Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNoatak waste heat Correspondence 1992State of Alaska Walter J. Hickel, Governor Alaska Energy Authority A 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, | f (hu “I LG. lt tap David Denig-Chakroff // Director of Rural Programs’ (Kok ee TOEE ST eet Gary Smith, Alaska Energy Authori Don Whelan, Alaska Energy Authority Marlys Hagen, Alaska Energy Authority PO.BoxAM Juneau, Alaska 99811 (907) 465-3575 ~Z) PO. Box 190869 701 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: Ls A potential for waste heat recovery has been identified in the community of Noatak. 245 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 #2 is $567,183. Final review comments and responses which were not incorporated into the report have been included in Appendix A. Accepted: Litvo— i Brian C. Gray Date Project Manager Accepted: fe RILLLT = ry B. Smith Date anager 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 teview 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 supplementary 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; WHILO9GB.DOC polarconsult alaska, inc. February 5, 1992 District Heat Report | 3. & 23. All reports assumed that three trips would be made to each village by a skilled crew each year, to perform routine maintenance. 11. Unit #4, a John Deere 6619A was scheduled to be replaced with a Cummins KTA 1150 after our scheduled field investigation. Field notes indicate the JD 6619A in position 4, while the report is based on the Cummins KTA 1150 already being installed in position 4. 12. Cummins KTA1150's in positions 4 & 5 are 1200 rpm, not 1800 rpm as indicated in Table III-A. 15. Fuel consumption for the school buildings is as shown in Table IV.A. 16. All district heating installations in forced air systems in this report, have the heating coil installed in the return air duct. 18.A Supply and return lines to unit #5 are shown reversed. During design of this project these lines will need to be reversed. 18.B Engine coolant flows through a thermostaticaly controlled valve that diverts coolant to either the heat exchanger, radiators, or directly back to the engine as required. When the system is constructed, the valve would need to be adjusted to keep a certain amount of coolant flowing through the radiators to keep down the possibility of cold shocking. 18.C. The primary heat exchanger was sized to be capable of transmitting the maximum amount of heat required in the distribution system. In this case it is less than the maximum amount of heat available. If plant growth warrants, additional plates can be added to increase the size of the heat exchanger. 18.D. During design phase of this project, piping layout will need to be reviewed, and possibly revised. 19. The distribution piping in Figure V-1 is 3" diameter as shown. The supply piping in Figures V-5 through 7 are 2" as shown. The piping necks down from 3" to 2" at the building. Larger diameter distribution piping is used to keep the pipe head losses down, which in turn keeps the pump sizes and annual operation cost down. 25.A Waste heat worksheets and building heating summaries included with this letter. 25.B The module size is 20'x12'x10.5', not 30'x12'x12'. This works out to 55,800 (ft° fr) / 2,520 ft’, or 24 air changes per hour as indicated in the report, and used in the calculations. Alaska Energy Authority A Poe Corooranon May 23, 1991 Mr. Earle Ausman Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Subject: Noatak Waste Heat Recovery Pre-Final Report Dear Mr. Ausman: We have reviewed the Pre-Final Report and Concept Level Design tor the above reterenced 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. i Cover page - arrow on map shows location of Naotak, not Noatak. Noatak is located approximately 60 miles north of Kotzebue. Coordinate. 2: Executive Surman page i - change "Project Cost for concept #1" in table to "Project Cost for Concept #2." Also, capitalize "C" in "concept #2" in last paragraph. B5 Executive Summary, page ii - paragraph 3, change "three" to "two", "trips to... each year." 4. Table of Contents: IV.B - Change "Building" to "Plant." IV.B.4 - Should be page 18, not 17. VI.D - Should be page 37, not 39. VILA - Should be page 39, not 38. Appendix A - Include worksheet calculations. MOOW> Ds List of Figures: A. Figure IV.6 - Change "Building" to "Plant" in both the figure on page 19 and List of Figures. B. Figure V-7 - "Same as above." 6. List of Tables: A. IV-B - Change "Building" to "Plant" on both page v and 18. [= PO.Box AM Juneau, Alaska 99814 (907) 465-3575 91 oe phyB 190869 704 EastTudorRoad Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 Mr. Earle Ausman May 23, 1991 Page 2 10. Le 12% 13: 14. 15; 16. 1s 18. 19. 20. Section I.C.3 - Figure 1 is on page 20, not 19. Section I.E - Northwest Arctic "Borough" School District, add "Borough." Section II, paragraph 1 - change "building" to "plant" in water treatment "building." Section II, paragraph 2 - add "Borough" to Northwest Arctic "Borough" School District. Section III.A - paragraph one contradicts itself. It says "Equipment... will be installed..." and then goes on to say "Position No. 1 now has... and positions No.4 & 5 now have....". Coordinate with table III-A. Also, replace "stand by unity” with "stand by unit.” Table III-A - KTA 1150's are 1200 rpm. Section III.C - last line, change "Figure III-2" to "III-3." Section III.D - figure V-2 is on page 21. Figure V-3 is on page 22. Section I[V.A.3 - Fuel oars in school buildings in paragraph 1 does not agree with table IV.A. Should paragraph one read: "20,000 gallons used by the high school and "Junior High School"? Coordinate. Section [V.A.4 - clarify that the heating coil will be located in the "return" duct. Figure V-2 - correct arrow directions on "new distribution piping." Figure V-3: A. Engine and heat exchanger piping is crossing connected. B. Coolant piping bypasses radiators. G KTA 1150 heat rejection to coolant is 560,000 BTU/HR. Why is the primary heat exchanger only 300,000 BTU/HR. D. The cooling system as shown can not function. Correct. Figures V-5 through 7 - Figure V-1 indicates Arctic Piping is 3" diameter. Figures V-5 through 7 indicate Arctic Piping is 2" diameter. Coordinate. Section VI, page 30 - last paragraph, replace "engine" with "primary" in first line. Section VIII.A - paragraphs 1 and 2, figure V-3 is on page 22. Mr. Earle Ausman May 23, 1991 Page 3 tN v Section VIILB - paragraphs 1 and 2. Correct page numbers for figures V-4 through 7. Also, change "building" to "plant" in paragraph 2. 23. Section VIII.C - paragraph 1, change "three" to "two me times per year." 24. Table VIII.A: A. Add to table VIILA: a subtotal for "Construction Cost" for each building including a line item for "General Conditions." Also, show the "Project Cost" with "Design, SIA", and "Project Contingency" separate trom Construction Cost. (Use similar format to HMS Summary Sheet.) Note: the construction cost for a building should be the same for each scenario. The "General Conditions" should include any variance in; freight, per diem, travel, profit, etc. 25. Appendix A: A. B. Waste heat worksheets and other calculations are missing. Module air changers with a KTA 1150 should be: 13 + 1 14 AC/HR, not 24. (This is based ona module size of 12'x 12'x 30' = 4320 feet? and 930 cfm = 55,800 ft?/hr. 55,800/4320 = 13 AC/HR.) Revise. 26. Appendix B: A. B. Number 2 - were discussions with "ADEC", or "PHS" or possibly "vSW"? Number 6 - most of second paragraph is missing. If you have any questions, please call me at 561-7877 or 261-7282. Sincerely, Aim f Stow Steven Stass, Rural Systems Engineer SS:jd a1 INA707025 “s 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" PO. Box AM Juneau, Alaska 99811 (907) 465-3575 PO. wm 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, Pie es 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: is A potential for waste heat recovery has been identified in the community of Mountain Village. are 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 #6 is $1,002 315: Accepted: Brian C. Gray Date Project Manager Accepted: Gary D. Smith Date Manager of Rural Projects State of Alaska DN Walter J. Hickel. Governor Alaska Energy Authority A Public Corporation May 23, 1991 Mr. Earle Ausman Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. 1503 West 33rd Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Subject: Noatak 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. ie Cover page - arrow on map shows location of Naotak, not Noatak. Noatak is located approximately 60 miles north of Kotzebue. Coordinate. Executive Summary, page i - change "Project Cost for concept #1" in table to "Project Cost for Concept #2." Also, capitalize "C" in "concept #2" in last paragraph. Executive Summary, page ii - paragraph 3, change "three" to "two", "trips to... each year.” Table of Contents: IV.B - Change "Building" to "Plant." IV.B.4 - Should be page 18, not 17. VI.D - Should be page 37, not 39. VILA - Should be page 39, not 38. Appendix A - Include worksheet calculations. MOOW> List of Figures: A. Figure IV.6 - Change "Building" to "Plant" in both the figure on page 19 and List of Figures. BS Figure V-7 - "Same as above." List of Tables: A. IV-B - Change "Building" to "Plant" on both page v and 18. © PO.BoxAM Juneau, Alaska 99811 (907) 465-3575 910 Db 7B 190869 701 EastTudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 Mr. Earle Ausman May 23, 1991 Page 2 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15; 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Zi. Section I.C.3 - Figure 1 is on page 20, not 19. Section I.E - Northwest Arctic "Borough" School District, add "Borough." Section IJ, paragraph 1 - change "building" to "plant" in water treatment "building." Section II, paragraph 2 - add "Borough" to Northwest Arctic "Borough" School District. Section III.A - paragraph one contradicts itself. It says "Equipment... will be installed..." and then goes on to say "Position No. 1 now has... and positions No.4 & 5 now have....". Coordinate with table III-A. Also, replace "stand by unity" with "stand by unit." Table IH-A - KTA 1150's are 1200 rpm. Section ILC - last line, change "Figure ITI-2" to "II-3." Section ILD - figure V-2 is on page 21. Figure V-3 is on page 22. Section IV.A.3 - Fuel consumption in school buildings in paragraph 1 does not agree with table IV.A. Should paragraph one read: "20,000 gallons used by the high school and "Junior High School"? Coordinate. Section IV.A.4 - clarify that the heating coil will be located in the "return" duct. Figure V-2 - correct arrow directions on "new distribution piping." Figure V-3: A. Engine and heat exchanger piping is crossing connected. B. Coolant piping bypasses radiators. Cc. KTA 1150 heat rejection to coolant is 560,000 BTU/HR. Why is the primary heat exchanger only 300,000 BTU/HR. D. The cooling system as shown can not function. Correct. Figures V-5 through 7 - Figure V-1 indicates Arctic Piping is 3" diameter. Figures V-5 through 7 indicate Arctic Piping is 2" diameter. Coordinate. Section VI, page 30 - last paragraph, replace "engine" with "primary" in first line. Section VIII.A - paragraphs 1 and 2, figure V-3 is on page 22. 9102\JD0797(2) Mr. Earle Ausman May 23, 1991 Page 3 22. Section VIII.B - paragraphs 1 and 2. Correct page numbers for figures V-4 through 7. Also, change "building" to "plant" in paragraph 2. 23. Section VIILC - paragraph 1, change "three" to "two met times per year." 24. Table VIHI.A: A. Add to table VIII.A: a subtotal for "Construction Cost" for each building including a line item for "General Conditions." Also, show the "Project Cost" with "Design, SIA", and "Project Contingency" separate from Construction Cost. (Use similar format to HMS Summary Sheet.) Note: the construction cost for a building should be the same for each scenario. The "General Conditions" should include any variance in; freight, per diem, travel, profit, etc. 25. Appendix A: A. B. Waste heat worksheets and other calculations are missing. Module air changers with a KTA 1150 should be: 13 + 1 = 14 AC/HR, not 24. (This is based ona module size of 12' x 12'x 30' = 4320 feet? and 930 cfm = 55,800 ft?/hr. 55,800/4320 = 13 AC/HR.) Revise. 26. Appendix B: A. B. Number 2 - were discussions with "ADEC", or "PHS" or possibly "VSWw"? Number 6 - most of second paragraph is missing. If you have any questions, please call me at 561-7877 or 261-7282. OE Steven Stass 1 Ae f Bec Rural Systems Engineer SS:jd 9102\JD0797(3) MEMORANDUM Date: 10/08/90 To: Earle Ausman Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. From: Brian Gray Rural Systems Engineer Alaska Energy Authority Re: Noatak 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 final submittal. Wools Executive Summary paragraph 1 - The price of fuel oil is listed as $2.80 per gallon while section IX-B lists Oy the cost of fuel for the schools (which represents the (J vast majority of fuel displaced by the waste heat) as 1.67 per gallon. This price is very misleading and should be clarified. Also note that the annual savings vs. fuel saved in paragraph 4 does not agree with this price. 