HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPPLICATION - COU REF15 Application for wind design-construction - FINALRenewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 1 of 40 10/04/2022
Application Forms and Instructions
This instruction page and the following grant application constitutes the Grant Application Form for
Round 15 of the Renewable Energy Fund (REF). A separate application form is available for
projects with a primary purpose of producing heat (see Request for Applications (RFA) Section
1.5). This is the standard form for all other projects, including projects that will produce heat and
electricity. An electronic version of the RFA and both application forms is available online at:
https://www.akenergyauthority.org/What-We-Do/Grants-Loans/Renewable-Energy-Fund/2022-
REF-Application.
What follows are some basic information and instructions for this application:
• If you are applying for grants for more than one project, provide separate application forms for
each project.
• Multiple phases (e.g. final design, construction) for the same project may be submitted as one
application.
• If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project, provide milestones
and grant budget for each phase of the project (see Sections 3.1 and 3.2.2).
• In order to ensure that grants provide sufficient benefit to the public, AEA may limit
recommendations for grants to preliminary development phases in accordance with 3 Alaska
Administrative Code (ACC) 107.605(1).
• If some work has already been completed on your project and you are requesting funding for
an advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the preceding phases are
completed and funding for an advanced phase is warranted. Supporting documentation may
include, but is not limited to, reports, conceptual or final designs, models, photos, maps, proof
of site control, utility agreements, business and operation plans, power sale agreements,
relevant data sets, and other materials. Please provide a list of supporting documents in
Section 11 of this application and attach the documents to your application.
• If you have additional information or reports you would like the Authority to consider in
reviewing your application, either provide an electronic version of the document with your
submission or reference a web link where it can be downloaded or reviewed. Please provide a
list of additional information; including any web links, in Section 12 of this application and attach
the documents to your application. For guidance on application best practices please refer to
the resource-specific Best Practices Checklists; links to the checklists can be found in the
appendices list at the end of the accompanying REF Round 15 RFA.
• In the Sections below, please enter responses in the spaces provided. You may add additional
rows or space to the form to provide sufficient space for the information, or attach additional
sheets if needed.
• If you need assistance with your application, please contact AEA’s Grants Coordinator by email
at grants@akenergyauthority.org or by phone at (907) 771-3081.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 2 of 40 10/04/2022
REMINDER:
• AEA is subject to the Public Records Act AS 40.25, and materials submitted to AEA may be
subject to disclosure requirements under the act if no statutory exemptions apply.
• All applications received will be posted on the Authority web site after final recommendations
are made to the legislature. Please submit resumes as separate PDFs if the applicant would
like those excluded from the web posting of this application.
• In accordance with 3 AAC 107.630 (b) Applicants may request trade secrets or proprietary
company data be kept confidential subject to review and approval by AEA. If you want
information to be kept confidential the applicant must:
o Request the information be kept confidential.
o Clearly identify the information that is the trade secret or proprietary in their application.
o Receive concurrence from the Authority that the information will be kept confidential. If
the Authority determines it is not confidential, it will be treated as a public record in
accordance with AS 40.25 or returned to the applicant upon request.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 3 of 40 10/04/2022
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION
Please specify the legal grantee that will own, operate, and maintain the project upon completion.
Name (Name of utility, IPP, local government, or other government entity)
City of Unalaska Department of Public Utilities
Tax ID # 92-0036399
Date of last financial statement audit: December 21, 2021 (annual audit)
Mailing Address: Physical Address:
P.O. Box 610 1035 E. Broadway Ave.
