Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPilot Station Waste Heat 1992State of Alaska Walter J. Hickel, Governor Alaska Energy Authority A Public Corporation November 23, 1992 The Honorable Fred Lamont, Sr. Mayor City of Pilot Station P.O. Box 5040 Pilot Station, Alaska 99650 Subject: Waste Heat Concept Design Report Dear Mayor Lamont: Please find enclosed a copy of the Waste Heat Concept Design Report prepared by the Alaska Energy Authority for your community. This report identifies potential waste heat end-users and provides an estimate of the amount of fuel that would be saved (in both gallons and dollars) for several different combinations of end-users. A cost estimate based on prevailing wage rates and contractor construction is also included for construction of the most feasible waste heat end-user combination. The designs presented herein are schematic in nature and should not be construed as being complete in design or function. A thorough review of content and correctness should be performed prior to use in the development of construction documents. The Energy Authority is currently in the process of reviewing the cost estimates and proposed waste heat end-user combinations to determine if a waste heat project would be economically feasible for your community. If additional information is required, a member of my staff will contact you. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call Brian Gray or Steve Stasse] at 800-478-7877 or (907) 561-7877 or FAX (907) 561-8584. lg id Ce A Lil, Y Director/Rural Programs SS:DDC:nk Attachment as stated ce: Mark T. Teitzel, AVEC (Without Report) PO. Box 190869 704 East Tudor Road = Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 Fax: (907) 561-8584 92Q4\NK3923DO0C(1) Alaska Energy Authority Public Corporation February 6, 1992 Mr. Earle V. Ausman, P.E. Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Subject: Contract #2800098 Work Order #8 (Noatak Waste Heat) Work Order #14 (Tununak Waste Heat) Work Order #15 (Nunapitchuk Waste Heat) Work Order #13 (Scammon Bay Waste Heat) Work Order #12 (Pilot Station Waste Heat) Dear Mr. Ausman: We have received your final invoices dated February 3, 1992, in the amounts of $1,886.58, $1,582.33, $1,404.58, $1,650.03, and $1,550.93 respectively on the work orders referenced above. This is to notify you that these work orders are being closed out. Any remaining funds that had been set aside for these work orders will be disencumbered and made available for future work under the contract. Sincerely, j = y / (hu oll Cin S btofld David Denig- ree / Director of Rural Programs cc: Steve Stassel, Alaska Energy Authority, Gary Smith, Alaska Energy Authority Don Whelan, Alaska Energy Authority Marlys Hagen, Alaska Energy Authority © PO. BoxAM Juneau, Alaska 99811 (907) 465-3575 ~Z PO. Box 190869 704 East Tudor Road =Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 This study was prepared under contract with the Alaska Energy Authority by: Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99503 The accepted conclusions are: 1. A potential for waste heat recovery has been identified in the community of Pilot Station. Ds Based on the proposed design and project cost estimate, the project is not economically feasible and does not appear to justify conventional financing. Alternate funding sources and/or revisions to the project scope will need to be evaluated. 3. The designs presented herein are schematic in nature and should not be construed as being complete in design or function. A thorough review of content and correctness should be performed prior to use in the development of construction documents. The concept-level project cost estimate for Scenario #1 is $378,728. Final review comments and responses which were not incorporated into the report have been included in Appendix A. Accepted: Botie— CS Zf 24/7 — Brian C. Gray Date Project Manager RVEET = Date Accepted: ary D. Smith Manager of Rural Projects polarconsult alaska, inc. ENGINEERS « SURVEYORS * ENERGY CONSULTANTS Alaska Energy Authority February 5, 1992 P.O. Box 19086 Anchorage, Ak. 99519-0869 Atm.: Brian Gray Rural Systems Engineer Re: Waste Heat Reports for nine Villages. Dear Brian: We are transmitting this letter as requested in response to your technical questions on the nine waste heat recovery reports prepare for AEA. The questions are from the second review of these reports by Steven Stassel of AEA. Copies of the review comments are included with this letter. There were a number of basic assumptions made during the progress of these reports. As the projects are to be constructed in AVEC power plants, the modifications and connections within the plant were to meet with their requirements. We feel that there are a number of ways to decrease the cost of these projects without major impact on the reliability of the power plants by revising the piping connection schematics. Electric demand at the plants varies both hourly and seasonally. As the use of engines is entirely up to the local operator, it is difficult to determine which single engine, or which combination of engines, will be running at any one time. AVEC is also in the process of replacing aging or failed engines, and increasing the size of some plants due to demand as part of their normal maintenance. New engines are mostly Cummins engines that are more efficient. These engines produce less waste heat than the older engines they are replacing. These two factors have a major impact on the amount of waste heat available. Our analysis assumed that the most efficient engine at each plant would run continuously. Station heat requirements were based on having the engine requiring the greatest amount of supplementar\ waste heat to keep the buildings warm, running continuously as shown in the builling summary sheets in Appendix A. 