2. Executive Summary paragraph 3 - Add a sentence explaining the three concepts that were investigated. Ol Also, concept #1 may not be the most economical because concept #2 saves 88% of the fuel that concept #1 does and has a lower installation cost. This statement should be reevaluated upon formulation of cost estimates. cost ... for Concept #1 are as follows". If the recommendation from comment 2 is for concept #2 then revise accordingly. pe Executive Summary paragraph 4 - Revise to say "Project OL 4. Section I-A - See comment #1. gu > Section I-C-2 - delete comma in sentence "Availability of village-supplied ...". 6. Section III-A - The waste heat utilization simulation worksheets use a John Deere generator for determination of the heat available. Is the John Deere in position WO ee #4 scheduled to be used as the lead generator? If not LO revise calculations to reflect the actual model used as LD the lead generator. need rae OL Oe ot ie Section III-c, last paragraph - This section is unclear. A statement should be added about the 190 gallons of fuel required for additional heat in the module that has a running generator. A statement should also be added which clearly identifies which combination of heat loss figures was used in the waste heat utilization simulation worksheets. Section III-D, paragraph 1 - This paragraph should mention removal of the skid mounted radiator as proposed in Figure V-3. See comment #15-C. 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-A-3 - Table IV-A indicates that 14,000 gallons was used by the high school and 6,000 gallons by the junior high school. Clarify. Also, how is domestic hot water heated at the various school facilities. If oil-fired water heaters are used, the “monthly oil consumption should be decreased by an appropriate factor. Section IV-A-4 - A heat exchanger and secondary pump is neither required or desired for the junior high school system. The heating coil provides essentially the same separation on a forced-air system that a heat exchanger provides on a hydronic system. Also clarify that the _coil will be located in the return air duct. Section IV-B-4 - This paragraph should reference the water treatment building not the school. Also a statement similar to this should be added to section IV-A~-4. Figure V-1: A. Label the buildings at the AVEC plant. B. What is the building that is labeled "school" east of the junior high school? Was this building considered as a waste heat user? (oJ5 The legend indicates hatching for the waste heat user buildings. Hatch buildings accordingly. D. Indicate pipe sizes for the waste heat distribution piping. Base pipe size on a 20F temperature drop. OK 15). Figure V-2 - Delete the heat exchanger at the junior high school. Also, indicate pipe sizes for the waste heat distribution piping. Base pipe size on a 20F temperature drop. Figure V-3: VA. In general this drawing is difficult to read. Additional line weights and/or line types should be utilized to increase clarity. oe. The drawing shows engine #4 in both modules. Revise to indicate location of engine #5. on Was removal of the skid mounted radiator from ow: 17. oS 18. c” NA engine #1 discussed with anyone from AVEC? Is it likely that the pump on this engine will have sufficient head available to circulate through the distribution piping, accessories, valves, and remote radiator as proposed? These questions should be addressed in Section III-D. Figure V-4 - Delete the heat exchanger and secondary piping from the system schematic. 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 fourth paragraph on page 29. Section VI-B-2-a - The field notes list the soils as very ice-rich permafrost with clear ice lenses and poor materials over the top. Is it feasible to bury hot distribution piping in this location? Also, report should indicate if there are any known buried utilities along the proposed route of the heating lines. Section VIII-A, paragraph 2 - Revise "Unit #3, and Unit #4" to say "Unit #4, and Unit #5". Figure IX-1 - Add months to the horizontal axis similar to Figure Ix-2. Appendix A, Page 1, Power Plant Heat - Values of 1.5 and 1.0 ACPH were added to the combustion air requirement in the building heat summary calculations, not 2.0 as indicated in this paragraph. Also, the value of 24 ACPH only applies to one of the modules, a unit containing a standby generator. Revise accordingly. Appendix A, Page 1, User’s Monthly Fuel Usage - Provide an explanation in this section for the constant 125 gallon monthly fuel consumption. f ; ees ; Fi ; (YY 23. Appendix A, Waste Heat Utilization Simulation ' Worksheets - The following comments apply to the worksheets for all three concepts: A. Y B. VY ‘c's Confirm that the generator being used for heat availability data is indeed the intended lead unit. See comment #6. Revise units under generator data to " (BTU/HR) /(KW)" not KWH as indicated. "Building #5" is not mentioned anywhere in the report and does not enter into the calculations. Delete this entry. 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. Revise page numbering to Page 1 of 3, Page 2 of 3, etc. Page 3 indicates that the user building hydronic systems utilize water. Is this true for all buildings? following comments apply to both versions of the Sa Appendix A, Building Heating Summary Calculations - The calculations: A. VB: Qualify where the value of 96,000 BTU/Gal for fuel oil comes from. List the units for Bldg. Heat, Heat to Ambient, etc. Antz 2s. The field notes should be checked for grammatical errors and corrected. O26. Provide a list of contacts and phone numbers for this project. yy" 27. Revise the map on the front cover to indicate the actual location of Noatak. ¥’ 28. Provide color photographs in the final report. NOATBGMI1 r NOORVIK WASTE HEAT RECOVERY ESTIMATION WASTE HEAT UTILIZATION SIMULATION WORK SHEET. Location: NOORVIK Date: December 14, 1989 Heat rate: 2488 Btu/kwh produced System loss: 54,068 Btu/hour Total generation: 1,082,408 kwh/year Local degree days: 1784 1846 L- \ { Assumed diurnal heat { demand variation: . ecnenennnnnnnn-n== JAN FEB Fraction:8.6813 6.6916 Winter Summer Hour Kwh: 88066 99288 ( Diurnal 6.0494 8.8494 1 variation 6.038 6.638 6.0477 8.6477 2 6.036 6.036 8.0460 6.0468 3 { 6.634 6.034 6.0443 8.0443 4 \ 6.034 6.034 6.0428 8.8428 5 6.633 6.033 8.0414 8.0414 6 / 6.834 6.634 6.0481 6.0401 7 / 6.838 6.638 6.0398 8.0398 8 6.042 6.042 6.0381 6.0381 9 } 6.042 6.042 6.8374 6.0374 16 6.047 6.047 6.0378 8.8378 "1 / 6.048 6.648 6.0367 6.0367 12 \ 6.847 6.847 8.8367 8.0367 13 6.045 6.045 6.0378 8.8378 4 6.647 6.647 6.8374 8.8374 15 j 6.048 6.648 6.8381 8.8381 16 \ 6.048 6.648 6.8398 8.0398 17 , 6.849 6.649 6.0401 8.0401 18 j 6.846 6.646 8.0414 8.8414 19 6.843 6.645 6.8428 8.0428 28 / 6.638 6.638 8.8443 8.0443 21 \ 6.638 6.638 6.8468 6.8468 22 . 6.641 6.641 8.6477 8.8477 2 6.045 8.045 8.0494 8.8494 24 6.048 6.640 Building use BUILDING 1, HIGH SCHOOL 3918 2431 BUILDING 2, COMMUNITY BUILDING 963 934 BUILDING 3, TREATMENT BUILDING 1719-1779 BUILDING 4 8 6 BUILDING 5 6 6 BUILDING 6 6 6 PAGE 1 (approx. 38 BTU/FT arctic pipe) 2889 «1418 944 683 263 Power plant monthly generation: MAR APR MAY 6.0923 8.8883 6.6885 168888 95666 87208 JUN JUL 6.0646 6.6646 76688 76686 6.658 8.836 8.034 6.034 6.633 8.834 6.638 6.642 6.842 6.047 6.648 6.847 6.645 6.647 6.648 6.848 6.849 6.646 6.045 6.638 6.638 6.641 6.645 6.648 6.838 6.036 6.834 6.834 6.033 6.034 6.638 6.842 6.642 6.847 6.648 6.647 6.645 6.647 6.648 6.648 6.849 6.846 6.645 6.638 6.658 6.841 6.641 6.641 6.645 6.041 6.048 6.643 8.045 6.648 6.036 8.835 6.635 6.638 6.038 6.048 6.645 6.647 6.648 6.648 6.858 6.652 6.658 6.858 6.645 6.847 6.658 6.645 6.045 6.848 6.036 8.835 8.635 6.838 6.638 6.648 6.645 6.647 6.648 6.848 6.858 6.852 6.858 6.658 6.845 6.647 6.656 6.845 6.641 6.641 6.641 8.845 8.645 6.648 6.836 8.835 6.635 6.838 6.838 6.648 8.845 6.847 6.646 6.648 6.858 6.652 6.656 6.656 6.845 6.647 6.858 6.645 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.643 per sonth, gallons of fuel oil 1266 ©2628 )=—-1739 8 8 1657 718 478 365 133 2013 = 1366 916 581 253 356 AUG 6.6728 78606 6.645 6.648 6.836 6.835 6.635 6.638 6.638 6.648 8.845 6.647 6.048 6.648 6.658 6.652 6.058 6.058 6.645 6.647 6.658 6.645 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.643 186 345 811 1854 =—-1787 SEP 6.6658 76488 8.6946 162468 6.6983 186468 6.045 6.046 6.836 6.035 6.835 6.638 6.638 6.648 6.645 6.047 6.648 6.648 6.056 6.852 6.658 6.658 6.645 6.847 6.658 6.645 6.641 6.641 6.841 8.843 6.845 6.846 6.036 8.035 6.635 6.638 6.638 6.648 6.045 6.647 6.646 6.848 8.658 6.852 6.856 6.858 6.045 6.647 6.058 8.645 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.843 6.838 6.036 6.034 6.634 8.833 6.834 6.638 6.642 6.842 6.647 6.048 6.647 6.845 6.047 6.848 6.848 6.049 8.646 6.645 6.638 6.838 6.641 6.045 6.648 3563 533 984 1616 = 1722 6 8 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 3125 2894 DEC 6.1664 115288 8.838 8.036 8.834 6.834 6.833 6.634 6.038 6.642 6.842 6.047 6.648 0.847 8.845 8.847 8.848 8.848 6.649 8.846 6.843 6.038 8.838 8.841 8.845 8.048 4846 1668 2818 8 a 8 CONCEPT 3 ANNUAL 15,849 CHECKSUM 1 1,682,408 25,508 7,615 14,581 Aiasika Energy Authority 2 PLolie Corpersnen 7) 2 ee cor (ANCHORAGE Telecopy Phone No. (907) 561-8584) (JUNEAU Telecopy Phone No. (907) 465-3767) TELECOPY SENT TO: ed) oe EB aes niece NAME OF COMPANY: us COMPANY ADDRESS: Arie rme Ace TELECOPY PHONE NUMBER: 276 — s7e= SENDER: =) rind Ru ritec et TELEPHONE NUMBER: Zei-— 72S ez. CHARGE CODE: S'1e822730c%68e NUMBER OF PAGES SENT: i—_ INCLUDING THIS COVER PAGE DATE SENT: ie Sa IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THIS TELECOPY PLEASE CALL: (907) _ 261-7240-Anchorage (907) 465-3575-Juneau SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: = PO. BOX AM Juneau. Aloska 99811 (907) 465-3575 ME PO. Box 190869 8609704 East Tudor Rood = Anchorage. Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 TRANSMISSION REPORT THIS DOCUMENT (REDUCED SAMPLE ABOVE) WAS SENT ** COUNT ** # 10 *ER SEND KK NO REMOTE STATION I. D. START TIME | DURATION #PAGES COMMENT 1 9072764763 1-31-91 8:30 | 9°52° 10 TOTAL 0:09'°52" 10 XEROX TELECOPIER 7020 Alaska Energy Authority A Puolic Corporation TELECGOrY (ANCHORAGE Telecopy Phone No. (907) 561-8584) (JUNEAU Telecopy Phone No. (907) 465-3767) TELECOPY SENT TO: CHU E GGENER_ NAME OF COMPANY: CHucte EGeeatgh Contsucrin&G COMPANY ADDRESS: Ant pot AGe_ TELECOPY PHONE NUMBER: Z76 -—- 4768 SENDER: Sonal Burcéor TELEPHONE NUMBER: 261-7267 CHARGE CODE: SIG2723046 NUMBER OF PAGES SENT: 10 INCLUDING THIS COVER PAGE DATE SENT: ZO SAN TI IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THIS TELECOPY PLEASE CALL: (907) 261-7240-Anchorage (907) 465-3575-Juneau SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: PO. Box AM Juneau, Alaska 99811 (907) 465-3575 . SPO. Box 190869 701 East Tudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 to: Chuck Eggener, Chuck Eggener Consulting from: John Bulkow, AEA date: 30 Jan 91 Te: NOATAK WASTE HEAT AVAILABILITY Here are some highlights from the waste heat recovery feasibility study that Polarconsult is preparing for us. I have stamped this "DRAFT" because we have not had a chance to review it yet. At a glance it looks like the concept used was a little too grandiose for the amount of waste heat available (i.e. it doesn’t look like it would really pay, to build a system of the size shown in the report, but this doesn’t mean that it wouldn’t pay to connect just a washeteria). Note that the heat available is expressed as gallons of fuel oil. Give me a call if you have any questions. polarconsult itak District Heating Executive Summary DRAFT Noatak is a bush community with a population of 350, located in Northwest Alaska on the west bank of the Noatak River, approximately 60 river miles upstream from Kotzebue Sound. This report was commissioned by the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) to determine whether introduction of a district heating system would save money for the community. The district heating system would recover energy that is now being wasted from the Alaska Village Electrical Cooperative (AVEC) power plant, and convert the waste heat to beneficial use for the community. With the 1990 cost of heating oil ranging from $1.67 to $2.80 per gallon, a considerable amount of money is expended to heat community buildings. A district heating system is not complicated. Typical baseboard-heated buildings have a boiler which transfers heat to water, and a pump to circulate the water through the baseboard radiators. At the radiator the heat is transferred to the air which heats the building. A district heating system works in the same manner, with the exception that the engine performs the same function as the boiler, and provides waste heat instead of burning fuel. This report discusses how this heat may be used in Noatak, and what results may be expected. The water system and schools were studied as likely candidates to be served by a district heating system in Noatak. The first combination included the water treatment building, the junior high, high school, and elementary school buildings. A second combination, and the most economical, included connecting the water treatment facility, junior high, and high school. This combination would utilize 100% of the heat available at the power plant during the winter months. A third combination included just the water treatment building and the junior high building. Project cost, annual amount of fuel saved and fuel cost savings for concept #2 are as follows: Project Cost