L 6.0 0.51 

Calcium 7440-70-2 4,020 

ug/L 100 13 


ug/L 10 1.8 

Iron 7439-89-6 250 

ug/L 50 2.7 

Lead 7439-92-1 ND 

ug/L 50 11 

Magnesium 7439-96-4 263 

ug/L 100 12 


ug/L 10 0.66 


ug/L 10 1.8 


ug/L 40 2.7 


ug/L 1,000 310 


ug/L 15 0.66 


ug/L 3,000 28 

Tin 7440-31-5 ND 

ug/L 50 13 




Prep Date: 10/18/2011 



File Name: 









run #: 


mg/L 1.0 1.0 

1 


Page 7 of 17


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1110017 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


CHIL R-1 



9/29/2011 11:15:00AM 



Prep Date: 10/13/2011 



File Name: 





Analyst Initials: KG 




run #: 


mg/L 0.051 0.026 

1 




Prep Date: 10/6/2011 


Analytical Method ID: SM4500-NH3D - Ammonia, Selective Electrode Method - Ammonia File Name: 

Prep Method ID: 4500-NH3D 








run #: 


mg/L 0.050 0.0069 

1 

Page 8 of 17


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1110017 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


CON LK-1 



9/29/2011 11:00:00AM 




Prep Date: 10/4/2011 











run #: 

Total settleable solids 0.100 

mL/L 0.10 0.10 

1 




Prep Date: 10/12/2011 





Report Basis: 


A111013001 

As Received 


25.00 ml 



run #: 


mg/L 0.10 0.015 

1 




Prep Date: 10/4/2011 



File Name: 



Report Basis: 


A111016004 

As Received 


50.00 ml 



run #: 



1 




Prep Date: 10/6/2011 











run #: 


NTU 0.20 0.050 

1 

Page 9 of 17 

ml 

ml


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1110017 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


CON LK-1 



9/29/2011 11:00:00AM 




Prep Date: 10/6/2011 











run #: 

Total Suspended Solids 13.0 

mg/L 10 5.0 

1 




Prep Date: 10/6/2011 











run #: 

Total Dissolved Solids ND 

mg/L 20 6.0 

1 




Prep Date: 10/3/2011 



File Name: 









run #: 

pH 6.4 

pH 0.0 0.0 

1 




Prep Date: 10/4/2011 



File Name: 









run #: 

Alkalinity, Total ND 

mg/L CaCO 4.0 0.77 

1 

Page 10 of 17


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1110017 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


CON LK-1 



9/29/2011 11:00:00AM 




Prep Date: 10/14/2011 



File Name: 

101711 









run #: 

Aluminum 7429-90-5 613 

ug/L 50 14 

1 


ug/L 100 15 

Barium 7440-39-3 15.6 

ug/L 10 0.16 


ug/L 1.0 0.060 


ug/L 6.0 0.51 

Calcium 7440-70-2 1,430 

ug/L 100 13 


ug/L 10 1.8 

Iron 7439-89-6 1,150 

ug/L 50 2.7 

Lead 7439-92-1 ND 

ug/L 50 11 

Magnesium 7439-96-4 398 

ug/L 100 12 

Manganese 7439-96-5 35.1 

ug/L 10 0.66 


ug/L 10 1.8 


ug/L 40 2.7 

Potassium 7440-09-7 1,440 

ug/L 1,000 310 


ug/L 15 0.66 

Sodium 7440-23-5 5,650 

ug/L 3,000 28 

Tin 7440-31-5 ND 

ug/L 50 13 




Prep Date: 10/18/2011 



File Name: 









run #: 

Hardness, Total 5.2 

mg/L 1.0 1.0 

1 


Page 11 of 17


Project: 

Client: 





Matrix: 

A1110017 


Shipley Group 

None 

Aqueous 


CON LK-1 



9/29/2011 11:00:00AM 



Prep Date: 10/13/2011 



File Name: 









run #: 

Phosphorus, Total and Ortho 0.059 

mg/L 0.051 0.026 

1 




Prep Date: 10/6/2011 


Analytical Method ID: SM4500-NH3D - Ammonia, Selective Electrode Method - Ammonia File Name: 

Prep Method ID: 4500-NH3D 








run #: 


mg/L 0.050 0.0069 

1 

Page 12 of 17


Project: 

Client: 



A1110017 


Shipley Group 

None 






Method: 

SampleNum 

A111005001-MB 

A111005001 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

10/4/2011 

A1109238-01B Batch QC 10/4/2011 9:45:00AM 

A1110017-01B CHIL R-1 10/4/2011 9:45:00AM 

A1110017-02B CON LK-1 10/4/2011 9:45:00AM 

A111005001-LCS LCS 10/4/2011 9:45:00AM 

A1109238-01B-DUP DUP 

10/4/2011 9:45:00AM 

A1109238-01B-MS MS 10/4/2011 9:45:00AM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

T111007004-MB 

T111007004 

SM4500-NH3D - Ammonia, Selective Electrode Method - Ammoni 



DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

10/6/2011 

A1110017-01A CHIL R-1 10/6/2011 3:00:00PM 

A1110017-02A CON LK-1 10/6/2011 3:00:00PM 

B1109156-01B Batch QC 10/6/2011 3:00:00PM 

T111007004-LCS LCS 10/6/2011 3:00:00PM 

B1109156-01B-DUP DUP 10/6/2011 3:00:00PM 

B1109156-01B-MS MS 10/6/2011 3:00:00PM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A111013001-MB 