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE ® SUITE 310 * ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258-2420 * TELEFAX (907) 258-2419 polarconsult alaska, inc. February 5, 1992 District Heat Report Engine manufacturer's specification data is listed in Table I-A. Waste heat utilization simulation work sheets used more detailed heat rejection information at various loads, supplied by the engine manufacturer's. Heat loss figures input into the station heat loss section of the waste heat utilization simulation work sheets were for the engine requiring the most waste heat to keep all the AVEC buildings at 65°F. Heat content of 96,000 BTU for a gallon of heating oil was used for this report. This value was arrived at by using a gross heating value of 132,000 BTU for arctic grade diesel times an estimated efficiency of 73% for boilers. Since the report conclusions are entirely in gallons of oil saved, these assumptions are critical. The BTU content of oil varies depending on the source, blending and grades used, so results can vary plus or minus 5% due to variations in heat content. Further, oil fired equipment efficiencies vary greatly which introduces another plus or minus 5% possible variation in the results. All reports assumed that three trips would be made to each village by a skilled crew each year, to perform routine maintenance. Follows are answers to review comments for each report, as well as copies of the review comments. Sincerely Yours Earle V. Ausman wh9; WHOLO9GB.DOC polarconsult alaska, inc. February 5, 1992 District Heat Report Pilot Station Waste Heat Recovery 3 i. All reports assumed that three trips would be made to each village by a skilled crew each year, to perform routine maintenance. Cummins KTA1150 in position 2 is 1200 rpm, not 1800 rpm as indicated in Table I-A. 1200 rpm used in all calculations. (See Appendix A.) As the use of engines is entirely up to the local operator, it is difficult to determine which single, or which combination of engines will be running at any one time. It was assumed that the most efficient engine, the Cummins KTA 1150 in position 2, would be running continuously. Preliminary analysis has shown that circulation in the piping system can be accommodated by the engine pumps. If during final design we find that engine pumps are marginal, then small booster pumps would be employed. Gallons of fuel consumed were rounded to the nearest 10 gallons in the text of the report. 13.A We could not locate an as-built of the sewer collection system in Pilot Station. 13.B 15: 16. 19, 20. The sewer is a gravity system that drains from the School, North across the State road ROW into a lagoon. There is a fuel fill line from the beach. The beginning portion of this line is shown in the figure. The exact alignment is not known past the location shown, although it can be assumed that the line crosses the proposed pipeline from the new power plant. There are 24,698 gallons available. Available heat to users should be as indicated in the waste heat utilization summary. Values listed in the text are 39 gallons high. Air changes for the building add up to 12 as shown in the building heating summaries, and listed in Appendix A, page 1. Annual fuel usage was distributed on a monthly basis using heating degree days. A base of 125 gallons per month was used to flatten the curve and make it conform to the monthly fuel usage indicated by the operator, and common to other buried water distribution systems in rural Alaska. The water is heated to keep the water lines from freezing. 21.A Fluid used in the user building hyd:. nic heating systems vary, and would not be changed by the connection to the district heating system. Heat exchangers are provided between district heat system and building hydronic systems. 22.B Waste heat utilization simulation worksheet indicates 21,897 btu/hr heat loss in the pipeline. This is close to the calculated 21,900 btu/hr listed in the letter. Alaska Energy Authority A ®uplic Corporation May 16, 1991 Mr. Earle Ausman Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Subject: Pilot Station Waste Heat Recovery Pre-Final Report Dear Mr. Ausman: We have reviewed the Pre-Final Report and Concept Level Design for the above referenced project and have the following comments. Please provide written responses to all review comments indicating if comment was incorporated or providing an appropriate answer/explanation with the final submittal. le Page i, Executive Summary, 4th Paragraph - capitalize "C" in "concept #1." a Table of Contents: A. List of Figures - Tables and glossary page numbers don't correlate with actual page numbers. Coordinate. B. Section III. D. is on page 7, not 8 Ce Section IV. A-1 through 3 are on page 10, not 9. Section IV. A. 4 is on page 11, not 10 D. Section VIII. C. - capitalize H in heating. Bi Page ii, Executive Summary, paragraph 4 - “Routine Maintenance... three trips..... each year." Replace "three" with “two." 4. Page ii, Executive Summary, paragraph 6 - replace "Northwest" with "Western." 5. Page 5, Section III, Power Plant=Is KTA 1150 1800 rpm or 1200 rpm? Please verify correct data in table. 6; Section III C, paragraph 1 - Figure III-1 does not show what is stated. S PO.BoxAM Juneau, Alaska 99814 (907) 465-3575 1. ka 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 ® ath P%, 199869 704 East Tudor Road §=Anchorage. Alaska (907) Mr. Ea May 16 Page 2 10. Il. Wie 3% 14. 15). 16. 17. 18. 19); 20. 2l. rle Ausma » 1991 Section III C, paragraph 2 - Please specify which engine is assumed to be operating. Rather than “an operating engine." Section III-O0, Figure V-3, page 18 - Can engine circulating pumps handle piping losses without a booster pump (see note one on drawing.) Figure III-2 is not called out in Section III. Section IV A.2 - "See Figure IV-1", not "V-1." Section IV A.3 - Number of gallons doesn't agree with Table IV-A. Section IV B.2 - Who owns the unsubdivided tract. Figure V-1: A. Is there a sewer line at the high school? If so, where. B. How are the high school fuel tanks filled? Is there a fuel filt line or transfer line. If so, indicate on drawing. Page 24, last paragraph - replace “engine” with “primary." Section IX, page 42, first paragraph - According to table IX-A there is less than 24,700 gallons available. Table IX A - Heat available to engines does not agree with waste heat utilization worksheet. Coordinate. Section IX, page 44, paragraph 1 - Only "two" concepts summarized, not "three." Section X - capitalize "W" in western. Appendix A, page 1, Power Plant Heat - Total air changes should be 14, rather than 12. Appendix A, page 1, User's Monthly Fuel Oil Usage - Explain the purpose of "125" in the water treatment plant calculation. Appendix A, Waste Heat Utilization Simulation Worksheets. A. Page 3 of 3 - please identify fluid used in the "User Building." ana InNATEA ION Mr. Earle Ausma May 16, 1991 Page 3 B. According to figure V-1, page 16, the school is 530 feet away from the new power plant location. Therefore, the arctic piping run should be 2 X 530 = 1060 feet. At 20.66 BTU/HR/FT. the heat loss would be 