for concept # 1 $567,183 Amount of Fuel Saved per Year 13107 Annual Savings $25,422 Straight Pay Back in Years 22.3 polarconsult DRAFT tak District Heating Total project cost includes design, supervision, inspection, administration and construction. The project includes construction of a new module at the power plant to house the district heating equipment, renovations to the AVEC power plant cooling system and the school-complex heating system, and construction of a hot water transmission line. The life of a district heating project is a function of availability of waste heat from the electric generation plant, the requirement for heat at buildings connected to the system, and system maintenance costs. In this case the requirement for electricity and space heat in the community imply an infinite project life. With proper maintenance the life of the district heating system will exceed 25 years . It is estimated that it will cost an average of $2,450 per year to repair actual failures in the district heating system. Routine maintenance will be performed during three trips to Noatak by a skilled crew each year. Operation will be by a local person who will monitor the system. Because annual operational and maintenance costs and economic decisions will be made by AEA, final economic conclusions are not presented in this report. The straight pay- back time for the best alternative, Concept 2, is 22.3 years. The project could be made more attractive economically by reducing its scale through minimizing new construction and renovations at the power plant. Another approach would be to combine this project with waste-heat projects in other Northwest Alaska communities to reduce Noatak's share of the high mobilization, shipping, travel, and supervision costs required. ii polarconsult DRAFT itak District Heating Ii. Power Plant A. General The power plant is a standard AVEC Butler type structure. It now houses one Caterpillar generator which is equipped with a skid-mounted radiator, switch gear, and a day tank. There are also two remote modules which are located toward the river from the Butler building. Each of these modules contains a single engine and two remote radiators. Equipment with the characteristics given in Table III-A will be installed in Noatak. Position No. 1 now has a Caterpillar and positions No. 4 and No. 5 now have Cummins KTA 1150,s. A used John Deere JD66198A may be installed in position 3 in the Butler Building. This would be a stand by unity due to its age. Table III-A Engine Data Position/Unit 1 4 5 Engine Caterpillar Cummins Cummins Model D342 KTA1150 KTA1150 Speed (rpm) 1200 1800 1800 Rating, Engine (kw)* 160 306 306 Heat Rejection** To Coolant (Btu/min) 9,400 9,320 9,320 To Stack (Btu/min) 7,269 13,990 13,990 To Ambient (Btu/min) 2,894 2,480 2,480 Water Flow (gpm) 60 125 125 Intake Air Flow (CFM 625 930 930 * Engine rating at shaft. ** Rating at full load. B, Available Load Inf — Monthly power production figures for Noatak were obtained from AEA. The 1989 figures were rounded to the nearest 100 kwh for use in this report. The amount of waste heat available off the engines was calculated using these generation values and the engine manufacturer's heat rejection figures listed in polarconsult D R A FT itak District Heating Table III-A. System losses were subtracted from the amount of heat available off the engines to arrive at the equivalent number of gallons of fuel oil available for use. System losses include building heat, distribution pipeline heat losses, radiator losses and plant piping heat losses. Table II-B Monthly Power Generation & Available Heat Month Power Produced Values Used Heat 1987 1988 1989 inStudy’ Avail.‘ kwh kwh kwh h Gal. Jan we 74,480 93,280 93,300 2,210 Feb 0 == 70,000 72,240 72,200 1,611 Mar == 70,480 69,120 69,100 1,531 App = 61,760 60,400 60,400 1,347 May == 55,040 56,400 56,400 1,289 June ----- 54,000 41,520 41,500 953 July 45,289 46,640 40,348 + —- 40,300 1,036 Aug 55,520 53,360 51,296 51,300 1,103 Sept 66,080 62,880 75,654 75,700 1,178 Oct 70,480 73,200 -~- 74,800" 1,641 Nov 67,520 81,780 --- 83,500 ‘1,812 Dec 72,400 _ 86,400 -----__ 88,2007 1,898 Annual 737,300° 790,020° 806,744 806,700 17,597 u Values used in this study were the 1989 kwh production figures rounded to the nearest 100 kwh. From Jan. to Sept. the load increased 2.1% from 1988 to 1989. This rate of increase was used to project the load from Oct. to Dec. 1989. Annual production for 1987 and 1989 was estimated, as data were not available for all months. Equivalent gallons of heating oil available from District Heating Simulation Work Sheet. polarconsult Noatak District Heating V. Concept Design Drawings DRAFT NOATAK SITE PLAN BS PROPOSED DISTRICT vie BS ies HEATING SYSTEM BUT BUILDING FRY, Rv \P We A 7 US SURVEY NO.3778 LOT NO.2 BI HARKEY STREET // ba es, LEGEND PROPOSED WASTE HEAT USER PROPOSED WASTE HEAT LINE —S— EXISTING SEWER LINE 55 EASEMENT REQUIRED ——-— EXST. UG POWER LINE — EXISTING FUEL LINE ° EXISTING POWER POLE FIGURE Vi polarconsult p RA FT atak District Heating NOATAK — PROPOSED SYSTEM SCHEMATIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL (SEE FIG. V-6) SEE FIG. V-S) OT eS | | CONNECT | | . esTO USER | | | SYSTEM | CONNECT Ito USER USER | | Neay | SYSTEM HEAT | EXCHANGER | EXCHANGER caer! | JUNIOR HIGH cee MON, | | pune WANE TREATIENT a 7 PIPE TTT | | CONCEPT 1 | | | | 870’ 3°¢ | | CONNECT, -@——.— 160’ 28 CONNECT |To USER |TO USER USER | SYSTEM re i SYSTEM HEAT & } EXCHAN | | | t fe eel COOLING ‘SYSTEM >—} Salle a PRIMARY HEAT | MODULE #4 EXCHANGER TO_ENGINE a ~ ' a DISTRICT HEAT MODULE [ <SEE FIGURES V-3> LEGEND D<J ISOLATION VALVE {NO CHECK =VALVE — — EXISTING NEW DISTRIBUTION NEW @ USER NEW @ PLANT € USER PRIMARY DISTRIBUTION PUMPS FIGURE V-2 21 polarconsult D R A FT tak District Heating Power Plant Heat The amount of heat required to keep the power plant building at 65°F was calculated. The number of air changes in the building was assumed to be equal to the amount of combustion air required by the engines plus 1.5 for the Butler building and 1.0 in the modules. This added up to 24 air changes per hour in the Cummins power portion of the Noatak power plant. The conduction heat loss was then added to the infiltration heat loss and the amount of heat rejected to the ambient air off the engine subtracted to come up with the hourly heat requirements for the building. User's Monthly Fuel Oil Usage The annual fuel oil usage, as obtained from the users, was distributed over 12 months using the number of heating degree days (HDD) as follows: School (Monthly HDD) x (Annual Fuel Consumption) Monthly fuel oil usage = —_ ------------------------------------------ === 22-22 n nana nn nn ( Annual HDD ) Water Treatment Building (Monthly HDD) x (Annual Fuel Cons. - 12 x 125) Monthly fuel oil usage = 125 + ------------------------------------------------------------- ( Annual HDD ) The base unit of 125 gallons per month was used to make the distribution conform to the fuel usage indicated by the plant operator. Avallale Waeee Heat &: (ier Heat Disalaced The amount of waste heat available at the power plant and the amount of heat required by the user were calculated using a computer model with the following input and assumptions: 1. Historical monthly power generation data for the power plant, annual users' heating oil consumption, and monthly heating degree days were input. 2. The amount of heat available off the engines versus power prodyction, from the engine manufacturer's data, was input. 3. The heat losses for the proposed piping system, plant heat, etc. were input. Appendix A Page polarconsult DRA FT atak District Heating 4. The hourly diurnal power generation variation per month and the hourly diurnal heating requirements were input to distribute the power and heat data over a one- year period in the model. 5. The amount of heat usable by the proposed users is summed up for each month to determine the equivalent number of gallons of oil which will be displaced by the district heating system each year. Program Notes: a. The amount of heat available off the engines listed in Table II-B is from the engine manufacturer's engine specs. The amount of heat available off the engines used in Appendix A comes from the engine manufacturer's test data which they indicated was good to 7 5%. We used 95% of their test data values for use in Appendix A as the heat available off the engines. b. The assumed heating value of a gallon of oil is derived by utilizing a 73% burner efficiency with 132,000 BTU/gallon oil to arrive at equivalent of 96,000 BTU output per gallon of oil. Appendix A Page Date: TELEPHONE CONFERENCE LOG 10/26/90 Between: Brian Gray and Earle Ausman of Polarconsult Re: Noatak Waste Heat Study Review Comments I called Earle to discuss his response to our review comments of 10/08/90 on the above referenced project. The following points were covered: 1. The majority of his comments are an attempt to show the inaccuracy inherent in our studies therefore demonstrating the lack of need for changing heat demand. He claims that changing the heat demand values will affect figures throughout the report and require considerable effort. If we the numbers changed he feels they are entitled to $4,000 additional compensation! The calculations will be revised to reflect Cummins generator since the John Deere used in the report is no longer on site. Comments 16-22 will be incorporated even though the letter does not indicate such. This was apparently an oversight on his part and he has no substantial objections to any of these comments. 1026BGT1 Ove Pus [o) nin SI L ny Hee L polarconsult alaska, Inc. CRO 1503 West 33rd Ave. Suite 310 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Phone: (907) 258-2420 Telefax: (907) 258-2419 TELEFAX MESSAGE Number of Pages, including this page: G Subject: laste heat reports polarconsu t alaska, inc, CNGINFERS ® SURVEYORS « +key CONSULTANTS *. 631 Pa2 25, 1990. Alaska Energy Aathcrity PO Bax 190869 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 Subject: Noatak Waste Heat Project Atm: Brian Gray, Engineer Dear Brian: We appreciate your comments on the draft for Noatak and have the following responses. Please understand we realize that you are a new reviewer and your approaches may differ from John's. We hope you understand it costs us money and time to make changes. Therefore, we think that changes which are preferential in nature should not be made. This is not to say that we will ignore mistakes or improvements where warranted and not costly. This statement is based on the fact that there are three previous approved finalized documents which had very detailed review, which we believed established the format for this work. We have made corrections or added clarifications as per the following paragraphs: 1, 2sce comment), 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15A, 15B, 23B(do not agree), 23C, 23E, 23F, 24, 25, 27, and 28. As for comment 2, we have attempted to keep the executive summary short and directed since it is the only thing most people will read. A discussion of alternatives takes away from this. We have put this discussion in Noatak as requested. We need a overall discussion on the philosophy of the work we arc doing and what we collectively know and more importandy what we do not know. a. We are not doing design except to the extent necessary to reasonably size components for pricing. 