Unalaska, AK 99685 Unalaska, AK 99685
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-581-1260
1.1 Applicant Point of Contact / Grants Coordinator
Name: Bob Cummings Title: City Engineer
Mailing Address:
Department of Public Works
1035 E. Broadway Ave.
P.O. Box 610
Unalaska, AK 99685
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-581-1260 907-581-2187 bcummings@ci.unalaska.ak.us
1.1.1 Applicant Signatory Authority Contact Information
Name: Chris Hladick Title: Interim City Manager
Mailing Address:
43 Raven Way
P.O. Box 610
Unalaska, AK 99685
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-581-1602 907-581-4669 chladick@ci.unalaska.ak.us
1.1.2 Applicant Alternate Points of Contact
Name Telephone: Fax: Email:
Steve Tompkins 907-581-1260 907-581-2187 stompkins@ci.unalaska.ak.us
Tom Cohenour 907-581-1260 907-581-2187 tcohenour@ci.unalaska.ak.us
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 4 of 40 10/04/2022
1.2 Applicant Minimum Requirements
Please check as appropriate. If applicants do not meet the minimum requirements, the application
will be rejected.
1.2.1 Applicant Type
☒ An electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS 42.05
CPCN #__106_, or
☐ An independent power producer in accordance with 3 AAC 107.695 (a) (1)
CPCN #______, or
☒ A local government, or
☐ A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities)
Additional minimum requirements
☒ 1.2.2 Attached to this application is formal approval and endorsement for the project by the
applicant’s board of directors, executive management, or other governing authority. If the
applicant is a collaborative grouping, a formal approval from each participant’s governing
authority is necessary. (Indicate yes by checking the box)
☒ 1.2.3 As an applicant, we have administrative and financial management systems and follow
procurement standards that comply with the standards set forth in the grant agreement
(Section 3 of the RFA). (Indicate yes by checking the box)
☒ 1.2.4 If awarded the grant, we can comply with all terms and conditions of the award as
identified in the Standard Grant Agreement template at
https://www.akenergyauthority.org/What-We-Do/Grants-Loans/Renewable-Energy-
Fund/2022-REF-Application (Any exceptions should be clearly noted and submitted with the
application.) (Indicate yes by checking the box)
☒ 1.2.5 We intend to own and operate any project that may be constructed with grant funds for
the benefit of the general public. If no please describe the nature of the project and who will
be the primary beneficiaries. (Indicate yes by checking the box)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 5 of 40 10/04/2022
SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY
2.1 Project Title
Provide a 4 to 7 word title for your project. Type in the space below.
City of Unalaska Wind Power Design/Construction
2.2 Project Location
2.2.1 Location of Project – Latitude and longitude (preferred), street address, or
community name.
Latitude and longitude coordinates may be obtained from Google Maps by finding you project’s
location on the map and then right clicking with the mouse and selecting “What is here? The
coordinates will be displayed in the Google search window above the map in a format as follows:
61.195676.-149.898663. If you would like assistance obtaining this information, please contact
AEA’s Grants Coordinator by email at grants@akenergyauthority.org or by phone at (907) 771-
3081.
Latitude 53.8494 Longitude -166.5625
Lower Pyramid Valley, between COU’s water treatment plant and Veronica Lake.
2.2.2 Community benefiting – Name(s) of the community or communities that will be the
beneficiaries of the project.
Unalaska
2.3 Project Type
Please check as appropriate.
2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type
☒ Wind ☐ Biomass or Biofuels (excluding heat-only)
☐ Hydro, Including Run of River ☐ Hydrokinetic
☐ Geothermal, Excluding Heat Pumps ☐ Transmission of Renewable Energy
☐ Solar Photovoltaic ☐ Storage of Renewable
☐ Other (Describe) ☐ Small Natural Gas
2.3.2 Proposed Grant Funded Phase(s) for this Request (Check all that apply)
Pre-Construction Construction
☐ Reconnaissance ☒ Final Design and Permitting
☐ Feasibility and Conceptual Design ☒ Construction
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 6 of 40 10/04/2022
2.4 Project Description
Provide a brief, one-paragraph description of the proposed project.