21,900 BTU/HR, not 10,948. Coordinate. If you have any questions, please call me at 561-7877 or 261-7282. pe. Hi ff Mo Siva ‘St sel Rural Systems Engineer SSegd a1N\.1NN764/2) Alaska Energy Authority A Public Corporation June 12, 1991 Mike Dahl Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue, Suite 310 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 SUBJECT: District Heating Report and Concept Level Design Studies for Mountain Village, Noatak, Pilot Station, and Scammon Bay. Dear Mr. Dahl: Thank you for taking the time to meet with me and Steve Stassel Wednesday, June llth to discuss the above referenced projects. I would like to confirm our understanding of our discussion regarding the preferred method for closing out these projects: 1) PCA was directed by the Energy Authority to use a "canned" approach in the design of the heat recovery systems including the design parameters for the AVEC cooling system (including multiple remote radiators, removal of skid mounted radiators, etc.) and the location of the circulating pumps at the end-user buildings. This contributed to the total cost of the proposed heat recovery systems. 2) PCA is agreeable to incorporating “draft" review comments that were omitted from the “pre-final” reports, as well as any new errors that were inadvertently included in the "pre-final" reports, at no additional cost to the Energy Authority. 3) PCA requires reimbursement for services provided to incorporate any new “pre-final” review comments that were not included in the "draft" review comments. 4) A compromise was reached between PCA and AEA that PCA will respond to the technical related questions in the "pre-final" 3 PO. BoxAM Juneau, Alaska 99811 (907) 465-3575 BA PO. Box 190869 701 EastTudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 review comments for the above projects, as well as to any "pre- final" review comments for Nunapitchuk and Tununak, in letter format. In addition, PCA will provide the assumed GPM and head-loss data for all circulating pumps referenced in the Reports. This information will be provided at no additional cost to the Energy Authority. These responses will not be incorporated into the "final" report. In return for fulfilling the requirements of #4 above, PCA will not be required to make any alterations to any of the Reports. In return, AEA will accept the Reports as Final, with the condition that AEA will not be responsible for any typographical errors or technical deficiencies in the reports. Please find enclosed a copy of the acceptance notice to be included with each copy of the reports. If you have any questions, please call me or Steven Stassel at 561- 7877. Sincerely, Lere—C. Brian Gray Project Manager Ss/ enclosure cc: Steve Stassel, Alaska Energy Authority This study was prepared under contract with the Alaska Energy Authority by: Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99503 The accepted conclusions are: La A potential for waste heat recovery has been identified in the community of Mountain Village. Based on the proposed design and project cost estimate, the project is not economically feasible and does not appear to justify conventional financing. Alternate funding sources and/or revisions to the project scope will need to be evaluated. The designs presented herein are schematic in nature and should not be construed as being complete in design or function. A thorough review of content and correctness should be performed prior to use in the development of construction documents. The concept-level project cost estimate for Scenario #6 is $1,002,315. Accepted: Accepted: Brian C. Gray Date Project Manager Gary D. Smith Date Manager of Rural Projects State of Alaska d Walter J. Hickel, Governor Alaska Energy Authority A Public Corporation May 16, 1991 Mr. Earle Ausman Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Subject: Pilot Station Waste Heat Recovery Pre-Final Report Dear Mr. Ausman: We have reviewed the Pre-Final Report and Concept Level Design for the above referenced project and have the following comments. Please provide written responses to all review comments indicating if comment was incorporated or providing an appropriate answer/explanation with the final submittal. 1. Page i, Executive Summary, 4th Paragraph - capitalize "C" in "concept #1." 2. Table of Contents: A. List of Figures - Tables and glossary page numbers don't correlate with actual page numbers. Coordinate. B. Section III. D. is on page 7, not 8 Cie Section IV. A-1 through 3 are on page 10, not 9. Section IV. A. 4 is on page 11, not 10 D. Section VIII. C. - capitalize H in heating. Bis Page ii, Executive Summary, paragraph 4 - "Routine Maintenance.... three trips..... each year." Replace "three" with "two." 4. Page ii, Executive Summary, paragraph 6 - replace "Northwest" with "Western." 5. Page 5, Section III, Power Plant=Is KTA 1150 1800 rpm or 1200 rpm? Please verify correct data in table. 6. Section III C, paragraph 1 - Figure III-1 does not show what is stated. OC PO. Box AM = Juneau, Alaska 998141 (907) 465-3575 x R h , Al | iv 1-7877 o® 2PM 139869 704 East Tudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-78 Mr. Ea May 16 Page 2 10. A. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. rle Ausman , 1991 Section III C, paragraph 2 - Please specify which engine is assumed to be operating. Rather than "an operating engine." Section III-D, Figure V-3, page 18 - Can engine circulating pumps handle piping losses without a booster pump (see note one on drawing.) Figure III-2 is not called out in Section III. Section IV A.2 - "See Figure IV-1", not "V-1." Section IV A.3 - Number of gallons doesn't agree with Table IV-A. Section IV B.2 - Who owns the unsubdivided tract. Figure V-1: A. Is there a sewer line at the high school? If so, where. B. How are the high school fuel tanks filled? Is there a fuel fill line or transfer line. If so, indicate on drawing. Page 24, last paragraph - replace "engine" with "primary." Section IX, page 42, first paragraph - According to table IX-A there is less than 24,700 gallons available. Table IX A - Heat available to engines does not agree with waste heat utilization worksheet. Coordinate. Section IX, page 44, paragraph 1 - Only "two" concepts summarized, not "three." Section X - capitalize "W" in western. Appendix A, page 1, Power Plant Heat - Total air changes should be 14, rather than 12. Appendix A, page 1, User's Monthly Fuel Oil Usage - Explain the purpose of "125" in the water treatment plant calculation. Appendix A, Waste Heat Utilization Simulation Worksheets. A. Page 3 of 3 - please identify fluid used in the "User Building." 