Alaska–Canada Rail Link: Phase II Feasibility Study (2012–2013)

This page presents Phase 2 materials (2012–2013). For Phase 1 (2005–2007), see this page.

Alaska–Canada Railroad Project (Phase II), March 2012:
» Incremental Expansion Project Breakout — PDF
Prepared by Paul Metz, PhD, CPG, P.G. and Mark Taylor, P.E., University of Alaska Fairbanks.
» Alaska–Canada Rail Link — Phase II Feasibility Study (2012–2013) — PDF
Agency: Commerce, Community and Economic Development  •  Grant Recipient: Community & Economic Dev.  •  Project Type: Planning and Research  •  Project Title: Alaska Canada Rail Link Phase II Feasibility Study  •  State Funding Requested: $1,100,000
Tip: Click the three headings below to expand the hidden content: Completed Work Products (selected list, 2000–2011), Work in Progress (as referenced), and Proposals Submitted to ADOT&PF.

Brief Project Description

The University of Alaska Fairbanks has completed several major investigations on the economic feasibility of both extending the Alaska Railroad in–state as well as connecting the Alaska Railroad to the North American railroad grid. This project was intended to replace $1.1 million in federal funding to complete five remaining tasks for the Phase II Feasibility Investigation for the Alaska–Canada Rail Link Project, with a final report targeted for completion by December 31, 2013.

Entity Responsible for Ongoing Operation & Maintenance

Alaska Railroad Corporation

Grant Recipient Contact Information

Paul Metz, Principal Investigator
Address: PO Box 755800, Fairbanks, Alaska 99775
Phone: (907) 474–6749    Email: pametz@alaska.edu

Mark Taylor, P.E., Co–Principal Investigator
College of Engineering and Mines, University of Alaska Fairbanks
P.O. Box 755800, Fairbanks, Alaska 99775–5800
Phone: (907) 301–3905

Detailed Project Description & Justification

Over the past decade, UAF has undertaken extensive investigations into the Alaska–Canada Rail Link (ACRL) and Alaska railroad extensions to support mineral and energy development. Work has been supported by the U.S. Departments of Defense, State, and Transportation, via the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (ADOT&PF). Major products include: the 2005 Eielson–Delta Junction Rail Extension and Tanana River Bridge study; Rails to Resources to Ports — ACRL Phase I Feasibility Study (2007); and multiple analyses supporting the Port MacKenzie Rail Extension (2008–2011).

Studies indicate that more than 7,200 known mineral occurrences in Alaska and 16,000+ along the ACRL corridor in the Yukon and NW British Columbia could generate long–term economic benefits for Alaska, Canadian provinces, and both national economies. The ACRL may also positively influence North Slope natural gas development.

Funding Context

Work proceeded under a Reimbursable Service Agreement (RSA) between UAF and ADOT&PF beginning in October 2006, funded from U.S. DOT sources. As of end–2011, the RSA balance was $1.9 million; $1.1 million was returned to ADOT&PF to complete the Alaska Railroad Master Plan (a prerequisite for FRA funding). Replacement via the State FY2013 Capital Budget did not occur, limiting Phase II work primarily to Task 1 absent new funds.

Phase II — Remaining Tasks

  1. Task 1: Field investigations (engineering geologic mapping & material site delineation) between Livengood and the Yukon River. Estimated cost: $800,000. (2012 Field Season)
  2. Task 2: Edit/supplement USGS ARDF and Canadian Mine Files to increase Mineral Freight Forecast Model deposits by 5,000 occurrences (≈25%). Estimated cost: $255,000. (By Dec 2012)
  3. Task 3: Refine and update capital & operating cost estimates from Phase I. Estimated cost: $230,000. (By Jun 30, 2013)
  4. Task 4: Update mineral freight revenue estimate using the revised model. Estimated cost: $65,000. (By Jun 30, 2013)
  5. Task 5: Complete a Phase II Benefit/Cost Analysis based on revised data. Estimated cost: $430,000. (By Sep 30, 2013)
  6. Task 6: Incorporate results into the Phase II Final Report. Estimated cost: $120,000. (By Dec 31, 2013)