City of Unalaska (COU) proposes a combined wind power design/construction project to install two
megawatts of wind power capacity – comprised of two EWT DW58-1000 wind turbines – on COU
land in Lower Pyramid Valley of Unalaska. COU initiated a self-funded wind study in 2017 to
identify prospective wind power sites and collect high quality wind data. That study is complete and
documented in a Wind Resource Assessment Report dated Feb. 2022. The primary site evaluated
in the wind study is the location of the proposed wind power construction project. In 2021, COU
was awarded REF13 funding for feasibility and design, which was revised in 2022 with AEA
consent to focus on design elements to support construction on an accelerated schedule. Work
completed under the REF13 has supported work in 2022 to enable final design, permitting, and
construction of wind turbines in Unalaska. In the larger view, wind and potentially geothermal
power will enable COU to attain its near-term goal of a renewable energy-powered community with
a long-term goal of becoming a world leader in operating a carbon-free economy.
2.5 Scope of Work
Provide a short narrative for the scope of work detailing the tasks to be performed under this
funding request. This should include work paid for by grant funds and matching funds or performed
as in-kind match.
Following feasibility and preliminary design work completed in the REF13 wind power feasibility
and design study, COU will commission remaining design elements for wind turbine construction,
followed by construction of two EWT DW58-1000 wind turbines on COU land in Pyramid Valley.
These turbines will displace approximately nine percent of annual diesel fuel usage in COU’s
Department of Public Utilities (DPU) powerplant and serve as the initial component of Unalaska’s
plan to transition to a carbon-free economy.
Wind power design-related work accomplished to date under the REF13 project includes:
1. EWT approval of DW58-1000 wind turbine following corporate review of Pyramid met
tower data.
2. Receipt of Budget Quotation from EWT for a DirectWIND 58-1000 HH46m wind turbine.
3. Contracted HDL of Anchorage to assess via desktop study the suitability of the proposed
turbine site area for foundation design via review of geotechnical report and boring logs for COU’s
water treatment plant (WTP). The WTP is approx. 1000 ft. north of the turbine site.
4. Contracted EPS, Inc. to assess connection and powerplant integration requirements for 1
or 2 MW of wind power installation in Pyramid Valley.
5. Contracted STG, Inc. to visit Unalaska and examine transport restrictions/requirements
to the site, assess on-island construction capability, and provide an installation cost estimate.
COU’s wind power design/construction project will pick up where its REF13-funded project leaves
off and will consist of, in order of completion: geotechnical investigation and foundation design
(standard gravity mat very likely will be suitable), obtaining FAA obstruction determination, site civil
design, final electrical connection and integration design, placement of turbine order, solicitation of
bids and award for construction, project construction, turbine commissioning and employee
training, and initiation of operations.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 7 of 40 10/04/2022
2.6 Previous REF Applications for the Project
See Section 1.15 of the RFA for the maximum per project cumulative grant award amount
Round
Submitted
Title of application Application
#, if known
Did you
receive a
grant? Y/N
Amount of REF
grant awarded
($)
13 City of Unalaska Wind Power
Feasibility and Final Design (only
Feasibility awarded)
13007 yes $139,000
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 8 of 40 10/04/2022
SECTION 3 – Project Management, Development, and Operation
3.1 Schedule and Milestones
Please fill out the schedule below (or attach a similar sheet) for the work covered by this funding
request. Be sure to identify key tasks and decision points, including go/no go decisions, in your
project along with estimated start and end dates for each of the milestones and tasks. Please
clearly identify the beginning and ending of all phases (I. Reconnaissance, II. Feasibility and
Conceptual Design, III. Final Design and Permitting, and IV. Construction) of your proposed
project. See the RFA, Sections 2.3-2.6 for the recommended milestones for each phase. Add
additional rows as needed.