9102\JD0754(2) Mr. Earle Ausman May 16, 1991 Page 3 B. According to figure V-1, page 16, the school is 530 feet away from the new power plant location. Therefore, the arctic piping run should be 2 X 530 = 1060 feet. At 20.66 BTU/HR/FT. the heat loss would be 21,900 BTU/HR, not 10,948. Coordinate. If you have any questions, please call me at 561-7877 or 261-7282. Sincerely, flo ff Sho ‘Steven Stabsel Rural Systems Engineer SS:jd 9102\JD0754(3) MEMORANDUM Date: 10/09/90 TOs Earle Ausman Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. From: Brian Gray Rural Systems Engineer Alaska Energy Authority Re: Pilot Station Waste Heat Recovery Draft Report We have reviewed the Draft Report and Concept Level Design for the above referenced project and have the following comments. Please provide written responses to all review comments indicating if comment was incorporated or providing an appropriate answer/explanation with the pre-final submittal. ole ie Executive Summary paragraph 1 - Pilot Station is not OL located in northwest Alaska but rather Wester} laska. Sr com OK Executive Summary paragraph 3 - Add a sentence Vv explaining the concepts that were investigated. ot aie Executive Summary paragraph 4 - Revise to say "Project cost ... for (Concep pt #1 are as follows". noT Ap 's OL as Table of Contents - Correct format on I-E. v 5 List of Figures - Correct format on IV-4. oO ok 6. Section I-D - See comment #1. 6k 7: Section I-E, paragraph 2 - Correct spelling of "community’s". ‘a Is the current plan to relocate the existing sete ita 5M or to build a new powerhouse? If a new building is yin planned will it have a similar arrangement to the \ man existing powerhouse? Clarify. Section III-A - The waste heat utilization simulation worksheets use the Cummins generator for determination of the heat available. Is the Cummins in position #2 scheduled to be used as the lead generator? If not revise calculations to reflect the actual model used as the lead generator. 10. ok 7 OC 11. oO i2. OL 135 oie 14. ection III-C, paragraph 2 - A statement should be added which clearly identifies which combination of heat loss figures was used in the waste heat utilization simulation worksheets. Also, change "engine block" to "engine blocks" since more than one standby engine requires heat. Section III-D, paragraph 1 - This paragraph should mention removal of the skid mounted radiators as proposed in Figure V-3. See comment #24. Section III-D, paragraph 1 - Will one of the remote radiators be adequate to meet the heat rejection requirements of any one of the three generators. Section III-D, third paragraph on page 11 - Report should clarify that the electrical systems for the new heat exchanger module only will be connected into a new panel at this location. We assume that the devices located at the user facilities would be connected into the electrical service for that particular building. Section IV, General Comments: A. The Executive Summary states that the two school complexes, the water treatment plant, and the City buildings were studied and yet the report only addresses the high school and the water treatment plant. A section IV-C should be added that \a) VS describes other potential district heating users A oW — investigated and provides some explanation of why dat 15. 16. / LE we they are not included in the various concepts. B. According to Figure V-1 the Clinic and the Fire Station appear to be closer to the high school than the water treatment plant. Were these buildings studied as potential users and if not why? Section IV-1 - The Executive Summary mentions two school complexes. Clarify which buildings comprise the two complexes. The report should also state here that under Concept #1 only the high school building would receive waste heat. Section IV-A-2 - Section I-C-2 mentions soils information as part of the field data gathered yet the report makes no mention of local soils conditions. Are local soils compatible with burying hot distribution piping? Also, the report should indicate any possible buried utilities along the proposed route of the heating piping. le Section IV-A-3 - Is domestic water heated off the O boilers at the high school only or at other school facilities? Clarify. 18. Section IV-A-4 - Address whether the existing high Oe school heating system circulating pumps are likely to be able to accommodate the additional head imposed by the heat exchanger. 0 19. Section IV-B-2 - Clarify which unsubdivided tract is N being referred to and who the owner is. Also, see q comment #16. of) vr 20. Section IV-B-4 - The field notes mention a furnace in for and how will its operation be affected by the waste heat system? Also, the issue of available head on the circulating pumps needs to be addressed. OL C tor water treatment plant. What is the furnace used 21. Section IV-B-4, paragraph #2 - This paragraph should reference the water treatment plant, not the high Ow school. Also, a similar statement should be added to Section IV-A-4. 22. Figure V-1: 2 A. Will the line from the new AVEC location to the ° high school be 2-1/2" diameter under both Concepts 1 & 2? ol: Identify the lines shown near the existing AVEC site and the elementary school. The linetype is not indicated in the legend. Ole: Change label of "pumphouse" to "water treatment plant" to be consistent with the rest of the report. 23. Figure V-2 - Figure V-1 indicates 1-1/2" diameter lines L between the high school and the water treatment plant O while Figure V-2 shows 2". Coordinate. 24. Figure V-3 - Was removal of the skid mounted radiators e- from units #1 & #3 discussed with anyone from AVEC. ~~ Also, is it likely that the pumps on these engines will have sufficient head to circulate through the manifold Jam > “piping, valves, and remote radiators as proposed? jean questions should be addressed in Section III-D. rT ' Vu ¢ 25. igure V-4 - Correct the spelli w " 7 wv OL indicate the estimated GPM, head, and motor “harsepowes \ for the pumps. Also, the legé indicates 2" diameter piping on the supply side while Figures V-1 & V-2 indicate 2-1/2". Coordinate. pi7 Ni 26. vot Figure V-5 - Correct the spelling-ef_ "Grundfos" and indicate the estimated GPM, head, and motor horsepower vik for the pumps. go — : z= 27 Section VI-B-1-b-5 - Add "primazy" prior to "heat ni *~exchanger" and add "pumps," er "piping,". Also, replace "Engine" with "Primary" in the first line of ow np ~ 29. the fifth paragraph on page 24. WD Section VI-B-2-a - See comment #16. 