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE ¢ SUITE 310 * ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258-2420 e TFI FFAX (907) 258 2419 pea ee wits! Wl eo 9 Fy dorup PULAU I bo. rw b. In many cases we do not know the exact amount of cil used due to measurement inaccuracies. The amounts can vary considerably based on the time the measurement was made and estimate of the quantity of oil left in institutional tanks, In some cases we rely on operator memory for how many gallons of oil are used. c. Oil prices, hence economics, are having great fluctuations. If AEA believes it can predict the price of oil within 10% over the next 25 years then we have a swell bridge for sale. d. We do not know the distribution of heat usage in institutional buildings, because there is not established base information and also because there is and will be variance with individual practice and control operations. We do know there are somc sophisticated controls in many of the newer schools. c. We do not know the relationship of community electricity demand and the need for institutional] heat. f. We do not know which generator will be run. It depends on the operators. So for our calculations we assume that the one which is run is the unit that produces the least heat. Therefore, this portion of our analysis is conservative. Further, with several sized machines depending on the operator and load requirements several different sizes and types of equipment can be run. g. We do not know what the future will bring in terms of prime mover efficiencics. For example a ceramic engine would have much less heat available then current machines. Also exhaust gas heat recovery has not been factored into the situation which can add considerably more heat to the system. Many of the machines produce more exhaust gas heat than jacket water heat, and it is possible to add wet manifolds to equipment which will recover more exhaust heat. h. We can not predict community growth and neither can AEA. There are so many unknowns involved, that extrapolation into the future is very uncertain, i, In the past we investigated heat used by domestic hot watcr heaters in the schools. The estimated amount of oil utilized was trivial, less than 220 gallons at Noatak. If it were more than trivial, a inexpensive coil heat exchanger, very small circulation pump NN wth CON Ro ool res and thermostat could take care of the ‘problem. Or a heat exchanger and terri tapping off of the main boilers could be used. Because of the uncertainty in oil quantities we do not bclicve we should change these values. Additionally the majority of the schools investigated utilize their main boilers for domestic hot water production. j. Although we are getting a approximarion on pumping power requirements, the use of individual pumps at each user will require work that more properly is done during design. At that time hydraulics can be optimized and final flow rates arrived so that meaningful pump selections can be made. The estimator, HMS, at this stage, does not price the difference between a 1/3 and 1/2 horsepower pump with certain impeller characteristics. k. We have used Peter Hansen's program and input values for ali 9 of our analysis. We have made some improvements in the program but stick to it as it is readily understood by all of us. At the onset of the project we reviewed the daily heat distribution values and could not come up with heat distribution numbers which we believe were significandy better. So we stuck with the standard which have gone through numerous reviews, has been a final value in three of our reports, and in all af /4~/ AEA's past work. We checked the dates on the programs and they are only one month apart. Our version was dated November 1989. We have rerun Noatak with the new values to see what the effects are. The reduction is 277 gallons or 1.1% of the total. We do not agree there is superior rationalization for using values derived for Norvik then the ones we have used, that were approved. If AEA believes this is significant, then we will make the changes. We estimate because of graphical, text and other Teport changes that it will take 6 us man days and cost about $4,000 to make the changes on the balance of the reports. 1. One difficulty we had with this project. which cost us substantial time and worry, was the interrelationship of AEA and AVEC as to the physical requirements of the project. After much thinking and realizing we had to solve the problem we arrived at following conclusions, and assumptions. ( Uleed '94 14:08 SOLARCONSULT 831 Pas polarconsult 0 Based on mectings with AVEC 9 te concluded we could design piping systems which would mostly would accommodate the new systems using circulation by the engine pumps. If during final design we felt engine pumps were marginal, then small booster pumps would be employed or at least provision for the same would be made. o We know that there are extensive outages in a number of AVEC plants. We utilized the average in our calculations. o We know that we could design and build a much less expensive far more teliable cooling and district heating system for AVEC and AEA which would not have the convolutions we have gone through trying to convert AVEC modular schemes. We have followed directions however and worked with what we have, not with what we would like or could do. o We are not convinced that locating the pumps at the user facility is best or least expensive. In addition it precludes more sophisticated electronic controls which can better optimize system efficiency. But we have done this as directed. o If an AVEC generator set with a radiator is moved and the drawing shows it connected to remote radiators it is obvious the radiator is removed. Is this a significant detail? Should a credit be made for the value of the used radiator and should we clevate its importance by discussing it in the text? m. At this stage we did not concem ourselves with the heat transfer media used on the user side of a facility. It is clear that during the design phase the exchangers will need to be sized on the basis of the media used. n. Our observations ure that most user facilities have the pumping capacity to handle an additional 3 to 4 psi drop. If in actual practice this proves not to be the case then the circulation pumps can be changed for a nominal fee. In general there are no pressure readings available to arrive at the head being produced by the pumps. User system piping is complex. It is far less expensive and more accurate to deal with the problem empirically. 7D Cer et oo. reo Be polarconsult as 3 ey * 2 0. The 96,000 BTU value for a gallon of heating oil is arrived at by using a gross © heating value of 132,000 BTU for arctic grade diesel times a estimated efficiency of ~ 73% for boilers. Since our report conclusions are entirely in gallons of oil saved, these assumptions are critical. It should be recognized that oil fired equipment efficiencies vary greatly and we could easily be more then plus or minus 5% off in these assumptions for an individual casc. Further, the BTU content of oil varies depending on the source, blending and grades used, so there can be another swing of 5% or more for this reason. These alterations introduce a great deal more uncertainty than any daily temperature calculations. Again thank you for your comments and it is a pleasure to have another University of Alaske graduate on board. Sincerely yours; Earle Ausman Date: TELEPHONE CONFERENCE LOG 10/26/90 Between: Brian Gray and Earle Ausman of Polarconsult Re: Noatak Waste Heat Study Review Comments I called Earle to discuss his response to our review comments of 10/08/90 on the above referenced project. The following points were covered: 1. The majority of his comments are an attempt to show the inaccuracy inherent in our studies therefore demonstrating the lack of need for changing heat demand. He claims that changing the heat demand values will affect figures throughout the report and require considerable effort. If we the numbers changed he feels they are entitled to $4,000 additional compensation! The calculations will be revised to reflect Cummins generator since the John Deere used in the report is no longer on site. Comments 16-22 will be incorporated even though the letter does not indicate such. This was apparently an oversight on his part and he has no substantial objections to any of these comments. 1026BGT1 polarconsult alaska, inc. ENGINEERS ¢ SURVEYORS e ENERGY CONSULTANTS October 25, 1990 a EGE) Ve aska Energy Authority S ) PO Box 190869 OCT 2 y 19g Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 ALASKA ENER 7 AUTHORITY, Subject: Noatak Waste Heat Project Attn: Brian Gray, Engineer Dear Brian: We appreciate your comments on the draft for Noatak and have the following responses. Please understand we realize that you are a new reviewer and your approaches may differ from John's. We hope you understand it costs us money and time to make changes. Therefore, we think that changes which are preferential in nature should not be made. This is not to say that we will ignore mistakes or improvements where warranted and not costly. This statement is based on the fact that there are three previous approved finalized documents which had very detailed review, which we believed established the format for this work. We have made corrections or added clarifications as per the following paragraphs: 1, 2(see comment), 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15A, 15B, 23B(do not agree), 23C, 23E, 23F, 24, 25, 27, and 28. As for comment 2. we have attempted to keep the executive summary short and directed since it is the only thing most people will read. A discussion of alternatives takes away from this. We have put this discussion in Noatak as requested. We need a overall discussion on the philosophy of the work we are doing and what we collectively know and more importantly what we do not know. a. We are not doing design except to the extent necessary to reasonably size components for pricing. 1503 WEST 33RD AVENUE e SUITE 310 e ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 PHONE (907) 258-2420 e TELEFAX (907) 258-2419 polarconsult b. In many cases we do not know the exact amount of oil used due to measurement inaccuracies. The amounts can vary considerably based on the time the measurement was made and estimate of the quantity of oil left in institutional tanks. In some cases we rely on operator memory for how many gallons of oil are used. c. Oil prices, hence economics, are having great fluctuations. If AEA believes it can predict the price of oil within 10% over the next 25 years then we have a swell bridge for sale. d. We do not know the distribution of heat usage in institutional buildings, because there is not established base information and also because there is and will be variance with individual practice and control operations. We do know there are some sophisticated controls in many of the newer schools. e. We do not know the relationship of community electricity demand and the need for institutional heat. f. We do not know which generator will be run. It depends on the operators. So for our calculations we assume that the one which is run is the unit that produces the least heat. Therefore, this portion of our analysis is conservative. Further, with several sized machines depending on the operator and load requirements several different sizes and types of equipment can be run. g. We do not know what the future will bring in terms of prime mover efficiencies. For example a ceramic engine would have much less heat available then current machines. Also exhaust gas heat recovery has not been factored into the situation which can add considerably more heat to the system. Many of the machines produce more exhaust gas heat than jacket water heat, and it is possible to add wet manifolds to equipment which will recover more exhaust heat. h. We can not predict community growth and neither can AEA. There are so many unknowns involved, that extrapolation into the future is very uncertain. i. In the past we investigated heat used by domestic hot water heaters in the schools. The estimated amount of oil utilized was trivial, less than 220 gallons at Noatak. If it were more than trivial, a inexpensive coil heat exchanger, very small circulation pump polarconsult and thermostat could take care of the problem. Or a heat exchanger and thermostat tapping off of the main boilers could be used. Because of the uncertainty in oil quantities we do not believe we should change these values. Additionally the majority of the schools investigated utilize their main boilers for domestic hot water production. j. Although we are getting a approximation on pumping power requirements, the use of individual pumps at each user will require work that more properly is done during design. At that time hydraulics can be optimized and final flow rates arrived so that meaningful pump selections can be made. The estimator, HMS, at this stage, does not price the difference between a 1/3 and 1/2 horsepower pump with certain impeller characteristics. k. We have used Peter Hansen's program and input values for all 9 of our analysis. We have made some improvements in the program but stick to it as it is readily understood by all of us. At the onset of the project we reviewed the daily heat distribution values and could not come up with heat distribution numbers which we believe were significantly better. So we stuck with the standard which have gone through numerous reviews, has been a final value in three of our reports, and in all of AEA's past work. We checked the dates on the programs and they are only one month apart. Our version was dated November 1989. We have rerun Noatak with the new values to see what the effects are. The reduction is 277 gallons or 1.1% of the total. We do not agree there is superior rationalization for using values derived for Norvik then the ones we have used, that were approved. If AEA believes this is significant, then we will make the changes. We estimate because of graphical, text and other report changes that it will take 6 us man days and cost about $4,000 to make the changes on the balance of the reports. 