Task
# Milestones Tasks
Start
Date
End
Date Deliverables
Phase 3 – Final Design and Permitting
1
Project scoping and
contractor
solicitation
Delineate scope of
engineering design
firm and specialty
contractors; solicit,
evaluate, select, and
hire engineering
design firm and
contractors
7/1/23 7/30/23
Establish contracts with project
design team and contractors;
kickoff meeting (internal
deliverable)
2
Permit applications Final layout of two
turbines on COU land;
submit FAA 7460-1
notifications for
construction (via
REF13 project)
12/1/22 3/1/23
Receipt of ASN determinations
(to AEA)
3
Final environmental
assessment and
mitigation plans
Re-evaluate
environmental review
in COU wind project
phase II report (via
REF13 project)
12/1/22 3/1/23
Updated environmental report
(internal deliverable; to AEA if
requested)
4
Resolution of land
use, right-of-way
issues
Assess site options
7/1/23 7/1/23
Completed in FS; project will
be constructed on COU land
(internal deliverable; complete)
5
Permitting, rights of
way, site control
Assess site options
7/1/23 7/1/23
Completed in FS; project will
be constructed on COU land
(internal deliverable; complete)
6
Final system design Select DW58 tower
(HH46 or HH69);
geotechnical field
borings and report;
foundation design (if
not EWT’s standard);
civil works design;
electrical connection
and integration design;
assess BESS need
(via remaining REF13
funds and REF15)
12/1/22 8/1/23
Turbine purchase contract or
letter of intent; geotechnical
report; stamped foundation
design; stamped civil
drawings; stamped mechanical
drawings; stamped electrical
drawings (internal and to AEA)
7
Final cost estimate
and financing plan
Complete contractor’s
construction cost
estimate; COU
12/1/22 7/30/23
Engineering design firm cost
estimate (internal deliverable,
to AEA if requested)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 9 of 40 10/04/2022
evaluation of project
funding options
(continuing REF13
and REF15)
8
Updated economic
and financial
analyses
Assess cost impact to
retail and commercial
customers; decision
on construction
financing; assess PTC
value (from federal
IRA legislation)
10/1/22 7/30/23
Economic and financial plan
report (internal deliverable)
9 Power sale
agreement in place
Project to be owned
by COU n/a n/a Self-owned; no power sale
agreement necessary
10
Final business and
operational plan
Manufacturer warranty
and support
agreements; internal
planning of employee
assignments and
support (continuing
REF13 and REF15)
12/1/22 7/30/23
Agreements and plans
(internal deliverable)
Phase 4 – Construction and Commissioning
1 Design and
feasibility
requirements
Final review of project
design before bid
process (continuing
REF13 and REF15)
12/1/22 7/1/23
Agreement between COU
departments and City Council
(internal deliverable)
2 Bid documents Definition of scope
and construction bid
solicitation (COU
requires competitive
bidding)
7/1/23 8/1/23
Development of bid package
(internal deliverable)
3 Vendor selection
and award
Receipt and review of
bids; award
construction contract
8/1/23 9/1/23
Construction contract award
(internal deliverable)
4 Construction Coordinate shipping of
EWT turbines from
Seattle to Dutch
Harbor; mobilize to
Unalaska; transport
turbines from dock to
site; construct access
road, pads, and
foundation; erect
turbines; construct
electrical connection;
test and commission
turbines; demobilize
(to be accomplished
by construction
contractor)
9/1/23 8/30/24
Documentation of work
completed (internal and to
AEA)
5 Integration and
testing
Complete EWT testing
and commissioning
protocols; test BESS
(if included)
6/1/24 8/30/24
Documentation of satisfactory
integration and testing (internal
and to AEA)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 10 of 40 10/04/2022
6 Decommissioning of
old system
Not applicable (no old
wind power system
exists in Unalaska;
site is undeveloped)
n/a n/a
Not applicable.
7 Final acceptance,
commissioning, and
start-up
Final project
acceptance by COU;
begin normal turbine
operations
8/1/24 8/30/24
Documentation of successful
commissioning by EWT and
construction contractor
(internal and to AEA)
8 Post-construction
certification and
report
Construction
contractor and EWT
wrap-up
9/1/24 10/1/24
Report (to AEA)
9 Operations reporting System operational
performance tracking
by DPU
9/1/24 +20 yr.
Wind generation reporting for
PCE and other needs (internal
and to AEA)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 11 of 40 10/04/2022
3.2 Budget
3.2.1 Funding Sources
Indicate the funding sources for the phase(s) of the project applied for in this funding request.