7! Section VIII-D - The first sentence refers to three concepts while Table VIII-A only shows two. Coordinate. Section X - See comment #1. Appendix A, Page 1, Power Plant Heat - There is no indication on the Building Heating Summaries that an additional 2 ACPH has been added. Coordinate. Appendix A, Page 1, User’s Monthly Fuel Usage - Provide an explanation in this section for the constant 125 gallon monthly fuel consumption. Appendix A, Waste Heat Utilization Simulation Worksheets - The following comments apply to the worksheets for all three concepts: A. Confirm that the generator being used for heat availability data is indeed the intended lead unit. See comment #9. B. Revise units under generator data to "(BTU/HR) /(KW)" not KWH as indicated. Se If the multi-purpose, elementary school, and village corporation buildings were not analyzed OT they should not be listed on the worksheet. D. Hourly heat demand variation appears to be incorrect. Heat demand should decrease during the daytime due to higher outside air temperatures and a increased internal heat gains. We have attached an example heat demand variation that you may wish to use. Revise calculations as required. E. Page 3 indicates that the user building hydronic systems utilize water, not glycol. Is this true for both buildings? Fs The Variable Losses indicates a plant heating load of 1,167 Btu/hr/F while the Building Heating Summary for the Cummins generator running with by va insulation in the floor gives a value of 1,444 Hee eee Tih . Coordinate. 34. Appendix A, Waste Heat Utilization Simulation Worksheet, Concept #1, Page 1 - Under Building Data the fuel use for the piping to the water treatment plant eae not appear in Concept #1. Also, the value ey listed for the high school piping appears to be (~~ incorrect. Table IX-A lists the combined piping losses 0 for the high school and water treatment plant as 4,807 ly, ae gallons of fuel. Coordinate. 35 Appendix A, Waste Heat Utilization Simulation Worksheet, Concept #2, Page 1 - Under Building Data the fuel use listed for the high school piping appears to be incorrect. Table IX-A lists the combined piping | losses for the high school and water treatment plant as uy 4,807 gallons of fuel. Coordinate. 36. Appendix A, Waste Heat Utilization Simulation Worksheet, Concept #3, Page 1 - Concept #3 is not even mentioned anywhere in the report. If this concept is a possible alternative (i.e. if the powerhouse may actually remain in its present location for some time) Ae then it should be addressed in the study. Otherwise delete the worksheet for this concept. Also, the value listed for the high school piping fuel use under Building Data appears to be incorrect. Coordinate. 37. Appendix A, Building Heating Summary Calculations - The following comments apply to all three versions of the calculations: A Qualify where the value of 96,000 BTU/Gal for fuel Or a oil comes from. wer oe B. List the units for Bldg. Heat, Heat to Ambient, Z etc. \ Vy 38. Field Notes, item #6 - Paragraph #1 mentions a domestic hot water heater at the high school while paragraph #4 QCvana Section IV-3 state that domestic water is heated by the boilers. Coordinate. yi-39- Provide color photographs in the final report. PSTABGM1 NOORVIK WASTE HEAT RECOVERY ESTIMATION PAGE 1 CONCEPT WASTE HEAT UTILIZATION SIMULATION WORK SHEET. Location: NOORVIK Date: December 14, 1989 Heat rate: 2466 Btu/kwh produced System loss: 54,068 Btu/hour (approx. 38 BTU/FT arctic pipe) Total generation: 1,082,408 kwh/year ANNUAL Local degree days: 1784 1846 2689 1418 944 683 263 356 811 1854 1787 2894 15,049 Assumed diurnal heat Power plant monthly generation: desand variation: on---- nnn --- oan JAN FEB. OMAR APR) MAY) JUN) JUL-AUG SEP OCT)=— NOV: DEC CHECKSUM Fraction:8.6815 6.6916 6.6923 6.6683 6.68805 6.6646 6.6646 6.6728 6.8658 6.8946 6.8983 8.1064 ! Kwh: 88866 99286 186886 95668 87288 78606 ‘76808 78686 78466 162408 186406 115266 1,082,400 Diurnal variation 6.638 6.638 6.658 6.658 6.645 6.645 6.845 6.645 6.845 6.845 6.038 6.038 6.056 8.656 6.656 6.856 6.846 6.6460 6.846 6.848 6.846 6.848 6.036 6.836 6.834 6.634 6.654 6.854 6.636 6.856 6.636 6.856 6.836 6.856 6.834 6.834 6.634 6.654 6.654 6.854 6.655 6.655 6.655 6.655 6.635 6.635 6.054 6.054 6.653 6.655 6.653 6.653 6.655 6.835 6.655 6.655 6.835 6.635 6.833 6.833 6.634 6.654 6.654 6.654 6.658 6.658 6.638 6.6538 6.638 6.638 6.834 6.634 6.658 6.658 6.658 6.858 6.658 6.658 6.658 6.858 6.658 6.658 6.838 6.638 6.642 6.042 6.642 6.842 6.646 6.646 6.648 6.046 6.648 6.046 6.842 6.042 6.642 6.642 6.042 6.642 6.645 6.645 6.645 6.845 6.845 6.845 6.842 8.042 6.647 6.647 6.647 6.647 6.647 6.647 6.647 6.647 6.847 6.647 6.847 6.847 6.648 6.648 6.648 6.648 6.046 6.648 6.648 6.046 6.646 6.646 8.048 0.048 6.647 6.647 6.847 6.647 6.648 6.648 6.648 6.048 6.648 6.648 6.847 6.047 6.645 6.045 6.645 6.658 68.058 6.058 6.058 6.656 6.656 6.645 6.045 6.647 6.647 6.647 6.052 6.652 6.052 6.052 6.852 6.852 6.647 6.647 6.648 6.048 6.848 6.056 6.058 6.058 6.056 6.658 6.656 6.848 6.048 6.648 6.648 6.648 6.856 6.658 6.056 6.058 6.656 6.856 6.648 6.048 6.849 6.649 6.649 6.645 6.845 6.645 6.645 8.645 6.845 6.649 6.049 6.846 6.046 6.646 6.647 6.647 6.647 6.847 6.647 6.647 6.646 6.646 6.645 6.645 6.643 6.056 6.658 6.056 6.058 6.656 6.956 6.645 6.643 6.658 6.658 6.658 6.645 6.645 6.645 6.645 6.645 6.645 6.638 6.638 6.638 6.658 6.658 6.658 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.638 6.838 6.041 6.041 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.841 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.045 6.045 6.645 6.645 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.645 6.645 6.640 6.648 6.046 6.846 6.645 6.645 6.6435 6.643 6.643 6.643 6.846 8.046 Building use per month, gallons of fuel oil BUILDING 1, HIGH SCHOOL 3918) 243112882628 )=1739 6 6 6 2858 3125 3563 4646 © .25,508 BUILDING 2, COMMUNITY BUILDING 6S «6934 «1857718 478 133 196 416 533 984 1868 7,615 BUILDING 3, TREATMENT BUILDING 1719 1779-2813 1366918 581 5 |= 345781 1816 1722—=s« 18 14,581 BUILDING 4 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 a BUILDING 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 8 BUILDING 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 a TELEPHONE CONFERENCE LOG Date: 10/16/90 Between: Brian Gray and Earle Ausman of Polarconsult Re: Noatak and Pilot Station Waste Heat Studies Earle called to try to convince us to leave the diurnal heat demand variation as used in the draft report due to the amount of work required to change all the related calculations, tables, graphs, etc. After discussing the matter with John, I directed him to change the heat demand figures in accordance with the review comments. I told him that we wanted all the reports to use the same basis for heat demand and other assumptions. I gave Earle verbal notice to proceed to final and to obtain cost estimates for both studies after incorporating the review comments. 