1. One difficulty we had with this project, which cost us substantial time and worry, was the interrelationship of AEA and AVEC as to the physical requirements of the project. After much thinking and realizing we had to solve the problem we arrived at following conclusions, and assumptions. polarconsult o Based on meetings with AVEC we concluded we could design piping systems which would mostly would accommodate the new systems using circulation by the engine pumps. If during final design we felt engine pumps were marginal, then small booster pumps would be employed or at least provision for the same would be made. o We know that there are extensive outages in a number of AVEC plants. We utilized the average in our calculations. o We know that we could design and build a much less expensive far more reliable cooling and district heating system for AVEC and AEA which would not have the convolutions we have gone through trying to convert AVEC modular schemes. We have followed directions however and worked with what we have, not with what we would like or could do. o Weare not convinced that locating the pumps at the user facility is best or least expensive. In addition it precludes more sophisticated electronic controls which can better optimize system efficiency. But we have done this as directed. o If an AVEC generator set with a radiator is moved and the drawing shows it connected to remote radiators it is obvious the radiator is removed. Is this a significant detail? Should a credit be made for the value of the used radiator and should we elevate its importance by discussing it in the text? m. At this stage we did not concern ourselves with the heat transfer media used on the user side of a facility. It is clear that during the design phase the exchangers will need to be sized on the basis of the media used. n. Our observations are that most user facilities have the pumping capacity to handle an additional 3 to 4 psi drop. If in actual practice this proves not to be the case then the circulation pumps can be changed for a nominal fee. In general there are no pressure readings available to arrive at the head being produced by the pumps. User system piping is complex. It is far less expensive and more accurate to deal with the problem empirically. polarconsult o. The 96,000 BTU value for a gallon of heating oil is arrived at by using a gross heating value of 132,000 BTU for arctic grade diesel times a estimated efficiency of 73% for boilers. Since our report conclusions are entirely in gallons of oil saved, these assumptions are critical. It should be recognized that oil fired equipment efficiencies vary greatly and we could easily be more then plus or minus 5% off in these assumptions for an individual case. Further, the BTU content of oil varies depending on the source, blending and grades used, so there can be another swing of 5% or more for this reason. These alterations introduce a great deal more uncertainty than any daily temperature calculations. Again thank you for your comments and it is a pleasure to have another University of Alaska graduate on board. Sincerely yours; Lie ( leenme Earle Ausman . £ af Polarconsult alaska, it LETTL.u OF TRANSMITTAL 1503 West 33rd Avenue e Suite 310 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 (907) 258-2420 FAX (907) 258-2419 Gitex JOB NO. ( ee is ATTENTION i To fie ENEZa4 Acnlee ir} Pein Geer RECEIVED | VIeTecr Hearine Repoers NOV 2 6 1990 ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY i WE ARE SENDING vou acne ( Under separate cover via_____the following items: ) Shop drawings - Copy of letter 0 Prints C) Plans 0 Samples C) Specifications ( Change order a COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION Zee Les cory 2p theaTING Wee Sheets 1/ a) Revised Divedar Heat Vinten’ b) Op Dweilae Hea Nohasoton its THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: OC For approval C) For your use CAs requested (1) For review and comment [1] CLFOR BIDS DUE REMARKS () Approved as submitted C) Resubmit copies for approval C Approved as noted 0 Submit copies for distribution C Returned for corrections 0 Return corrected prints 19... _—- (] PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US -he coe ee stan Thee i Nor Hvew crtange iN qe Arjount = rhea DioPpAcel cory 10 4 PEAT TU WS gigep: Ut ISO set if enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. oe ' St aloo ahinao 4 wn Z at aion @1omo 9 Nn ~ | aioe ne " a 1 on no o = |EEEEEEEEEEE © </55 1 4 . iS 5 5 ISS ' ! | Socata ce oe oe vlow 2 | OOPENTONN ON eDMAoMaDA4WNO Bites 9 Py iota to aco gies 0 | MMMMNMOMNGE TTT T STS TION SS oIM~O o 0 NSN aS 8 199899898S5S55S555S5500665 al on a N BEBEBREBERE ise | Cd0G0CC0CCC0000000000000 las < | elena a en ea en en em en 1@ | ‘© ot BE lomnoaonese0" blom > | moremsannrennraancmaa dno plomo > ” Ol Ream ainda Sic 0 MAMAMMMNGITTTTTTTTSTTOINT TS 21 2o 5 5 Bo | BOS OOCREARS Zioo Z 1909090958666666500500869 Zl oo z < 83! ad | copcpecoCeCeCSCSSCSCSCCCO | ao o e 1 ' ow ' 1 BE | donrooresss plow bl songerraronradansonwoooN wlawo v 2 Gl ssOemNMMMMm D1On BL ENNIS SMSLHVTSSTLIITS VIMAG o 3 BA | BOracomaman o1nn © 1698899665505509965550005 ol nn ° 5 28 | Ssrereicimeeimey da | codoNcCCCCNCC0C0C0000000 | aa a vz lOnovonsyvess blow a eneenroeusradasseosooes plone © BX] TAM~BOOGCS alow 2.1 EINAANNISSNSTHCLSSTLILTS aImMAo 2 wo zat AANA giao BI S9gg9qgessoasesesassoess gy am 2 5 251 s | C0d000000000000000000000 on) a oo? | a ' 1 9 8 0 00 90 00 00 90 00 00 00 00 90 | © geeogco0000 Ol wanesrraronradaaconsco0oN a] wo Blamnnc lo . > S55 FI SOMMAIMNMNFTOT TNT TST TSS SSS 31940 Slom~eo |i a 93882222888 —_ © 1999999698896508588658865 <1 em Zane tm ¢ saedaeae aes | 000000000000000000000000 hoe | a £ Blvvsvvsvv00 \ | o SUGGTGTTG0S 1 ® 100000000000 ml ease ATOM AnARTeATOOOS D1 4@o BD ett aettteintetet Alsons soe s TTT TSS S a 158s rover uriye 31 G000000000065050506505600 31° Sa & PESESSEEEEEEE Biles eee eee fl . £ [XR REM RES SS 100. 00000 log = 5 leupuvuvovon | 1 1OVDTITICTOG 1 1 * ! © | sanesr rawr adnanw0nr000N @1ong ©1002000000000 El snmmMonnssMsshTseTTTSTTS g1m50 GH vivevevevonon 5 | GO0GGG005006005000000505 51 on 5 gi S8ecsnnnnns Bf cee re oe 0 tte et tt ett te eee e 51 sj a PRANAB A | oo000G000C00000009000000 io > ae 2) euyeeeeoeeE e 1 9 Olagnnggaggggg9 ot ' & dl Ododooog000 A plwonserrascnradansconso0oNn DADO ay § wl mmemeem ee B Pi gnnaananssnssossssssssss gimse gs a > § B1900000005806608658655595 fas 6 Zz | % | Soodc00CGC00000000000000 | qo o ! > I ' oO slow > doors vannnonnnaanvomaadno dlowo ft A1oo A dinammnonssssssess ssc TS Fimso s pee BD Bil Socorro ese cececece ese ere locas cecene iecece a St 8 e134 g | dddoddddddddddddddddddds <1 dg 9 3 1 ' 1 e 1 4 al 1D | tettetet 2 | MOrTMTONArOrNreDnomM@aDnnd alano @ o Eg Ulamnmnnnsess sree ee TOMS TS BIMSS aN u § 81908598955886585556559885 BE x B 3 lddcddddddcddddcdddcdcdc3 al ag 9 ag fay Cag 3 I 1 3 ' xx os 1 Poe a 0 2 loorenvsannnennnwmancmaandnoe Q1@@®o 4. eee o KO lmmanmansssr Tre TTT TONS TS @INoo oF Seen sed oe & b& | COODDOOGGGGGG06060000600 Blan oO tS SSh | Behar iri ara ic ar aid | ‘ox | 3333 333 Bb |O00000000000000000000000 Loa ow | anna mam s | po 6 | 4 a | owow owo glow 4 a donom EldNQ sgl awmnweo |r 1 RR HAS sion 0 on GIMMO 9 Odlaran 10 aa aa 5imo 4 4 oa 510m Animran IN ! = is . ws a o es) 1 ty ws ts aa a aa ° z act Pam gp odadiie 9 yo a 3 a 1 oe ' 54 % Be \ ' | ave Ho Be S lo eage cho == o le | baod eo Ss Zale = yr Eco Dado 4a Sia ereiee Sag a4 Aoon ADA =a o as aos a 00 Bone De xk a a ARS a OOnlo 1 'aa0 ‘Oh 4 soy ola fe iu st BHO oco @1mO000 wed 21 Oco0m1D ale HO wo * E1Ncoo : ql egee Glavsea vgug < 61|“500 sau a att G1Ocudg OE aq = OI wea "co a4 =egy a Clegaow anad ae & glnoso ao4 xy & a atgeo agg ad qo ait gon Bl gai 10 1 Oman On q au dj S90 alsnzama le Id a 2a a 20 a oa ° oa 00 sromearnonwOrnosdodsomons . Aly o H v £5 ob AROTANAOADREOORNOAONNTORA Gein S At cies 2 oO & SIT TI TIOMMMNNMNNNMGT TT eCs Ogge ais 2 sii Raeleoan SS56sasoo0cq0009008500665 /'tEas Ble a te Aga | Skee a Sdcccccc0CCC0CC00C000000 Y BH4 1B aie 4 z Hod) a a SGEE +10 Ss DAG! Gund 3 oo00 alo > oO ARoOISSza «a BHnZO PAGE 1 OF 3 Noatax WIP. - Concept 1 HEET LUA 1 LN Ln 19 un Ln un Ln Un Un In nnn in nnn inn QDOKDVOCGHNAAANAMOL ANOS ANON MO POT EFMMAIM OO VANE NNE FONDMNNDNOOO@ MANO NTH NODOONTONAARS MAMMMMAMMMMMMMAMMMMMMANAM DO AAIMMONOOM VONANHONINNMNNO MOCONNMR AMANO TO NANA NNN NAMM MMNANMANNNN AMOOM ME HWON RE WOW ODON JAANDDOONNIR AE AOMANMR ANNAN NAA ANANNNNNNM NANA MOMCBOWWOMMOMrOrFArrorrro PAOR RADA AOL ORE TOM Td ANA AA ANNAN D> NONTTdHONODArMOrK NORA J | QOMSERKQOMNGIN- ALON MARAT ANNNNNNNMMAMMAMMMMMMANNM OOO ON TF PHAGOADAN NUNN OW NOM ANN OCODOOCON NOAA TOM IN NANAMMMAMMAMMAMMAMMMMAM Apr AADA@BANNNM MOM MMNTaNAAroOs MMOQNOMAAMTMAIMTTNVONNAAE MMAMAMMAAMMMMMMMMMMMAMAMM March rT aSSC*OS”S~*~«aSS~«SSS*«*|)SC4S!SS~C*«SBSC«SSC CHOOMOOADDHOBDMMOrDNOCOMO ANOOMOATTHON-HOCHOMAATH AAMAMMMMMMSEMAMSTEMMMMMMM Feb PADDR ATOON Reeds Ore RONNANR HAAN AAAINAMOME ROAD MMMM PPT F MOT PGTIPIOM TIM Jan ANN TNF OHOdAMTNLCraADnocAAMS FANN Heat available per hour by month (1,000 BIOs) Hour 1 277,767 2,789,464 30,327 3,020 764 263,701 2,867 2,128 “2,318 © 2,759 233,919 167,547 182,147 195,742 213,201 253 1,822 1,980 2,543 Gallons Heat demand b' BTU’s Month Annual AVADOMOAAAE MMM VAINOMO! ODN FVOND™ OOo Or- OHO TN SDD ee PP UNI Dec 624 DONO MOOT HATOONE HONODO QA MFNAONADADADHAOAITOM HON SPD PP POO OS EP TD Nov 526 MAN MAUNMWVOM TTrOWMAIMINAMwO DON FANVAOONAANOOINM FNOD MAMMMAMAMANNAMAMMMMMMMM 396 v oO ° DAHON TI AOMONAHAOMVAN FYOND WIT PFANAAOCONAIOCONHANM STW) INANNANNA AAA 268 268 v a. @ an DATDAOAOMOOM--DOMOAOHOwe AAOKROONNHe TT TNNNOOR RON RNA tt dd ttt ded ed et ed ttt 198 27 16,772 124,191 162,427 248,595 319,396 391,294 3,046,229 30 DOM ONIN TMMMMMMMM FINN OOHRS INNANNANANNNNNANNNN NNN PLO MOAONNOGOMdAANNOTd RMTMAHONMORK rr OODROAAM TN MMMMMMMNANANNANNNMMMMMMM March 4 a4 1 3 5 5 5 a 9 9 2 4 5 5 7 1 7 4 3 2 0 (1,000 BTU’s) 386,903 397,148 414,346 334,215 232,496 18,447 Feb demon CrNNODONTFANAAAANTNOBONNEO FOOCONNNNNNNNNNNNNNSOoLOR WTO SAL OF NOONE Orde ene IDEM AOD OOOO DOG MIN Tet LOL LD PS PE PUD LDL Jan 617 ANN TNO OROTAMTNLOrAROFAMS AAA AA ANN yy hour by month Hour Total Demand Heat Delivered AAR ANAM SOOM STOMA AYO AMADA AMHR AMANOAMNMTHOMMBOW MONA SETS TTS PIMMOM EO MNNNOMNNNO TOWN NODDRDNOOAANAAKDOTOM ANAT MMANAMAMMMMMMAMMMSPEMMOIMOM WE AAANAMwONsTrOUMANNOOOD AL MAAMANAOODAAHOOAAMAAAAS MAMMMMMMMMMANANAMMMMMMANNO DOMME TE AHOMODAOMOHE FVORDH WIMANNAHAHOCONAGOONANM ST TINO ANNNNANNNAN AANA DATDAOAOMOOMOOMOAOdOTAID DAO OOM Te TTANNOOR ROY FAR ddtdtdidittdtidtidtittettittetet 7191 161,478 232,698 258,770 277 1,350 RoOUMwrnnNdHOOCCOCOn ANAM THO NANA NNN ANIA 16,772 124 ONO ON TAMMIMMMMM TMM and ANNAANNANANANNANANANN NANO NOW SIR DOOR AK KDODHOMINAAA ANNANNNANNNNNNNNNM MONOD May NOO6P ONT THAT TNNNON AAR EO GNNOOCOBDOOONAONATOM ANNANNMMMAMANMMMMAMMMMAM April ADDON Nr OMNI TONMNNKOT MOODOMAAMTMAM TFNVONNONE MMMM MAUNMMMMMMMMMMMMAIME 572 222,588 212,751 18,447 month (1,000 BTU’s) 352 March D2 IOAOOMCBOAADDDODHOr-MNOOCOBO IN DOON OAT IHN AOOAON AAS AMMMMMMMMIMMMSTIEMMMMMOM 2 8 3 4 4 iy 1 8 6 1 8 5 5 8 1 6 3 1 1 i 7 7 of 5 yy hour by SADA ATONE ee eels sere RONNIE HAAN AANNMOME LOAD MMMM SPST GOTT TTS IOM TOM Jan Hour ANAM TNOrOROFAMTHNLrARnddAMNS FAA ANNAN Heat delivered b' BTU’s 67 2,304,550 291,229 243,287 244, 2,813 ee 2,530 1,756 182 201 2,313 14 Btu/Hr 24 Btu/Hr 14 Btu/Hr 2,420 2,659 y Heat Displaced 2,645 y Heat Demand 3,166 Conce| Bt 1g WIP, » HS, ELEM Gallons PAGE 2 OF 3 gz \A%, ies 8 8 8 147 Kw 443, 700, Heat Available 443, Y Maximum Hourly Peak KW Maximum Hourl Maximum Hourl Maximum Hour1' 04/11/90 03:29 PM Annual Noatax Dec Nov kw Coolant Ambient Oct Output Heat To Heat To Sept HS, ELEM 1,800 RPM July Aug JH, June 41,500 44,500 47,300 50,900 WIP, Sen a eee ee nesses enesn snes essen snes ss essen sssssssssssssasse= Location: Date: Heat rate at kw-load above Heat rate at kw-load above Heat rate at kw-load above: Heat rate at kw-load above Heat rate at kw-load above: Heat rate at kw-load above: Heat rate at kw-load above: Heat rate at kw-load above: Heat rate at kw-load above: Heat rate at kw-load above Heat rate at kw-load above: Flow Rate May GENERATOR DATA: John Deere, April Concept 1 March Feb QO Btu/hr. 956 Btu/hr QO Btu/h: 41,956 Btu/hr. 50 Btu/hr.xF 1,596 Btu/hr.xF 100 Btu/hr.xF Jan , in 41 din e piping ace pi gine prehea' al constant Variable losses: Noatak Apr-90 Radiator losses: Surface pipii Plant heating? Subsur: En To WASTE HEAT UTILIZATION SIMULATION WORK SHEET SYSTEM LOSS DATA: aN a5 or Bea ow AO om wo ad on an aa 7 616 825 608 801 GENERATION DATA: WEATHER DATA: Boiler Non- SeasonalSeasonal Effic. 1 BUILDING DATA: Fuel use, gallons ddd Dec ddd Nov t iii dada ddd Oc: Sept ooo ooo ddd iit Feb March April Jan fh Schoo 1 Washeteria Jr Hi High Elem Bldg. # 5 DOTIMTOANNE ONE DOHOMOOAND MNMNNNNNVTT TITTIES O00000000000000000000000 eoccc0c00CCCCCeCC0C000000 Dec OOTTIMTFONNE ON DOAOMOMHNO MNNNMNNNVTTI TITTIES ecoccc00CcC00000000000000, ScoocoooceCCCCCCCCSCCCCC000 Nov yONs ERR ATOAnaAdaAaTonTOOON FOMNNNNNTINTITMSTTT TTT SS SOCC90000000000000000000 eocecccceCCCCCRCR000000000 Oct TOMS ATOVArAdAATONTOOON FONONMNNNNTINTTHTTT TTI S OOSGO0G000000000000 JAOOCDGDC00000000000 Sept IPH ATPONEAIAATONTOOCON AMMO SF POT COI SPS PSSST TS OOGG0GG00000000000 OOCCCDCCCCC0CC000000 Aug TOMS TOC ATOArAdaAaTONTOOCON FOMMNNMNNNTINTTMT TIT T TITS e00000000000000000000000 coocecceCCCCCCCC000000000 July COMTI ATOArAdAATONTOOON FNMOMNNNNTTNTTOVTTTTTIITTS S00000000000000000000000 cococoeeccCCCCCCCCCCCC0000 June P| tOMTeRRATOARAdAATONTOOON gees sos eessSSSesee0 ScoecoeCeD000000000000000, coccocCceCCCCCCCOCCCCC0000 | DOTIMTOANE ONE DOAOMADANO ONNNNNNVETI TTT TET TIONS O80000000000000000000000 oecococcccccCCCC0000000000 PIM TONNE ORM ODHOMBDANO MMMONMNGT TICE TTT TTI TS IOOOOO9G0090900G000000000 OOOCCCCCO 038 036 DMN DOHOMODMH4NO FPGCSFICIFTOMN TS OO0000000, IOOGCCC0CO ONMNNMNNVTIT TIT TTT TTT TTIM S00000000000000000000000 uw i ADODMDOAdM TT ETNTMMMMMMANNON Q | CoppCCOOeCCCOCCCCOCSCCCCCDO DODDOAAIMT TIT ITMMMMMMANOD MMMNMNMNTT TIT T STITT TIM eocc00000000000000000000 oecccoccceCCD0C00000000000 ronno NOAA OAD moma Annual 33,125 Annual drwdo Nome rom Dec Dec 2255 PAGE 1 OF 2 4 zaamMo NerT0 Nov Nov 3,473 Oct Oct 2,703 Sept 1,766 Aug 1,350 July July 182 June June 201 May Gallons May 2,528 i 3,634 April Apri. month March March 4,506 Feb Feb 4,319 Jan Jan Gallons of Oil used per 4,207 Bhool gh Elem School Building Bldg. # 5 Washeteria Jr Hi Hi Total Use Power year factor Yegr no. ELEM Jan Feb March Roel May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Annual a in nnn nnn nnn nnn ne per hour by month (1,000 BTU’s Hour Heat available dt INN TOMS TENN AMN ADAH AVK-KANVONMM FAHOMMoOW MONNMNMNMNM SES STS TTIMOMMEM Palularateluraararalaratararalaratalararararara) NOMDMKONOOHNTHOHNAMORNNNOS MONNMNMMMS SIMS TFEPFIMMMIMMM WEAN MANT dONMONMNDNOCOD AC MANNNK ATH NODOONTONADAR MMMMAMMMMMMAMAMMMMMMMMANNIM DOM INDAOOTOMOONwWODOwOOM OOMANNNCONOMNONNONNORERA ANNNNNNNMIMAMMMMMMMMMNNAIN MODAdAIMMANO@rnwonaNnonNNMNND PMOCONNME ANAK Ad Te TO NANNAANANNNNNMMM MANOA WAMOOE RN HOOdh eI HwWOnwMDaN WNADDOONNIRANRAODAMRANANNS NANA AANAINNNNNNMNNNNNNNNNN MOMBLOBOWOMrOMrorrerrmrrro PAOR RANA AOR ARE TOM THA NANA AAA ANNAN NOMeeddONOMAMMEKNORAREEN MON SSK KOIMNDNEK ALK ME MAAAC ANNNNNNNMMAMMAMMMMMMANNM MOO OMT ThA OKAAN TNH AAK ROM ANNOCODOCOH NOH TOM ANNAN MMMAMMANMMAMAMMMMAM NANAOANHONEMrOrMHNTeoNnaNroOs WMDONOMAAM TNA TTNNONNON MMMMANMMANMMMMMMMMMMMMAMM CHOOMOGOAADDODHHOH™-DNOCOBO ANOGONGATPFACNAOCHON AGH MANMMMMMMMMPMMMSSIMMMMMMM SADA OATOOR EEE Reeds rorn BONNAROO TNAMOME ROAD MMMM MSP PFIOS TTS SIO SOM ANMNTNOFOAOFAAMNTNLrOnOFAMS AAA ANN 64 30,327 7 789,4 3,020 7701 277,767 2 2,867 201 253,764 263 2,318 2,759 213, 7742 7128 182,147 195, 1,980 2 Gallons BTU’s Heat demand b Month April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Annual March hour by th (1,000 BTU’ y ur en dh’ s) Hour DOO DATONG SFM FFF MNON Ae EN NNN Or On Moder dH TOdNddore HOOMOAIMOOLLrr ONoNoLCN TENG vreOVvesereverererereres TOWHWHOrONNNOOMR ARMs HOCCORMTHNNNNH see TT TMNMN: MAMMAMAMMAMMMAMMMAMMAMMMMmM co ! 