Grant funds requested in this application $4,000,000
Cash match to be provideda $8,790,000
In-kind match to be provideda $
Energy efficiency match providedb $
Total costs for project phase(s) covered in application (sum of
above)
$12,790,000
Describe your financial commitment to the project and the source(s) of match. Indicate whether
these matching funds are secured or pending future approvals. Describe the impact, if any, that
the timing of additional funds would have on the ability to proceed with the grant.
COU is strongly committed to this project, as demonstrated by $495,000 allocated for a wind
resource assessment study to demonstrate a developable wind resource in Unalaska. This and
COU’s signed power purchase agreement (PPA) with OCCP (a joint venture of Ounalashka
Corporation and Chena Power) for geothermal power, demonstrates COU’s commitment to 100%
renewable energy to power Unalaska’s electrical and thermal power demands.
COU requests $4M of REF15 grant funding for construction of two EWT DW58-1000 wind turbines
at the Pyramid Valley site, to include remaining design activities not already accomplished via its
REF13 project. Unalaska City Council, in Resolution 2022-47 dated 11/22/2022 has expressed its
support of this effort. If awarded, COU will finance the balance of the project via bond sales, its
unrestricted utility budget reserve, and production tax credits, if available.
a Attach documentation for proof (see Section 1.18 of the Request for Applications)
b See Section 8.2 of this application and Section 1.18 of the RFA for requirements for Energy Efficiency
Match.
3.2.2 Cost Overruns
Describe the plan to cover potential cost increases or shortfalls in funding.
Project costs will be closely monitored by Bob Cummings, City Engineer, who will serve as the
grant manager. Should the Department of Public Works (DPW)/Department of Public Utilities
(DPU) elect to expand the scope of work beyond that detailed in this proposal, COU will self-fund
all additional costs (requires approval of city council).
3.2.3 Total Project Costs
Indicate the anticipated total cost by phase of the project (including all funding sources). Use actual
costs for completed phases. Indicate if the costs were actual or estimated.
Reconnaissance (including met tower
installations and WRA report; COU expense)
Actual; 100% COU
expense
incurred/allocated
$495,000
Feasibility and Conceptual Design (adjusted
post-award to preliminary design with AEA
consent)
Actual/awarded in
REF13
$139,000
Final Design and Permitting (phase 3) Estimated, in addition to
remaining REF13 funds
$420,000
Construction and Commissioning (phase 4) Estimated $12,370,000
Total Project Costs (sum of above) Estimated $13,424,000
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 12 of 40 10/04/2022
Metering/Tracking Equipment [not included in
project cost]
Estimated $
3.2.4 Funding Subsequent Phases
If subsequent phases are required beyond the phases being applied for in this application,
describe the anticipated sources of funding and the likelihood of receipt of those funds.
• State and/or federal grants
• Loans, bonds, or other financing options
• Additional incentives (i.e. tax credits)
• Additional revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable energy subsidies or
programs that might be available)
This grant application is for the design/construction of two EWT DW58-1000 wind turbines on COU
land in Pyramid Valley in Unalaska. To achieve higher average wind penetration and meet its
renewable energy goals, COU will expand the wind project in the future with construction of wind
turbines on Ounalashka Corporation land adjacent to the project site. Funding for that future
expansion is presently undetermined, but likely would be a combination of grants, bond sales,
loans, and tax credits, if available.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 13 of 40 10/04/2022
3.2.3 Budget Forms
Applications MUST include a separate worksheet for each project phase that was identified in
Section 2.3.2 of this application — I. Reconnaissance, II. Feasibility and Conceptual Design, III.
Final Design and Permitting, and IV. Construction. Please use the tables provided below to detail
your proposed project’s total budget. Be sure to use one table for each phase of your project, and
delete any unnecessary tables. The milestones and tasks should match those listed in 3.1 above.