1016BGT1 State of Alaska: ’ a Steve Cowper, Governor ye. Alaska Energy Authority A PUBlic Corporation TELECOPY (ANCHORAGE Telecopy Phone No. (907) 561-8584) (JUNEAU Telecopy Phone No. (907) 465-3767) TELECOPY SENT TO: - Sor NAME OF COMPANY: Foele mesons: [+ BN ae eae Tre COMPANY ADDRESS: DAN a TELECOPY PHONE NUMBER: 2s3 —-zZ<t1 _. SENDER: are < Soe i TELEPHONE NUMBER: Z2el-7Z2.2 =~ CHARGE CODE: NUMBER OF PAGES SENT: Z INCLUDING THIS COVER PAGE DATE SENT: \o/ om l 22 IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THIS TELECOPY PLEASE CALL: (907) 261-7240-Anchorage (907) 465-3575-Juneau SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: BPrilet Station wWoente Seed ie Sh ee cette rd ee, = RPO BOK AM | sunecu. Alaska 99811 (907) 466-3675 SY PO. Box 190869 =0701 East Tudor Roea = Anchorage Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 TRANSMISSION REPORT THIS DOCUMENT (REDUCED SAMPLE ABOVE) WAS SENT ** COUNT ** # #7 week SEND k% NO REMOTE STATION I. D. START TIME DURATION #PAGES COMMENT q 9072582419 10- 9-90 16:27 4°57" 7 TOTAL 0:04'57" 7 XEROX TELECOPIER 7020 State of Alaska \ Steve Cowper, Governor Alaska Energy Authority A Public Corporation TELECOPY (ANCHORAGE Telecopy Phone No. (907) 561-8584) (JUNEAU Telecopy Phone No. (907) 465-3767) TELECOPY SENT TO: Earle Avera NAME OF coMPANY: Yolarcouss| las COMPANY ADDRESS: Auch. TELECOPY PHONE NUMBER: Z5S-24)9 SENDER: bc av Cr OA es TELEPHONE NUMBER: ZGl-7Z294 CHARGE CODE: NUMBER OF PAGES SENT: a INCLUDING THIS COVER PAGE DATE SENT: \o/ oO O IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THIS TELECOPY PLEASE CALL: (907) 261-7240-Anchorage (907) 465-3575-Juneau SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: f i let are ti ou lk Jaete Weat Dn Lt Ve cor Review ZLouments PO. Box AM Juneau, Alaska 99811 (907) 465-3575 % PO. Box 190869 701 EastTudorRoad Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 Date: To: From: Re: MEMORANDUM 10/09/90 Earle Ausman Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. Brian Gray Rural Systems Engineer Alaska Energy Authority Pilot Station Waste Heat Recovery Draft Report We have reviewed the Draft Report and Concept Level Design for the above referenced project and have the following comments. Please provide written responses to all review comments indicating if comment was incorporated or providing an appropriate answer/explanation with the pre-final submittal. 1. Executive Summary paragraph 1 - Pilot Station is not located in northwest Alaska but rather western Alaska. Executive Summary paragraph 3 - Add a sentence explaining the concepts that were investigated. Executive Summary paragraph 4 - Revise to say "Project cost ... for Concept #1 are as follows". Table of Contents - Correct format on I-E. List of Figures - Correct format on IV-4. Section I-D - See comment #1. Section I-E, paragraph 2 - Correct spelling of "community’s". Is the current plan to relocate the existing structure or to build a new powerhouse? If a new building is planned will it have a similar arrangement to the existing powerhouse? Clarify. Section III-A - The waste heat utilization simulation worksheets use the Cummins generator for determination of the heat available. Is the Cummins in position #2 scheduled to be used as the lead generator? If not revise calculations to reflect the actual model used as the lead generator. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Section III-C, paragraph 2 - A statement should be added which clearly identifies which combination of heat loss figures was used in the waste heat utilization simulation worksheets. Also, change "engine block" to "engine blocks" since more than one standby engine requires heat. Section III-D, paragraph 1 - This paragraph should mention removal of the skid mounted radiators as proposed in Figure V-3. See comment #24. Section III-D, paragraph 1 - Will one of the remote radiators be adequate to meet the heat rejection requirements of any one of the three generators. Section III-D, third paragraph on page 11 - Report should clarify that the electrical systems for the new heat exchanger module only will be connected into a new panel at this location. We assume that the devices located at the user facilities would be connected into the electrical service for that particular building. Section IV, General Comments: A. The Executive Summary states that the two school complexes, the water treatment plant, and the City buildings were studied and yet the report only addresses the high school and the water treatment plant. A section IV-C should be added that describes other potential district heating users investigated and provides some explanation of why they are not included in the various concepts. B. According to Figure V-1 the Clinic and the Fire Station appear to be closer to the high school than the water treatment plant. Were these buildings studied as potential users and if not why? Section IV-1 - The Executive Summary mentions two school complexes. Clarify which buildings comprise the two complexes. The report should also state here that under Concept #1 only the high school building would receive waste heat. Section IV-A-2 - Section I-C-2 mentions soils information as part of the field data gathered yet the report makes no mention of local soils conditions. Are local soils compatible with burying hot distribution piping? Also, the report should indicate any possible buried utilities along the proposed route of the heating piping. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. Section IV-A-3 - Is domestic water heated off the boilers at the high school only or at other school facilities? Clarify. Section IV-A-4 - Address whether the existing high school heating system circulating pumps are likely to be able to accommodate the additional head imposed by the heat exchanger. Section IV-B-2 - Clarify which unsubdivided tract is being referred to and who the owner is. Also, see comment #16. Section IV-B-4 - The field notes mention a furnace in the water treatment plant. What is the furnace used for and how will its operation be affected by the waste heat system? Also, the issue of available head on the circulating pumps needs to be addressed. Section IV-B-4, paragraph #2 - This paragraph should reference the water treatment plant, not the high school. Also, a similar statement should be added to Section IV-A-4. Figure V-1: A. Will the line from the new AVEC location to the high school be 2-1/2" diameter under both Concepts 1 & 2? B. Identify the lines shown near the existing AVEC site and the elementary school. The linetype is not indicated in the legend. c. Change label of "pumphouse" to "water treatment plant" to be consistent with the rest of the report. Figure V-2 - Figure V-1 indicates 1-1/2" diameter lines between the high school and the water treatment plant while Figure V-2 shows 2". Coordinate. Figure V-3 - Was removal of the skid mounted radiators from units #1 & #3 discussed with anyone from AVEC. Also, is it likely that the pumps on these engines will have sufficient head to circulate through the manifold piping, valves, and remote radiators as proposed? These questions should be addressed in Section III-D. Figure V-4 - Correct the spelling of "Grundfos" and indicate the estimated GPM, head, and motor horsepower for the pumps. Also, the legend indicates 2" diameter piping on the supply side while Figures V-1 & V-2 indicate 2-1/2". Coordinate. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. Figure V-5 - Correct the spelling of "Grundfos" and indicate the estimated GPM, head, and motor horsepower for the pumps. Section VI-B-1-b-5 - Add "primary" prior to "heat exchanger" and add "pumps," after "piping,". Also, replace "Engine" with "Primary" in the first line of the fifth paragraph on page 24. Section VI-B-2-a - See comment #16. Section VIII-D - The first sentence refers to three concepts while Table VIII-A only shows two. Coordinate. Section X - See comment #1. Appendix A, Page 1, Power Plant Heat - There is no indication on the Building Heating Summaries that an additional 2 ACPH has been added. Coordinate. Appendix A, Page 1, User’s Monthly Fuel Usage - Provide an explanation in this section for the constant 125 gallon monthly fuel consumption. Appendix A, Waste Heat Utilization Simulation Worksheets - The following comments apply to the worksheets for all three concepts: A. Confirm that the generator being used for heat availability data is indeed the intended lead unit. See comment #9. B. Revise units under generator data to "(BTU/HR) /(KW)" not KWH as indicated. c. If the multi-purpose, elementary school, and village corporation buildings were not analyzed they should not be listed on the worksheet. D. Hourly heat demand variation appears to be incorrect. Heat demand should decrease during the daytime due to higher outside air temperatures and increased internal heat gains. We have attached an example heat demand variation that you may wish to use. Revise calculations as required. E. Page 3 indicates that the user building hydronic systems utilize water, not glycol. Is this true for both buildings? 34. 35. 36. 37s 38. 39. F. The Variable Losses indicates a plant heating load of 1,167 Btu/hr/F while the Building Heating Summary for the Cummins generator running with insulation in the floor gives a value of 1,444 Btu/hr/F. Coordinate. Appendix A, Waste Heat Utilization Simulation Worksheet, Concept #1, Page 1 - Under Building Data the fuel use for the piping to the water treatment plant should not appear in Concept #1. Also, the value listed for the high school piping appears to be incorrect. Table IX-A lists the combined piping losses for the high school and water treatment plant as 4,807 gallons of fuel. Coordinate. Appendix A, Waste Heat Utilization Simulation Worksheet, Concept #2, Page 1 - Under Building Data the fuel use listed for the high school piping appears to be incorrect. Table IX-A lists the combined piping losses for the high school and water treatment plant as 4,807 gallons of fuel. Coordinate. Appendix A, Waste Heat Utilization Simulation Worksheet, Concept #3, Page 1 - Concept #3 is not even mentioned anywhere in the report. If this concept is a possible alternative (i.e. if the powerhouse may actually remain in its present location for some time) then it should be addressed in the study. Otherwise delete the worksheet for this concept. Also, the value listed for the high school piping fuel use under Building Data appears to be incorrect. Coordinate. Appendix A, Building Heating Summary Calculations - The following comments apply to all three versions of the calculations: A. Qualify where the value of 96,000 BTU/Gal for fuel oil comes from. B. List the units for Bldg. Heat, Heat to Ambient, etc. Field Notes, item #6 - Paragraph #1 mentions a domestic hot water heater at the high school while paragraph #4 and Section IV-3 state that domestic water is heated by the boilers. Coordinate. Provide color photographs in the final report. PSTABGM1 “ NOORVIK HASTE HEAT RECOVERY ESTIMATION WASTE HEAT UTILIZATION SIMULATION WORK SHEET. Location: NOORVIK Heat rate: System loss: 8.0477 8.0468 8.0443 8.0428 0.0414 8.0481 8.0398 (6.0381 ) 6.0374 8.9378 ) 6.8367 / 6.0367 0.0378 8.0374 / 9.6381 8.0398 8.0401 8.0414 8.0428 8.8443 6.0466 8.8477 Assumed diurnal heat demand variation: Summer 8.8494 6.0477 6.0468 8.0443 6.8428 8.0414 6.0461 8.0398 6.0381 8.8374 6.8378 6.6367 6.8367 6.0376 6.8374 8.6381 8.8398 6.6401 8.8414 8.8428 8.8443 8.0468 6.6477 8.8494 Date: December 14, 1989 2488 Btu/kwh produced (approx. 