6 248,670 319,492 391,412 3,047,143 NOM MrOMTODDANONTAT EME ONN FAOCCOTNNMMNAMEMNMMMMMANNd NANNANNNNANNNNNNNNNNANN rn 4 PrTMONMNTHwOLCronATds Nord Paralalalals inte atatet et ant aietat atch tela AAA A AAA AAA AAA teed 7228 162 HAHOn NNN Sere TINMMMMMMATG NANNANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNAN 16,777 124 SIMMER Eero wwuwuns NAANANNANNNNNNNNNNNNNNN _ wn v o a , FOr dONraAanHrmNOMNMMNATy ADDDDAHONANAMMANANANNAHOD ANAAANAMMMMMMMMMMMMAMMMMMN rad POVMwVNANOAAMM-wANONAAONr ANNANMNDDDODAAO-O-DoO-ooTm vrrr8v989ssTeTTTeTTTT TS 315 232, PMAGANADAMM MOMMA OS NAO AS DODADAOM ON AMINA N nn nn nNnninininininininin WUANNOMNTANMKMAOTOTTOOND DP FOPNDAGAANM A AAO AAD: MUNN OCOOOODOOWUSOWWINININ o ry rr DOOM TMA TOON TRAM THI OPP OP Oder eT CNN TMM TTMNNOD Sree TTS 387,019 397,268 414,470 334 ANMPNOFDAOANMTNOrAnCFIAMS FAA AAA AAA NNN Total Demand Dec Annual Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov yy hour by month (1,000 BTU’s) Jan Heat delivered by Hour Heat Delivered PAE INN CIN STEMI MADARA KH AMNONMMSADMMOO! MONON SPE S ETT SEMI SM LINN OWUNnIN nn nnnnnnin NODDRONOOINAAHNNMORNNNAS MONNONM MOM SPM SE ESSAI POOHOHOMMANADOMrNNENOCOw AQOCCOAM SN THN GENTFNAAAO MMMAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMANAM NOr MON TwODAN ONT TMK ON AQOCCORAMMNMIMMEMMMMMMMANE et NNNANNANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN PemMOMNNTHwoLranagds snore Pralalalalah-inieieintete niet innnintch ta} ttt PASO STE TIMMMMMMMMAG AANNANNANNNNNNNNNANNNNN SOON SORE eee ererrewons ANNAN TONS THOR AONNNMMOMNNEers DON SIR DANDMIMANANAINAAAADY ANAANANAMMAMMAMMMMMMANANN MOO6CP OMT THAW AAE TTNNMNOW FARR ON ANNOCOBOOCON AGHA TOM ANNNNNMMMMMANMMMAMAMMMMAM NADAOANNNE Hr OorMMN sam MMOQNOMAAM CMAN TTNNONNANK MMMMAMMANMMMMMMMmme CAOOMGOADDDHODOH™-DHNOCOWO ANOONGATTFAON- HOCH OMAASHM MAMMMMMMMMEMMMSSICEMMMMIMMM SANA ATOANR Reesor BONN AAA OAIANMOME LOND MMMM STS PING PETIT, ANN TNO OnOFAMTNLrAnOdAMS FAA AA AAA ANNAN a a ° ° a a ) r oO e c n a ° 5 Oa © Nn rc . a x = n © 6 + s © a © s N = NX a rc 5 5 o a a no zn o a wn on ee aa rs) n oo on no = aa a a ano no no va = x cw os xno oe an = n ao Nn © Na an a a BTU’s Conce} Bt 2 WIP, » HS, ELEM Gallons y Heat Displaced Heat Available y Heat Demand Maximum Hourl Maximum Hour] Maximum Hour] Y Maximum Hourly Peak KW PAGE 2 OF 2 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 o™ Steve Cowper, Governor Alaska Energy Authority A Public Corporation TELECOP Y (ANCHORAGE Telecopy Phone No. (907) 561-8584) (JUNEAU Telecopy Phone No. (907) 465-3767) TELECOPY SENT TO: Earle AK NAME OF COMPANY: Fe laceoneolt Alana Dre COMPANY ADDRESS: TELECOPY PHONE NUMBER: 2S OS- 2st SD SENDER: Lien TELEPHONE NUMBER: Boi -72 Ft CHARGE CODE: NUMBER OF PAGES SENT: = INCLUDING THIS COVER PAGE DATE SENT: \o 19a IF YOU DO NOT RECETVE ALL OF THIS TELECOPY PLEASE CALL: (907) 261-7240-Anchorage (907) 465-3575-Juneau SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: bicata kk Weaeeste Heat z = PO. BOX AM Juneau. Alaska 99811 (907) 465-3575 PO. Bo: x x 190BS9 704 East Tuder Road =Anchorage. Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 TRANSMISSION REPORT THIS DOCUMENT (REDUCED SAMPLE ABOVE) WAS SENT **& COUNT ** # 5 3K SEND eK NO REMOTE STATION I. D. START TIME DURATION #PAGES COMMENT j 9072582419 10- 6-90 10:15 3°30" 5 TOTAL 0:03'30" 5 XEROX TELECOPIER 7020 Date: Tos From: Re: MEMORANDUM 10/08/90 Earle Ausman Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. Brian Gray Rural Systems Engineer Alaska Energy Authority Noatak 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 final submittal. 1 Executive Summary paragraph 1 - The price of fuel oil is listed as $2.80 per gallon while section IX-B lists the cost of fuel for the schools (which represents the vast majority of fuel displaced by the waste heat) as $1.67 per gallon. This price is very misleading and should be clarified. Also note that the annual savings vs. fuel saved in paragraph 4 does not agree with this price. Executive Summary paragraph 3 - Add a sentence explaining the three concepts that were investigated. Also, concept #1 may not be the most economical because concept #2 saves 88% of the fuel that concept #1 does and has a lower installation cost. This statement should be reevaluated upon formulation of cost estimates. Executive Summary paragraph 4 - Revise to say "Project cost ... for Concept #1 are as follows". If the recommendation from comment 2 is for concept #2 then revise accordingly. Section I-A - See comment #1. Section I-C-2 - delete comma in sentence "Availability of village-supplied ...". Section III-A - The waste heat utilization simulation worksheets use a John Deere generator for determination of the heat available. Is the John Deere in position #4 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. L3is Section III-C, last paragraph - This section is unclear. A statement should be added about the 190 gallons of fuel required for additional heat in the module that has a running generator. A statement should also be added which clearly identifies which combination of heat loss figures was used in the waste heat utilization simulation worksheets. Section III-D, paragraph 1 - This paragraph should mention removal of the skid mounted radiator as proposed in Figure V-3. See comment #15-C. 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-A-3 - Table IV-A indicates that 14,000 gallons was used by the high school and 6,000 gallons by the junior high school. Clarify. Also, how is domestic hot water heated at the various school facilities. If oil-fired water heaters are used, the monthly oil consumption should be decreased by an appropriate factor. Section IV-A-4 - A heat exchanger and secondary pump is neither required or desired for the junior high school system. The heating coil provides essentially the same separation on a forced-air system that a heat exchanger provides on a hydronic system. Also clarify that the coil will be located in the return air duct. Section IV-B-4 - This paragraph should reference the water treatment building not the school. Also a statement similar to this should be added to section IV-A-4. Figure V-1: A. Label the buildings at the AVEC plant. B. What is the building that is labeled "school" east of the junior high school? Was this building considered as a waste heat user? Cc: The legend indicates hatching for the waste heat user buildings. Hatch buildings accordingly. D. Indicate pipe sizes for the waste heat distribution piping. Base pipe size on a 20F temperature drop. 14. Lie 16. Tie 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. Figure V-2 - Delete the heat exchanger at the junior high school. Also, indicate pipe sizes for the waste heat distribution piping. Base pipe size on a 20F temperature drop. Figure V-3: A. In general this drawing is difficult to read. Additional line weights and/or line types should be utilized to increase clarity. B. The drawing shows engine #4 in both modules. Revise to indicate location of engine #5. GC. Was removal of the skid mounted radiator from engine #1 discussed with anyone from AVEC? Is it likely that the pump on this engine will have sufficient head available to circulate through the distribution piping, accessories, valves, and remote radiator as proposed? These questions should be addressed in Section III-D. Figure V-4 - Delete the heat exchanger and secondary piping from the system schematic. 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 fourth paragraph on page 29. Section VI-B-2-a - The field notes list the soils as very ice-rich permafrost with clear ice lenses and poor materials over the top. Is it feasible to bury hot distribution piping in this location? Also, report should indicate if there are any known buried utilities along the proposed route of the heating lines. Section VIII-A, paragraph 2 - Revise "Unit #3, and Unit #4" to say "Unit #4, and Unit #5". Figure IX-1 - Add months to the horizontal axis similar to Figure Ix-2. Appendix A, Page 1, Power Plant Heat - Values of 1.5 and 1.0 ACPH were added to the combustion air requirement in the building heat summary calculations, not 2.0 as indicated in this paragraph. Also, the value of 24 ACPH only applies to one of the modules, a unit containing a standby generator. Revise accordingly. Appendix A, Page 1, User’s Monthly Fuel Usage - Provide an explanation in this section for the constant 125 gallon monthly fuel consumption. 23. 24. 25. 26. i 28. 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 #6. B. Revise units under generator data to "(BTU/HR) /(KW)" not KWH as indicated. c. "Building #5" is not mentioned anywhere in the report and does not enter into the calculations. Delete this entry. 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. Revise page numbering to Page 1 of 3, Page 2 of 3, etc. F.. Page 3 indicates that the user building hydronic systems utilize water. Is this true for all buildings? Appendix A, Building Heating Summary Calculations - The following comments apply to both versions of the calculations: A. Qualify where the value of 96,000 BTU/Gal for fuel oil comes from. 5. List the units for Bldg. Heat, Heat to Ambient, etc. The field notes should be checked for grammatical errors and corrected. Provide a list of contacts and phone numbers for this project. Revise the map on the front cover to indicate the actual location of Noatak. Provide color photographs in the final report. NOATBGM1 State of Alaska oS 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 Apert. NAME OF COMPANY: elarcons,,/ Alastlea he. COMPANY ADDRESS: TELECOPY PHONE NUMBER: ane s- RY? P. SENDER: Boi oa < Seo TELEPHONE NUMBER: Z@eji- 729 + CHARGE CODE: NUMBER OF PAGES SENT: 2 INCLUDING THIS COVER PAGE DATE SENT: jo/ee/De IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THIS TELECOPY PLEASE CALL: (907) _261-7240-Anchorage (807) 465-3575-Juneau SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: thee ie. the Cxvauvle dtocneat Neat demand Variatian = i+ wae = PO. BOK AM Juneau. Alaska 99814 (907) 465-3575 Be PO. Box 190869 704 East TudorRoad = Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 (907) 561-7877 TRANSMISSION REPORT THIS DOCUMENT (REDUCED SAMPLE ABOVE) WAS SENT ** COUNT *% # 2 4k SEND ak NO REMOTE STATION I. D. START TIME DURATION #PAGES COMMENT 1 9072582419 10- 8-90 10:51 1°42" 2 TOTAL 0:01'42" 2 XEROX TELECOPIER 7020 NOORVIK WASTE HEAT RECOVERY ESTIMATION PAGE 1 CONCEPT 3 Location: NOORVIK Date: December 14, 1989 Heat rate: 2488 Btu/kwh produced System loss: 54,088 Btu/hour (approx. 38 BTU/FT arctic pipe) | Total generation: 1,082,480 kwh/year ANNUAL We Local degree days: 1784 1846 2689 1418 944 683 263 356 811 1854 1787 2894 15,049 c { Assumed diurnal heat Power plant monthly generation: demand variation: a ( JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP ocT NOV DEC CHECKSUM \ Fraction:0.6813 8.6916 6.0923 0.0883 0.0805 0.6646 6.0646 8.0728 0.0658 8.0946 8.0983 0.1064 1 Winter Summer Hour ) Kuh: 88080 992008 100088 95608 87288 70600 70600 78000 70408 102400 106488 115200 1,082,400 \ Diurnal / 6.0494 8.0494 1 variation 6.038 9.038 6.038 6.038 6.