If you have any question regarding how to prepare these tables or if you need assistance preparing
the application please feel free to contact AEA’s Grants Coordinator by email at
grants@akenergyauthority.org or by phone at (907) 771-3081.
Phase 3 — Final Design and Permitting
Milestone or Task
Anticipated
Completion
Date
RE- Fund
Grantee
Matching
Source of
Matching
Funds:
TOTALS Grant
Funds
Funds Cash/In-
kind/Federal
Grants/Other
State
Grants/Other
Project scoping and
contractor solicitation 7/30/2023 $8,400 $0 Cash $8,400
Permit applications 3/1/2023 $8,400 $0 Cash $8,400
Final environmental
assessment and
mitigation plans
3/1/2023 $12,600 $0 Cash $12,600
Resolution of land use,
right-of-way issues 7/1/2023 $0 $0 Cash $0
Permitting, rights of way,
site control 7/1/2023 $0 $0 Cash $0
Final system design 8/1/2023 $361,200 $0 Cash $361,200
Final cost estimate and
financing plan 7/30/2023 $8,400 $0 Cash $8,400
Updated economic and
financial analyses 7/30/2023 $8,400 $0 Cash $8,400
Power sale agreement in
place n/a $0 $0 Cash $0
Final business and
operational plan 7/30/2023 $12,600 $0 Cash $12,600
TOTALS $420,000 $0 $420,000
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $12,600 $0 Cash $12,600
Travel & Per Diem $0 $0 Cash $0
Equipment $0 $0 Cash $0
Materials & Supplies $0 $0 Cash $0
Contractual Services $407,400 $0 Cash $407,400
Construction Services $0 $0 Cash $0
Other $0 $0 Cash $0
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 14 of 40 10/04/2022
Phase 3 — Final Design and Permitting
Milestone or Task
Anticipated
Completion
Date
RE- Fund
Grantee
Matching
Source of
Matching
Funds:
TOTALS Grant
Funds
Funds Cash/In-
kind/Federal
Grants/Other
State
Grants/Other
TOTALS $420,000 $0 $420,000
Phase 4 — Construction and Commissioning
Milestone or Task
Anticipated
Completion
Date
RE- Fund
Grantee
Matching
Source of
Matching
Funds:
TOTALS Grant
Funds
Funds Cash/In-
kind/Federal
Grants/Other
State
Grants/Other
Design and feasibility
requirements 7/1/2023 $0 $0 Cash $0
Bid documents 8/1/2023 $8,950 $21,975 Cash $30,925
Vendor selection and
award 9/1/2023 $8,950 $21,975 Cash $30,925
Construction 8/30/2024 $3,329,400 $8,174,700 Cash $11,504,100
Integration and testing 8/30/2024 $179,000 $439,500 Cash $618,500
Decommissioning of old
system n/a $0 $0 Cash $0
Final acceptance,
commissioning, and
start-up
8/30/2024 $44,750 $109,875 Cash $154,625
Post-construction
certification and report 10/1/2024 $8,950 $21,975 Cash $30,925
Operations reporting +20 yr. $0 $0 Cash $0
TOTALS $3,580,000 $8,790,000 $12,370,000
Budget Categories: $0 $0
Direct Labor & Benefits $8,950 $21,975 Cash $30,925
Travel & Per Diem $0 $0 Cash $0
Equipment $0 $0 Cash $0
Materials & Supplies $895,000 $2,197,500 Cash $3,092,500
Contractual Services $35,800 $87,900 Cash $123,700
Construction Services $2,640,250 $6,482,625 Cash $9,122,875
Other $0 $0 Cash $0
TOTALS $3,580,000 $8,790,000 $12,370,000
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 15 of 40 10/04/2022
3.2.4 Cost Justification
Indicate the source(s) of the cost estimates used for the project budget, including costs for future
phases not included in this application.
As of submission of this REF15 application and via its REF13-funded feasibility and design project,
COU has received a Budget Quotation of $1.27M (plus $350K delivery to Seattle) from EWT for
one DW58-1000 HH46 turbine, dated 11/11/2022. Following review, COU requested EWT to revise
the quotation to include a second turbine, same model, and to delete the cold climate package.