38 BTU/FT arctic pipe) 54,068 Btu/hour Total generation: 1,082,408 kwh/year Hour BUILDING 1, HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING 2, COMMUNITY BUILDING BUILDING 3, TREATMENT BUILDING BUILDING 4 BUILDING 5 BUILDING 6 Local degree days: 1784 1846 2689 PAGE 1 1418 Power plant monthly generation: JAN FEB MAR APR Fraction:8.6813 6.8916 6.6923 6.6883 Kwh: 88008 99208 100008 95608 Diurnal variation 6.638 6.838 6.036 6.036 6.834 6.034 6.034 6.034 6.633 6.833 6.034 6.834 6.038 6.038 8.042 6.842 6.042 6.042 6.047 6.047 6.648 6.048 6.047 6.047 6.645 6.845 6.847 6.847 6.648 6.648 6.648 6.648 6.649 6.649 6.846 6.646 6.645 6.643 6.638 6.638 6.638 6.638 6.641 6.641 6.845 6.045 6.040 6.048 Building use 3918 2431 983-934 1719 1779 6.838 8.836 6.034 6.034 8.833 6.034 8.838 8.042 8.642 6.047 6.048 8.847 8.845 8.647 6.048 6.048 8.849 6.846 6.043 6.638 6.638 6.841 8.045 6.6468 6.038 8.836 8.034 8.034 6.833 8.034 6.038 6.842 8.642 8.847 6.048 8.847 8.045 8.847 6.648 8.048 6.049 8.846 6.845 6.838 6.638 6.041 8.845 6.046 944 MAY 683 JUN 263 JUL 6.6885 6.0646 6.0646 87208 76068 70000 8.045 8.048 8.036 8.035 6.635 8.838 8.038 8.048 8.845 8.847 8.048 8.048 8.058 6.652 6.658 6.058 6.045 8.847 6.658 6.045 6.841 6.841 8.841 8.843 8.045 8.048 8.036 8.035 8.835 6.838 8.838 6.048 6.845 6.047 6.048 8.848 6.058 6.852 6.858 6.058 8.845 6.647 8.058 6.845 6.041 6.641 6.41 6.643 6.045 8.648 8.036 8.035 6.835 6.038 8.838 6.048 6.845 6.047 6.648 6.048 8.858 6.852 8.058 6.056 6.845 6.647 6.058 6.645 6.641 6.641 6.841 6.043 per month, gallons of fuel oil 1266 1857 2013 6 6 8 2628 718 1366 6 6 6 1739 478 918 6 6 6 133 253 356 AUG 811 1854 SEP OCT 6.6728 6.6658 8.0946 78808 8.845 8.048 8.036 8.835 8.035 6.838 6.638 6.048 8.845 8.047 6.048 6.048 8.858 8.852 6.058 8.058 6.845 8.847 6.058 6.845 6.641 6.041 6.641 8.843 186 343 70406 162408 8.045 6.045 6.048 6.040 8.036 6.036 6.635 6.835 8.835 6.035 8.038 6.038 6.838 6.838 6.046 6.040 8.845 8.045 8.047 6.047 8.046 6.040 6.648 6.048 8.058 6.058 6.652 6.852 6.058 6.858 6.658 6.858 8.845 8.045 6.647 6.047 6.656 6.058 6.645 8.845 8.641 6.841 6.641 6.041 6.641 6.841 6.843 6.043 2858 = 3125 416 533 781 1616 1787 NOV 6.8983 186488 6.838 8.036 8.034 8.034 8.033 8.034 8.838 8.042 8.042 8.047 6.048 8.047 8.045 6.047 8.48 6.648 6.049 8.846 8.845 6.638 6.638 6.041 8.845 8.048 3563 1722 8 8 8 2094 DEC 8.1064 115208 8.038 8.036 8.034 8.034 8.833 8.034 6.838 8.042 8.042 6.047 8.048 6.047 6.045 8.047 8.048 8.048 8.049 8.046 8.043 8.838 8.838 8.041 8.045 8.048 4846 1868 2818 CONCEPT 3 ANNUAL 15,049 CHECKSUM 1) 1,682,408 25,5088 7,615 14,581 polarconsult alaska, i LETTL.3 OF TRANSMITTAL 1503 West 33rd Avenue e Suite 310 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 (907) 258-2420 FAX (907) 258-2419 SSORORERITTITAT DATE S (Zz iO ATTENTION to Ne. Nee Aanicen _rlenn Bocve Ss ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY, WE ARE SENDING YOU [1] Attached [1] Under separate cover via___________the following items: C) Shop drawings O Prints C) Plans 0 Samples OC) Specifications Copy of letter {) Change order i My Copies DATE NO l DESCRIPTION | Pier Stations “District thea Zerpees “DEAE THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: C) For approval C) Approved as submitted C) Resubmit copies for approval (J For your use ( Approved as noted 0 Submit copies for distribution C As requested ( Returned for corrections © Return corrected prints Jo review and comment [1] PIFOR BIDSIDIE =e eng age C) PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS CORY TO) eee ee eee Bel ees SIGNED: _— ¥ | pieeeeeee it enclosures are not as noted. kindly notify us at once. @6-Feb-9e W/O ASSIGNED PROF ENGR SUPPORT OF RURAL FRI MULTI-DISCIPLINE HSESAFASEROZEA ¥46uaad. FGLARCONSULT ALASKA, EN #2656 — AMEND #1 10 ALD s6Q, Qua & ExT DATE INC. FUNDS AVHILABLE DATE INVOICE # AMOUNT PAID ERLANCE W/O # wo BHLANCE eas (ia pangs fu fu Gi bt te @ooon NwNN Toon tn cn cr wouuwue 1@ 1a 1a 1a 25204. AA 6166. aa 622. AA cba. Va LWAAD, Aa 18321. a2 12364. @@ 9/15/88 Q2/15/89 23/18/69 23/16/89 11/38/88 26/14/89 24/87/89 @1/17/98 @7/Q3/89 @35/13/89 @6/21/89 Q6/11/89 @6/27/91 12/11/69 @2/21/9a 86/25/90 6/27/91 12/11/83 @3/29/9a @S5/21/98 12/11/9@ 12/11/89 23/29/92 Q5/21/98 @9/28/98 @2/83/92 12/11/89 @3/29/98 @5/@1/98 Q6/21/98 12/11/89 23/29/52 @S/21/92 26/21/92 CANCELLED UNKNGWN* UNKNOWN* LBANAGE-S 231169 @61169-S W/O CLOSED M221 92-1 “UNKNOWN " W/O CLOSED @32998-WO#7 W/0#7-@52150 7-@62198 @3A992-WOHS W/0#8-25219 8-892998 POL@28392-A Q3AIIV-WO#D W/O#9-25A19a 9-86219 Q3299A-WO# 18 W/O#12-SA198 18-862 192 6166. aa 6eua, aa 17916. 9@ 1362.33 698.77 3879. 72 4736.28 2505. 26 2979.72 4861.67 S@6. 63 1866. 58 7265. 14 1687.89 131.97 7682. 14 14@@. 39 1323.47 See. aU Q. wa 22H. VA Q. ae 23204. BK 2. 22 5166. @@ W.VA 6208. Ga 2. V2 coud, aa 513.95 3. @. AV AVA, WA 2061.18 696.77 @. au 1Q3Z1. WA 7241.28 2505S. @6 @. AA 10255. aa 2989. 66 1341.97 BW. A 12364. 2a 2783. 66 13@3. 47 2. a2 a. Aa Q. Va 2. aa 2. wa SB. Ae G. Ae @. Ba @. a2 Q. a2 @. ad 11 9648. a@ 12/11/89 9646. aa 11 Q3/29/9 A3AIBW-WO#H11 3596. 84 6251.16 11 @5/@1/9@ W/O#11-S@192 398@. 57 2278.59 11 Q9/26/92 11-VG21 GAREY 689. 63 1618.76 11 @1/31/91 W/O 11/JANS1 1614. 76 a. Qui @. Wea 9766. QW 12/11/69 3766. Ua US/OI/IN ASAIGA-WOH1E 3596. 64 6189. 16 QS/2Q1/3A W/GH12-Sa1sa 3672. 42 2516.76 @5/28/98 12-621 9AREV 967.835 1558. 93 PENDING Q4/82/91 FOLA4U291 1554. 93 2. ad @. aa 13 9888.@@ 12/11/89 9868. aa 3 QS/AI/F9A ASAIGA-WO#1S 3546. 64 6341.16 3 @S5/@1/94 wW/O#13-5e@19a 3673. 34 2667. 86 13 W5/2Z8/92 13-O7QGIVREV 1217.63 1658. 83 13* PENDING @3/26/91 FOL@32891 165@. a3 @. aa @. Qa 14 9812.88 12/11/89 9612. ad 14 23/89/98 14-easug9a 3596. 84 6215.16 14 Q5/@1/92 W/0#14-5219a 3665. 64 2545. 32 14 Q9/Z8/9A 14-@7A@69O0REV 967.16 1562. 16 14* PENDING @3/23/92 POLWASI2-H 1582.16 Q. 2a Q. aa 1S 9429.88 12/11/89 9429. aa 1s Q3/@9/9A ASAIGA-WOHIS 1533.67 7895. 33 1S QS/A1/9@ W/G#1S-SA1 Ge 4655. 92 3239.41 1S Q9/26/98 15-A72S5NREV 1634.63 1404.56 15* PENDING Q2/AS/92 FOL@ZA392-C 1404.56 @. aa Q. Bei 15635@. a2 TOTALS TO DATE 156352, wa 2. aa Q. a2 polarconsult alaska, inc. ENGINEERS e SURVEYORS « ENERGY CONSULTANTS Alaska Energy Authority April 2, 1991 P.O. Box 190869 Anchorage, Alaska 99519 Re: Contract AEA 2800098, Work Order 12, Pilot Station Waste Heat. Dear Mr. Brian Gray: Please find enclosed the final report for Pilot Station. Follows is the final invoice for the project. Invoice # Labor Expenses Total 04/90 Invoice $2,906.67 $690.17 $3,596.84 05/90 Invoice $3,665.00 $5.40 $3,670.40 09/90 Invoice $967.83 $0 $967.83 Total Due This Invoice $1,330.50 $220.43 $1,550.93 Expended to Date $8,870.00 $916.00 $9,786.00 Contract $8,870.00 $916.00 $9,786.00 Remaining $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Labor hours on the project were as follows: Personnel Ausman Moore Dahl Tech. Total Rate $72 $72 $50 $40 Hours 04/90 Invoice 11 10 27 1 05/90 Invoice 27 3 27 09/90 Invoice 8 2 31 = This Invoice 8 1 10 8 Pol FY0¢3 ay Sincerely Yours AC Aim [once Ogle | Fund Appt f¥FO G3 _ SH Vf je Earle V. Ausman joe 46/4 = B193e0 | jZu 2 £00098 9VIIO6PS.DOC 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE e SUITE 310 ¢ ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 i to BUEZY3Iz PHONE (907) 258-2420 e TELEFAX (907) 258-2419 | - F31F ox - A/C #