Bibliography & Supporting Work

Completed Work Products (selected list, 2000–2011)
  1. Metz, P.A., 2011, Site characterization for a railroad extension in the sub-arctic of interior Alaska.
  2. Billings, M.E. & Metz, P.A., 2011/2013, Lime treatment of fine-grained Alaska soils .
  3. Bohart, C.W., 2011, Engineering economic analysis for a railroad extension from Dunbar siding to Livengood .
  4. Bolz, P. & Metz, P.A., 2011, CO2 flue gas injection site investigation. NETL proceedings (slides).
  5. Brooks, C. et al., 2011, Mineral Occurrence Revenue Estimation & Visualization (MOREV) tool .
  6. Brooks, C. et al., 2011, Expanding Alaska–Canada Rail: Visualizing revenue, cost & CO2 impacts .
  7. Bundtzen, T.K. et al., 2011, Material site investigations, Dunbar–Livengood Rail Extension Route .
  8. Ferrel, S.M. & Lautala, P.T., 2011, Rail embankment stabilization in permafrost.
  9. Zhenhua, R. (Rui) et al., 2011, Pipeline construction cost overruns analysis.
  10. Zhenhua, R. et al., 2011, Historical pipeline construction cost analysis.
  11. Zhenhua, R. et al., 2011, Regression models to estimate pipeline costs.
  12. Metz, P.A., 2011, Natural Resource Development & Port MacKenzie Rail Extension. State budget backup (cites item) · AK Legislature packet.
  13. Brooks, C., Metz, P.A., & Shuchman, R., 2011, MOREV Tool Pamphlet. overview.
  14. Shuchman, R. et al., 2011, Transportation Carbon Accounting Module Pamphlet. context.
  15. Metz, P.A., 2010, Coal–to–Liquid Fuels Production: Energy security.
  16. Bohart, C.; Thorum, E.; Metz, P.A., 2010, Dunbar–Livengood Rail Extension Pre-feasibility.
  17. Brooks, C. et al., 2010, MOREV — Rail revenue & GHG in Alaska–NW Canada. overview.
  18. Li, H., 2009, Sonic wave propagation in freezing soils (Ph.D. dissertation).
  19. Metz, P.A. et al., 2009, Annotated Bibliography of the Alaska Railroad .
  20. Kumar, P., 2008, Port MacKenzie material handling system. MSB/State backup · Port Master Plan 2016.
  21. Jing, L., 2008, Modeling dynamic active layer in permafrost (M.S. thesis).
  22. Penjore, T., 2008, Aggregate resources in Port MacKenzie area.
  23. Rai, P., 2008, Lime stabilization on Port MacKenzie extension.
  24. Metz, P.A., 2008, Landslide risk near Denali NP & Preserve.
  25. Metz, P.A. et al., 2008, Mineral freight forecasts along ACRL corridor.
  26. Metz, P.A. et al., 2008, Route locations & benefits to Alaska (Map, 1:1,000,000).
  27. Wiltse, N., 2007, Rock quarry operation feasibility simulation.
  28. Metz, P.A., 2007, ACRL & gas pipeline economic frontiers.
  29. Boland, K.; Metz, P.A.; et al., 2007, ACRL Feasibility Study Phase I Final Report.
  30. Metz, P.A., 2007, Alaska Railroad extension — Port MacKenzie to Canadian Border.
  31. Metz, P.A., 2007, Mineral occurrences along Port MacKenzie extension.
  32. Metz, P.A., 2007, Mineral occurrences in Alaska & NW Canada (SAME meeting).
  33. ACRL Working Group, 2006, Pre–Feasibility Study.
  34. Blaszak, M., 2006, Finance Regulatory Review (Van Horne Institute).
  35. HDR/HLB Decision Economics, 2006, Cost–benefit Analysis for ACRL.
  36. Lockheed Martin Space Ops, 2006, ACRL impact on North Slope development.
  37. Lockheed Martin Space Ops, 2006, Market analysis of North Slope O&G activity.
  38. Metz, P.A., 2006, Site selection for petrochemical complex in Alaska.
  39. Metz, P.A., 2006, Mineral freight forecast for ACRL (Vancouver workshop).
  40. Metz, P.A. et al., 2006, Limestone supply & demand in Alaska.
  41. Metz, P.A., 2006, Mineral freight for Fairbanks–Border extension.
  42. Metz, P.A., 2005, Pipeline development in Arctic/Sub–Arctic regions.
  43. Metz, P.A., 2005, Opportunity & Risk Analysis of ACRL.
  44. Jing, L. et al., 2005, Modeling active layer in permafrost with GIS.
  45. Metz, P.A., 2005, Eielson–Delta Junction access — Final report.
  46. Metz, P.A., 2005, Mineral & energy resources along Alaska rail corridor.
  47. Metz, P.A., 2004, Geologic hazards for Alaska gas pipeline routes.
  48. Metz, P.A., 2004, Energy, minerals, & infrastructure for petrochemical industry.
  49. Metz, P.A., 2003, Fairbanks to Big Delta extension (FNSB Task Force).
  50. Metz, P.A., 2002, Geologic hazards for Alaska gas pipeline routes.
  51. Metz, P.A., 2001, A/C rail link in N.A. energy transport system.
  52. Metz, P.A., 2001, Testimony: Natural Gas Pipelines Committee.
  53. Metz, P.A., 2001, Alaska mineral resources & the A/C rail link.
  54. Metz, P.A., 2001, Status of A/C rail link (Legislature testimony).
  55. Metz, P.A., 2000, Mineral resources along Fairbanks–Border extension.
Work in Progress (as referenced)
Proposals Submitted to ADOT&PF for Work Related to Previous ACRL Investigations
  1. Alaska Railroad Master Plan: Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities — $1,100,000.
    The Alaska Railroad Master Plan would benefit from the large volume of data and reports generated by the Alaska–Canada Rail Link Project. The plan must include provisions for the route locations necessary to connect the major mineral and energy resources of Alaska with a bulk transportation system provided by the Alaska Railroad Corporation. Incorporating this data in the short time period necessary to comply with the federal mandate to have such a plan in place by the end of 2012 shall be a challenge. To date there has been no reply to the proposal.
  2. Western Alaska Transportation Corridor Assessment and Mineral Freight Forecast: Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities — $404,130.
    ADOT&PF has proposed the construction of roads to Nome and to the Brooks Range Copper Belt to provide road access to the mineral resources in these regions. This proposal provides for the application of the mineral freight forecast tools developed for the Alaska–Canada Rail Link Project to assess all the mineral resources along the various road corridors to western and northern Alaska. This tool can be utilized to estimate the expected tonnages of mineral and energy materials that may occur in the regions and thus determine the most appropriate method(s) for developing transportation systems within a transportation corridor. To date there has been no reply to the proposal.
    Note (Nov 6, 2012): Alaska voters approved a $453.5 million bond measure funding multiple projects, including $30 million for the Alaska Railroad rail extension to Port MacKenzie (Matanuska–Susitna Borough), $10 million for port design and construction in Nome, and $6.5 million for the Nenana–Totchaket resource development corridor — a potential beginning of a future auto– and railroad to Nome (InterBering).