A111013001 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

10/12/2011 

A1110017-01D CHIL R-1 10/12/2011 11:00:00AM 

A1110017-02D CON LK-1 10/12/2011 11:00:00AM 

A1110095-02C Batch QC 10/12/2011 11:00:00AM 

A111013001-LCS LCS 10/12/2011 11:00:00AM 

A1110095-02C-DUP DUP 

10/12/2011 11:00:00AM 

A1110095-02C-MS MS 10/12/2011 11:00:00AM 

Page 13 of 17


Project: 

Client: 



A1110017 


Shipley Group 

None 






Method: 

SampleNum 

T111014007-MB 

T111014007 




DataFile 

A1110017-01C CHIL R-1 

101711 

A1110017-02C CON LK-1 

101711 

B1110058-01A Batch QC 

101711 

T111014007-LCS LCS 

101711 

B1110058-01A-DUP DUP 

101711 

B1110058-01A-MS MS 

101711 

B1110058-01A-MSD MSD 

101711 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A111014001-MB 

A111014001 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

10/14/2011 

10/17/2011 1:58:51PM 

10/17/2011 2:04:12PM 

10/17/2011 2:47:06PM 

10/17/2011 1:53:29PM 

10/17/2011 2:52:27PM 

10/17/2011 2:57:48PM 

10/17/2011 3:03:09PM 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

10/6/2011 

A1110017-01B CHIL R-1 10/6/2011 3:50:00PM 

A1110017-02B CON LK-1 10/6/2011 3:50:00PM 

A111014001-LCS LCS 10/6/2011 3:50:00PM 

A1110017-01B-DUP DUP 

10/6/2011 3:50:00PM 

A1110017-01B-MS MS 10/6/2011 3:50:00PM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A111016003-MB 

A111016003 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

10/6/2011 

A1110017-01B CHIL R-1 10/6/2011 5:45:00PM 

A1110017-02B CON LK-1 10/6/2011 5:45:00PM 

A111016003-LCS LCS 10/6/2011 5:45:00PM 

A111016003-LCSD LCSD 10/6/2011 5:45:00PM 

A1110017-01B-DUP DUP 

10/6/2011 5:45:00PM 

Page 14 of 17


Project: 

Client: 



A1110017 


Shipley Group 

None 






Method: 

SampleNum 

A111016004-MB 

A111016004 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

10/4/2011 

A1110017-01B CHIL R-1 10/4/2011 11:57:00AM 

A1110017-02B CON LK-1 10/4/2011 11:57:00AM 

A111016004-LCS LCS 10/4/2011 11:57:00AM 

A1110017-01B-DUP DUP 

10/4/2011 11:57:00AM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

T111017009-MB 

T111017009 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

10/13/2011 

A1110017-01A CHIL R-1 10/14/2011 11:45:00AM 

A1110017-02A CON LK-1 10/14/2011 11:45:00AM 

T111017009-LCS LCS 10/14/2011 11:45:00AM 

A1110017-01A-DUP DUP 

10/14/2011 11:45:00AM 

A1110017-01A-MS MS 10/14/2011 11:45:00AM 



Method: 

SampleNum 

A111017001-MB 

A111017001 




DataFile 

Prep Date: 

AnalysisDate 

10/6/2011 

A1110017-01B CHIL R-1 10/6/2011 5:00:00PM 

A1110017-02B CON LK-1 10/6/2011 5:00:00PM 

A111017001-LCS LCS 10/6/2011 5:00:00PM 

A1110017-02B-DUP DUP 

10/6/2011 5:00:00PM 

Page 15 of 17


Project: 

Client: 



A1110017 


Shipley Group 

None 






Result Field: 





























Page 16 of 17


Project: 

Client: 



A1110017 


Shipley Group 

None 



A1110017 

TestPkgName 

Basis 

# Sig Figs 










4500-NH3D/4500-NH3D (Aqueous) - Ammonia As Received 2 




Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Report to PQL 

Page 17 of 17

APPENDIX G 

STREAM GAGING CONNELLY LAKE OUTLET 

(GLH STARTED IN SEPTEMBER 2011)

Although a stream gage was installed at the outlet of Connelly Lake in 

September 2011, no stream gage data has not been collected up to this 

point and is therefore unavailable.

APPENDIX H 

CONNELLY LAKE, OUTLET STREAM, AND CHILKOOT RIVER 

FISH HABITAT SURVEY (ADF&G – 1995)

( 

Connolly Lake showing the inflatable raft used for survey work. 

11

The main (glacial) inlet stream to Connolly Lake. 

Clear water inlet stream at south end of Connolly Lake. 

12

Typical stream reach of Hydro Creek, looking upstream near confluence with the 

Chilkoot River. 

14

Trap catches in the lower section of Power Creek. 

16

Upper limits of fish habitat on Power Creek. 

17

Outlet to Glory Hole, looking upstream toward bridge. 

20

Minnow trap set in the Glory Hole. 

22

Culvert crossing at the tributary to the Glory Hole outlet. 

24

View of stream # 11, looking upstream toward the bridge. 

Off channel rearing pool on stream #11, immediately upstream of bridge. 

26

Slough below stream #12. 

28

View of Reeves Creek looking downstream from bridge. 

Setting a minnow trap in Reeves Creek just above the bridge. 

30

View of Bear Creek looking downstream toward confluence with Chilkoot River. 

Upwelling spring area of Bear Creek, spawning sockeye are visible in foreground. 

32

View of stream #13 from road. 

34

Stream above stream # 13 flowing across the road. 

36

Glacial stream at the end of the existing road. 

38

Draft Study Plan Vol 1 (PDF) - Alaska Power and Telephone Company

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?