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 8.045 0.045 0.038 0.038 { 0.0477 0.0477 2 8.036 0.036 0.036 6.036 0.040 0.040 0.040 6.048 6.048 6.040 0.036 0.036 \ 0.0468 8.0468 3 [ 8.034 6.034 6.034 0.034 0.036 6.036 6.036 6.036 6.036 6.036 6.034 6.034 | 8.0443 0.0443 4 \ 8.034 6.034 6.034 6.034 0.035 0.035 0.035 8.035 0.035 0.035 6.034 6.034 0.0428 0.0428 5 8.033 6.033 0.033 0.033 0.035 0.035 6.035 8.035 0.035 0.035 8.033 6.033 0.0414 0.0414 6 / 6.034 6.034 6.034 8.034 0.038 6.038 6.038 0.038 0.058 6.038 0.034 0.034 \ 6.0481 8.0481 7 / 0.038 6.038 6.038 6.038 0.038 0.038 0.058 6.038 6.038 6.038 6.038 0.038 | 0.0398 9.0398 8 8.042 6.042 6.042 0.042 0.040 0.040 0.040 6.040 6.040 6.040 0.042 0.042 0.0381 0.0381 9 8.042 6.842 6.042 6.842 6.045 0.045 0.045 8.045 0.045 6.045 0.042 0.042 0.0374 8.0374 16 / 8.047 6.047 6.047 0.047 6.047 6.047 6.047 6.047 6.047 6.047 0.847 0.047 — | \ 6.0378 6.6378 8.048 6.048 6.048 6.048 0.040 6.040 0.040 6.040 6.046 6.040 0.048 0.048 6.0367 6.0367 12 \ 8.047 6.047 6.047 6.047 6.048 6.048 6.048 6.048 6.048 6.048 6.047 0.047 8.8367 6.0367 13 8.045 6.045 6.045 6.045 8.056 6.050 6.058 8.056 8.056 8.058 6.045 6.045 | \ 8.0378 6.8378 14 6.647 6.647 6.647 6.647 6.652 6.052 6.052 8.052 8.052 6.652 6.047 6.047 ) 6.0374 «8.8374 15 6.048 6.648 6.648 6.648 6.058 6.058 8.058 6.058 8.058 6.050 6.048 6.048 8.0381 8.6381 16 6.048 6.048 6.048 6.048 8.058 6.056 6.050 8.058 6.058 8.050 0.048 6.048 8.0398 6.0398 17 8.049 6.049 6.849 6.049 6.045 6.045 8.045 6.045 6.045 6.045 6.049 6.049 | 8.6461 6.0481 18 6.046 6.046 6.046 6.046 0.047 6.047 0.047 6.047 6.047 6.047 6.046 0.046 8.0414 6.8414 19 8.043 6.043 6.043 6.043 6.058 8.050 6.050 8.056 8.056 8.058 6.043 6.043 8.0428 6.0428 26 / 8.038 8.038 8.038 6.038 6.045 6.045 6.045 6.045 6.045 8.645 6.038 0.038 | 8.6443 = 8.8443 21 6.038 6.038 6.038 8.038 6.041 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.641 6.041 6.038 6.038 8.6468 68.0468 22 8.841 6.841 6.041 6.041 6.041 6.641 6.041 6.041 6.041 6.041 6.041 6.041 8.8477 8.6477 | 8.0494 = 8.0494 6.045 6.045 8.045 6.045 6.041 6.041 6.641 6.041 6.041 6.041 6.045 6.045 8.048 6.648 6.046 0.046 6.043 6.043 6.043 6.043 6.043 6.043 0.040 0.040 vn aw a Building use per month, gallons of fuel oil | BUILDING 1, HIGH SCHOOL 3918 «2431-1288 = 2628 )—:1739 8 8 6 2858 3125 3563 4846 25,508 BUILDING 2, COMMUNITY BUILDING 983 934 1857 718 478 305 133 188 4168 533 984 «©1868 7,615 BUILDING 3, TREATMENT BUILDING 1719 1779 28131366 9168 581 253 343 781 «1616 1722 2818 14,581 BUILDING 4 6 6 8 8 8 8 6 6 6 6 8 8 a BUILDING 5 6 a 8 8 8 8 8 6 6 a 8 8 a BUILDING 6 6 a 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 a 8 8 6 polarconsult alaska, i LETTL.3 OF TRANSMITTAL 1503 West 33rd Avenue e Suite 310 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99503 (907) 258-2420 FAX (907) 258-2419 DATE JOB NO. 4. 2}-4 ATTENTION TO AEA o downs Bow creois Noam . was ne er WE ARE SENDING YOU [J Attached [1] Under separate cover via_________the following items: CJ Shop drawings O Prints ( Plans C) Samples C) Specifications 1 Copy of letter (Change order MK Lepoay, Deher— 2 Copies DATE NO. DESCRIPTION es \ NoaTme Dererer Hear Kepoer | Deerr THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ror approval ( Approved as submitted C Resubmit copies for approval {J For your use CU Approved as noted 0 Submit copies for distribution C) As requested C Returned for corrections © Return corrected prints ror review and comment [] EL. FOR BIDS DUB ert PO C PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPYTO #4e@- eee scree WI ASE SQ — onob it enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at w Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, Alaska 99503-7497 (907) 561-1848 October 8, 1987 Brent Petrie Alaska Power Authority P.O. Box 190869 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 SUBJECT: AVEC Projects for System Efficiency Improvements Dear Brent: According to our recent telephone conversation, attached is a copy of the list recently sent to Senator Hensley on a variety of capital project which would be useful in AVEC villages. Many of these are related to energy effi- ciency improvement and are self-explanatory. As you can see, there are numerous places where we can use money for upgradings. We could compile some statistical information about what these improvements can do since we have similar installa- tions in other villages. If after reviewing this, you wish to have more details on any projects, we would be pleased to work with you in this regard. Best Regards, fyd M. Hodson General Manager Yo De Share G. Dua sale S. totue & Thus, dev art Vette ~ EFFICIENCY, RELIABILITY, AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE VILLAGE ELECTRICAL POWER SYSTEMS OBJECTIVES: Each AVEC power plant would be equipped with waste heat recovery equipment capable of capturing a portion of the heat rejected to the engine coolant and transferring that heat to an end user such as the school, water plant, or city for use in decreasing oil requirements for space heating. Each AVEC power plant providing peak loads in excess of 175 KW would be equipped with two all-steel, fireproof, long-life generator modules. Each AVEC power plant would be equipped with two of the latest design diesel electric sets featuring peak fuel efficiency. Each AVEC power plant providing peak loads up to 175 KW would be equipped with all-steel, fireproof, long-life generator modules. Each AVEC power plant would be equipped with an insulated, all-steel, fireproof, long-life control module for housing the control equipment in a protected weatherproof area. Each AVEC power plant would be equipped with three control panels capable of providing complete control and protection of each diesel engine and generator. Each AVEC power plant would be equipped with a waste oil blender which would filter waste lubricating oi] and blend it into the normal engine fuel supply to be burned off by the engine. Each AVEC fuel tank farm would be installed on top of an impermeable barrier which would prevent the escape of any leaked or spilled fuel. Each AVEC power plant would have a chain link fence installed around both the power plant and the fuel tank farm to keep children and unauthorized individuals away. Each AVEC distribution system would be converted to an overhead pole supported system having higher reliability and lower losses. COST ESTIMATES BY LOCATION (21 VILLAGE LOCATIONS) Ambler 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Waste Heat Recovery Completed Generator Modules Completed Latest Design Generator Sets - 2 Each LTA 10s $ 150,000 Control Module Completed Latest Design Control Panels - 3 Each @ $35,000 Completed Waste Oi] Blender $ 10,000 Impermeable Dike Liner $ 48,000 8. 9. Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Alakanuk WONAMNLPWNHe oe ee we we we ew Waste Heat Recovery Generator Modules - 1 Each Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste 0i1 Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Chevak WONAMOLSWNH- ee © © © © © m — = 3 MeSPEESSr | oe © © © © © oe Waste Heat Recovery Generator Modules - 1 Each Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste 0i1 Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Waste Heat Recovery Generator Modules - 1 Each Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste Oi] Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Emmonak WONAMaWNHH “oe 6 ss 6 8S Waste Heat Recovery Generator Modules - 1 Each Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste 011 Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Each Each Each Each Each Each Each Each KTA 1150 @ $35,000 KTA 38s @ $35,000 LTA 10s @ $35,000 KTA 38 @ $35,000 Completed $ 257,000 3465;000 AHHH OHO 493,000 200,000 100 ,000 200,000 35,000 10,000 64,000 10,000 rsa 305 ,000 200 ,000 300 ,000 200 ,000 35,000 10,000 72,000 10,000 146,000 200,000 150,000 200 ,000 35,000 10,000 32,000 10,000 compigted Completed $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 200,000 150,000 200 ,000 35,000 10,000 64,000 10,000 > Gambel1 WDNAMaWNH Tee eee 6 8 Waste Heat Recovery Generator Modules Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module Latest Design Control Panels Waste 01] Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Hooper Bay WONAMPWHe oe 8 @ © Waste Heat Recovery Generator Modules - 1 Each Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste Oil Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Kiana WOBNAMSWNHH ee Waste Heat Recovery Generator Modules - 1 Each Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste Oi] Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Kivalina eee WONAMHWNHH . Waste Heat Recovery Generator Modules Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste Oil Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution 1 3 2 3 3 1 Each KTA 38 Each @ $35,000 Each KTA 38s Each @ $35,000 Each KTA 1150 Each @ $35,000 Each LTA 10 Each @ $15,000 $ 493,000 Completed $ 150,000 Completed Completed $ 10,000 Completed $ 20,000 $ 246,000 3919, 000 $ 332,000 $ 200,000 $ 300,000 $ 200,000 $ 35,000 $ 10,000 $ 80,000 $ 10,000 $299,000 31, 466,000 Completed $ 200,000 $ 100,000 $ 200,000 Completed $ 10,000 $ 56,000 Completed $ 226,000 3792,,000 $ 348,000 Completed 75,000 200 ,000 15,000 10,000 48,000 10,000 245 ,000 AHO az oS Cc cam 1. Waste Heat Recovery $ 248,000 2. Generator Modules - 1 Each $ 200,000 3. Latest Design Generator Sets - 2 Each KTA 10s $ 150,000 4. Control Module - 1 Each $ 200,000 5. Latest Design Control Panels - 3 Each @ $35,000 $ 35,000 6. Waste Oi] Blender $ 10,000 7. Impermeable Dike Liner $ 32,000 8. Plant Site _— 2 10,000 9. Overhead Distribution ompetes Noatak 1. Waste Heat Recovery $ 348,000 2. Generator Modules Completed 3. Latest Design Generator Sets - 2 Each LTA 10s $ 150,000 4. Control Module - 1 Each $ 200,000 5. Latest Design Control Panels - 1 Each @ $15,000 $ 15,000 6. Waste 0i1 Blender $ 10,000 7. Impermeable Dike Liner $ 40,000 8. rate Site Fence : 10,000 9. Overhead Distribution 191,000 Noorvik 1. Waste Heat Recovery $ 493,000 2. Generator Modules Completed 3. Latest Design Generator Sets - 1 Each KTA 1150 $ 100,000 4. Control Module : Completed 5. Latest Design Control Panels - 3 Each @ $35,000 Completed 6. Waste Oi] Blender $ 10,000 7. Impermeable Dike Liner $ 52,000 8. Plant Site Fence $ 10,000 9. Overhead Distribution Et St. Michael 1. Waste Heat Recovery Completed 2. Generator Modules Completed 3. Latest Design Generator Sets - 2 Each KTA 1150s $ 200,000 1 Each LTA 10 $ 75,000 4. Control Module Completed 5. Latest Design Control Panels - 3 Each @ $35,000 $ 35,000 6. Waste Oi] Blender $ 10,000 7. Impermeable Dike Liner $ 40,000 8. Plant Site Fence $ 10,000 9, Overhead Distribution coe es Savoonga WONAMSWNHH oe e © Waste Heat Recovery Generator Modules - 1 Each Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module Latest Design Control Panels Waste Oi] Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Scammon Bay WONAMPWHEe oe ee Waste Heat Recovery Generator Modules - 1 Each Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module Latest Design Control Panels Waste 01] Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Selawik WONANHWNHH eee wee Waste Heat Recovery Generator Modules - 1 Each Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste Oi] Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Shaktoolik WONANHWNHH eee @ Waste Heat Recovery Generator Modules - 1 Each Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste Oi] Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Each KTA 38 Each @ $25,000 Each LTA 10 Each @ $25,000 Each KTA 1150 Each @ $35,000 Each LTA 10 Each @ $35,000 Completed $ 200,000 $ 150,000 $ 200,000 $ 25,000 $ 10,000 $ 64,000 $ 10,000 $ 246,000 $ 332,000 $ 200,000 $ 100,000 $ 200,000 Completed $ 10,000 $ 64,000 $ 10,000 $306,000 31,222,000 Completed $ 200,000 $ 75,000 $ 200,000 $ 35,000 $ 10,000 $ 24,000 $ 10,000 Shishmaref 1. Waste Heat Recovery $ 450,000 2. Generator Modules - 1 Each $ 200,000 3. Latest Design Generator Sets - 1 Each KTA 1150 $ 100,000 4. Control Module - 1 Each $ 200,000 5. Latest Design Control Panels - 3 Each @ $35,000 $ 35,000 6. Waste 0i1 Blender $ 10,000 7. Impermeable Dike Liner $ 56,000 8. Plant Site Fence $ 10,000 9. Overhead Distribution Completed $1,061,000 Shungnak 1. Waste Heat Recovery Completed 2. Generator Modules Completed 3. Latest Design Generator Sets - 2 Each KTA 1150s $ 200,000 4. Control Module - 1 Each $ 200,000 5. Latest Design Control Panels - 1 Each @ $15,000 $ 15,000 6. Waste 0i1 Blender $ 10,000 7. Impermeable Dike Liner $ 56,000 = fae Site Fence : ; shetoes . Overhead Distribution 3692, 000 Stebbins 1. Waste Heat Recovery $ 348,000 2. Generator Modules - 1 Each $ 200,000 3. Latest Design Generator Sets - 1 Each LTA 10 $ 75,000 4. Control Module --1 Each $ 200,000 5. Latest Design Control Panels - 3 Each @ $35,000 $ 35,000 6. Waste Oi] Blender $ 10,000 7. Impermeable Dike Liner $ 40,000 8. Plant Site Fence $ 10,000 9. Overhead Distribution $ 155,000 > > Wales 1. Waste Heat Recovery $ 191,000 2. Generator Modules - 1 Each $ 200,000 3. Latest Design Generator Sets - 2 Each LTA 10s 1200 RPM $ 150,000 4. Control Module - 1 Each $ 200,000 5. Latest Design Control Panels - 3 Each @ $35,000 $ 35,000 6. Waste 0i1 Blender $ 10,000 7. Impermeable Dike Liner $ 24,000 8. Plant Site Fence $ 10,000 9. Overhead Distribution competed » SUMMARY Waste Heat Recovery Installations $ 4,729,000 (13 Locations - Ambler/E1im/Emmonak/Kiana/St. Michael/ Savoonga/Shaktoolik/Shangnak) : Waste Oi] Blenders $ 210,000 (21 Locations) Fence Plant Sites $ 200,000 (19 Locations - Kiana and Ambler Already Fenced) Impermeable Barriers (249 Tanks) $ 996,000 (Only Gambel] NIC) Control Modules $ 3,400,000 (17 Locations - Ambler/Noorvik/St. Michael/Gambel] NIC) Generator Modules $ 2,800,000 (14 Locations) Control Panels $ 480,000 (40 Each) Overhead Distribution Conversions $ 2,626,000 (12 Locations) Generator Sets: 15 LTA 10s $ 1,125,000 9 KTA 1150s $ 900,000 7 KTA 38s $ 1,050,000 TOTAL ; $18,516,000 RECOMMENDED PRIORITY Emmonak 1. Waste Heat Recovery Completed 2. Generator Modules - 1 Each $ 200,000 3. Latest Design Generator Sets - 1 Each KTA 38 $ 150,000 4. Control Module - 1 Each $ 200,000 5. Latest Design Control Panels - 3 Each @ $35,000 $ 35,000 6. Waste 0i1 Blender $ 10,000 a Plant Site Fence $ 10,000 Overhead Distribution Competes Hooper Bay Waste Heat Recovery $ 332,000 Generator Modules - 1 Each $ 200,000 Latest Design Generator Sets - 1 Each KTA 38s : 150,000 $ Control Module - 1 Each 200,000 Latest Design Control Panels - 3 Each @ $35,000 35,000 PWN . . =|) 6. is 8. Waste Oil Blender Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Selawik ONAN WNHH oe © © © ee Waste Heat Recovery Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste Oi] Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Overhead Distribution Kiana 4. 5. 6. Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste 0i1 Blender Alakanuk An SWPP . oe Generator Modules - 1 Each Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste 0i1 Blender Savoonga ONAN SW oe ee we ew Generator Modules - 1 Each Latest Design Generator Sets Control Module Latest Design Control Panels Waste 0i1 Blender Impermeable Dike Liner Plant Site Fence Shishmaref 1. 4. 5. 6. Waste Heat Recovery Control Module - 1 Each Latest Design Control Panels Waste Oi] Blender Each KTA 1150 Each @ $35,000 Each @ $35,000 Each KTA 1150 Each @ $35,000 Each KTA 38 Each @ $25,000 Each @ $35,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $299,000 31,236,000 $ 332,000 $ 100,000 $ 200,000 Completed $ 10,000 $ -0- $ 10,000 $ 306,000 3958, 000 $ 200,000 Completed $ 10,000 3-210, 000 $ 200,000 $ 100,000 $ 200,000 $ 35,000 $10,000 3385 ,000 $ 200,000 $ 150,000 $ 200,000 $ 25,000 $ 10,000 $ 64,000 $__10,000 3659, 000 $ 450,000 $ 200,000 $ 35,000 $10,000 3-855,000 Chevak 1. Waste Heat Recovery $ 305,000 2. Generator Modules - 1 Each $ 200,000 3. Latest Design Generator Sets - 2 Each KTA 38s , $ 300,000 4. Control Module - 1 Each $ 200,000 5. Latest Design Control Panels - 3 Each @ $35,000 $ 35,000 6. Waste Oi] Blender $ 10,000 $1,050,000 TOTAL $5,958,000 SUMMARY Waste Heat Recovery Installations $ 1,419,000 (4 Locations) Waste Oi] Blenders $ 80,000 (8 Locations) Fence Plant Sites $ 40,000 (4 Locations) Impermeable Barriers (16 Tanks) $ 64,000 Control Modules $ 1,600,000 (8 Locations) Generator Modules $ 1,000,000 (5 Locations) Control Panels $ 200,000 (17 Each) Overhead Distribution Conversions $ 605,000 (2 Locations) Generator Sets: 2 KTA 1150s $ 200,000 5 KTA 38s $750,000 TOTAL $ 5,958,000 ‘ BILL SHEFFIELO GR pees ee a . <= vy Bye ny 4 2” STATE OF ALASKA ca OFFICE OF THE SOVERNOR owe oy J AUTHORITY ces ru Jonear ALES February 22, 1985 Mr. Vincent T. Beans President Alaska Village Electric Co-operative, Inc., Board of Directors 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, AK 99503 Dear Mr. Beans: I have received your correspondence of January 31 regarding the capital project request by the Alaska Village Electric Co-operative. Thank you for informing me of your organiza- tion's support of the twelve programs to convert village electrical systems to overhead distribution. As you may be aware, I had proposed a Fiscal Year 1986 operating and capital budget for the State of Alaska total- ing $2.97 billion in general funds. With declining oil prices reducing our projected revenue, we will not know with certainty what amount will be available for the capital budget until we receive our March revenue forecast. We do know, however, that the total capital budget will be far less than it has been in recent years. Funding for the projects requests you have submitted has not been included in the proposed budget. In order for the projects to receive consideration throughout the budget process, it is important that the communities submit them as community priorities. I encourage those communities that rate the system conversion project as a top priority to work closely with their legislative delegation, as well as with the appropriate State agencies. You may be assured that all projects included in the final FY 86 budget presented to me by the Legislature will receive full consideration. I have referred a copy of your letter to the Office of Management and Budget, as well as to the Alaska Power Authority, for their information and review. XC’. Ed Mons Supa White Mr. Vincent T. Beans -2- February 22, 1985 Again, thank you for providing me with this information on your request for funding. Sincerely, /s/ Bill Sheffield Bill Sheffield Governor cc: Jay Hogan, Associate Director Division of Budget Review Office of Management and Budget w/attachment Larry Crawford, Executive Director Alaska Power Authority Department of Commerce and Economic Development w/attachment 4831 EAGLE STREET, ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99503 TELEPHONE: (907) 561-1818 January 31, 1985 Mr. Bill Sheffield, Governor Office of the Governor Pouch A ee Juneau, Alaska 99811 . 2S tr Dear Governor Sheffield: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative serves 48 cities across Alaska with a total population in excess of 15,000. AVEC provides electric service to a majority of communities in Western Alaska with populations from 125 to 800 citizens. The Cooperative has in the past received the large majority of Cooperative money for construction of generation and distribution facilities from REA in the form of loans. This adds an element of interest cost to our KWH retail rates. In addition, the loan funds must be repaid. Many villages and cities have received numerous grants, sometimes ranging into the millions of dollars, for electrical facilities. AVEC originally constructed distribution systems with underground and later surface utilidor in some areas. While well intentioned at the time with funds available, both types of systems have proven to have reliability or maintainabil- ity limitations in the arctic environment. Damage due to ground cracks and frost heaving action causes safety problems to develop. Accordingly, AVEC has been subject to some criticism from regulatory agencies as a result of practical problems associated with providing service in remote village areas, necessitating accelerated conversion action to reduce future problems. Many consumer service entrances were also found to be substandard by investigators and subjects the village consumers served by regulated utilities to immediate disconnection under = nea rigid interpretation of statutes/regulations by State agencies in small villages. The Cooperative has started a program to convert to overhead distribution to improve safety and reliability. The cost to complete this is estimated to be some $15,000,000 in current dollars. We therefore request that AVEC receive a grant to the Cooperative in the amount of $3,890,000 in the new state budget as a first installment on this project with similar annual increments each future year until this task is satisfactorily completed. Included in the list of conversion projects scheduled with the first installment are as follows: Mr. Bill Sheffield, Governor January 31, 1985 State of Alaska Page Two of Two Estimated City/Village Cost Shishmaref $454,000 Selawik 630,000 Scammon Bay 258 ,000 St. Mary's 2nd Phase, St. Mary's Airport Line, 506 ,000 Pitkas Point Intertie, Pitkas Point Stebbins 263,000 Holy Cross 2nd Phase 263,000 Alakanuk 2nd Phase 188 ,000 Marshal] 109,000 Noatak 300,000 Koyuk 245 ,000 Elim 264 ,000 St. Michael 410,000 Total $3,890,000 This project will provide long range benefits to the village people in many communities with more reliable and longer life electrical facilities. Accordingly, the Board of Directors of Alaska Village Electric Cooperative unanimously forward this request and encourage the strongest support of the Administration and our elected officials to ensure this receives high priority and adequate funding. Cer bh_ OF THE BOARD: ‘Taare x Beans, Lo AVEC Board of Directors cc: Sen. Frank Ferguson Sen. John Sackett Rep. Al Adams Rep. John Binkley Rep. Jack Fuller Rep. Kay Wallis CLTY OF SHISHMAREF, ALASKA RESOLUTION 85-1 A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATLVE'S REQUEST FOR FUNDS TO CONVERT THE URD SYSTEM TO OVERHEAD IN SHISHMAREF, ALASKA. WHEREAS, the City of Shishmaref receives it's electrical power thru an agreement with Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, 4831 Eagle Street, Anchorage Alaska, and : WHEREAS, the current system intact is an overgound "URD'' system, inadequate to serve the City of Shishmaref's needs because of numerous failures within the system, causing power outages throughouc the City, and WHEREAS, che Alaska Village Electric Cooperative has requested monies from the Stace of Alaska to convert the current URD system to an overhead system in the City of Shishmaref, Alaska, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of Shishmaref City Council fully supports the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative's request for funding to convert the current URD system to a more reliable overhead system. PASSED and APPROVED THIS ares day of Ysa wnat , 1985 = tite) Goa CU tat tle etek ATTEST: CITY CLERK Ne er MEMORANDUM December 7, 1988 88-M-363 TO: Loyd M. Hodson, General Manager FROM: Mark E. Teitzel, Manager, Engineering SUBJECT: New Diesel Electric Sets/Diesel Engines Only/Generators Only Proposed for Purchase Under the 1989-1990 Two Year Construction Work Plan The following units are proposed for purchase under the new Two Year Construction Work Plan: Ambler W.0. 60614 Install Cummins KTA 1150 Generator Set $ 85,000 Anvik W.0. 51419 Install Cummins LTA10 1200 RPM 1 Generator Set $ 65,000 Chevak W.O. 14625 Install Caterpillar 3412 1200 RPM Engine 2 Only or Equivalent $100,000 Eek W.0. 18G11 Install Larger Generator on AC 3500 #2 $ 15,000° Hooper W.0. 8632 Install 400 KW (Cummins KTA 38) Generator Bay Set $125,000 Koyuk W.0. 40G22 Install Larger Generator on LTA 10 #1 $ 15,0004 Noatak W.0. 42626 Install Cummins KTA 1150 Generator Set $ 85,000 Savoonga W.0. 29G11 Install Larger Generator on AC 6851 #3 $ 15,0004 Toksook W.0. 71626 Install] Cummins KTA 1150 Generator Set $ 85,000 Bay Wales W.0. 62G20 Install Cummins LTA 10 1200 RPM Generator 1 Set $ 65,000 Summar, One Cummins KTA 38 1200 RPM Generator Set (850 H.P.) One Caterpillar 3412 1200 RPM Engine Only (530 H.P.)¢ Three Cummins KTA 1150 1200 RPM Generator Sets (410 H.P.) 5 Cecember 7, 1988 88-M- Page Two C Two 2 One 1 Notes 1. Origi Wales New S New S Kalta Kalta Shung Scamm 363 2 ummins LTA 10 1200 RPM Generator Sets (184 H.P. Approx.) 68 KW Three Phase Rated 1800 RPM Generators* 35 KW Three Phase Rated 1800 RPM Generator® { ' 1200 RPM generators only may be available from retired 1200 RPM 8V-71 generator sets and may not have to be purchased as part of the set. nal 1200 RPM KATO Generators: KATO 105SU9D S.N. 67931-3 (Used for 01d Harbor) tuyahok KATO 105SU9D S.N. 67931-2 (Used at Wales) tuyahok KATO 105SU9D S.N. 67931-1 (In Yard, Proposed for Shageluk) g KATO 105SU9D =S.N. 67931-4 (Still in Service) g KATO 105SU9D = S.N. 69563-1 (Retired in Village) nak KATO 105SU9D S.N. 69563-3 (Still in Service) on Bay KATO 105SU9D_ = S.N. 67931-5 (Still in Service) The retired unit at Kaltag should be brought back to Anchorage, tested and put into 2. stock as a backup unit. Currently there is one Caterpillar 3412 1200 RPM Engine Only in stock. It is the unit that was removed from Hooper Bay and repaired following discovery of the block corrosion problem. If this unit is used at Chevak, a spare unit is still needed to back up the existing 3412 at Emmonak, Hooper Bay, Mt. Village, Noorvik, Nunapitchuk, Selawik, and Togiak. This generator may not have to be purchased. An acceptable unit will become available when a larger generator is installed at Koyuk. One 268 KW 1800 RPM Generator may not be needed as it has been recommended that the AC 685I engine at Savoonga be relocated to a village where an existing AC 6851 is due for an overhaul. One 268 KW 1800 RPM Generator became available following the decision to convert the Old Harbor module unit to 1200 RPM. It is still recommended that a spare 268 KW three phase 1800 RPM generator be kept in stock as a backup unit for Ambler, Elim, Goodnews Bay, Grayling, Holy Cross, Huslia, Kaltag, Kivalina, Koyuk, Marshall, Mekoryuk, Minto, New Stuyahok, Noatak, Old Harbor, Pilot Station, Quinhagak, Russian Mission, Scammon Bay, Shaktoolik, Shungnak, St. Michael, Stebbins, Toksook Bay, and Tununak. We currently do not have a spare KTA 1150 engine in stock to back up the existing KTA 1150s at Alakanuk, Gambell, Nulato, Pilot Station, Quinhagak, Savoonga, Shishmaref, and the future units at Ambler, Noatak, and Toksook Bay. Jecember 7, 1988 88-M-363 Page 3 Final Summary Recommended for Purchase One Cummins KTA 38 1200 RPM Generator Set (850 H.P.) One Caterpillar 3412 1200 RPM Engine Only (530 H.P.) Three Cummins KTA 1150 1200 RPM Generator Sets (410 H.P.) One Cummins KTA 1150'1200 RPM Engine Only (410 H.P.) for a Spare Two Cummins LTA 10 1200 RPM Generator Sets (184 H.P. Approx.) One Cummins LTA 10 1800 RPM Engine Only (276 H.P.) for a spare with separate turbocharger for 1200 RPM use and with separate fuel pump calibrated for 1200 RPM use. Met ¢ SL ar - leitze Manager, Engineering