EWT indicated that a degree of cost savings can be expected with a two-turbine order, though
presently of an unknown amount. At present, COU assumes $3.2M for two turbines delivered to
Seattle.
As of submission of this application and via its REF13 project, STG, Inc. provided COU a
preliminary cost estimate of $6.91M to install one wind turbine at the Pyramid site. This includes
mobilization/demobilization, barge transport of turbines from Seattle to a dock in Captains Bay in
Unalaska and then by truck to the site, civil works (access road and pad), foundation, electrical
connection, and turbine testing and commissioning. STG’s estimate includes $0.22M for civil
engineering that will be accomplished in the design phase, hence $6.69 for installation of one
turbine. Following COU’s subsequent decision to install two turbines to better optimize project fixed
costs and provide redundancy, STG has been requested to revise their cost estimate accordingly.
That estimate is pending but is expected to be approx. $9.24M.
Additional expected engineering costs include site-specific geotechnical investigation and
foundation design ($150K assumed), and electrical connection design ($50K assumed). Note that
HDL’s desktop Geotechnical Suitability Evaluation, Unalaska Wind Turbine Site, dated 6/10/2022
indicated a strong likelihood that EWT’s standard gravity mat foundation will be suitable. If proven
true, custom foundation design may not be necessary.
Briefly then, design and construction of a two-turbine project totals $12.79M, as follows:
1. $0.42M remaining engineering (not completed via REF13 project) (REF15 phase 3)
2. $2.85M turbines (REF15 phase 4)
3. $0.70M turbine shipping to Seattle (REF15 phase 4)
4. $9.24M construction (including turbine transport to Dutch Harbor) (REF15 phase 4)
This cost estimate compares to AEA’s project cost assumption of $6,675/kW for a 2,000 kW
project, or $13.35M, in its 2022.11.01 REF Round 15 Evaluation Model spreadsheet.
At the present time an electrical connection and integration analysis by EPS is preliminary. It notes
that extending the existing 34.5 kV distribution line that powers the WTP easily has sufficient
capacity and can be readily extended to the wind site. EPS states that voltage support at the wind
site, likely with capacitors, may be necessary, but will require further evaluation. Further, EPS has
determined that the powerplant SCADA and controls must be modified to handle turbine ramp
rates, and “the addition of a spinning reserve control point, allocated to the wind generation to
monitor diesel generator spinning reserve and dispatch generators appropriately. We currently
have a control system similar to this in Kotzebue that has more wind penetration than what we are
looking at here.” (Dave Buss, EPS, communication).
Possibly EPS will conclude that battery energy storage is necessary to integrate 2 MW of wind
turbine capacity with the six diesel generators and three ORC units in DPU’s powerplants. Should
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 16 of 40 10/04/2022
that conclusion be reached, COU would install a battery energy storage system (BESS) to
augment the project. Note that DPU has previously evaluated a BESS to better manage its diesel
generators during operation of a 3 MW electric crane on the City Dock, and hence a BESS would
serve two valuable purposes: stabilize voltage and frequency with 2 MW of wind power online and
stabilize same during operation of the electric crane. BESS cost is uncertain at present, but COU
anticipates $1.0M to $1.5M based on equivalent systems installed elsewhere in rural Alaska. COU
would fund a BESS as part of its cash match to complete the project. This would increase total
project cost to approximately $13.5M, but a BESS will have value beyond integrating 2 MW of wind
power, plus it would enable future expansion of the wind farm with minimal additional integration
required.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 17 of 40 10/04/2022
3.3 Project Communications
3.3.1 Project Progress Reporting
Describe how you plan to monitor the progress of the project and keep AEA informed of the status.
Who will be responsible for tracking the progress? What tools and methods will be used to track
progress?
Bob Cummings, as COU’s grants manager for this project, will communicate with AEA on a
mutually agreed upon schedule, presumably monthly or bi-monthly. He will be assisted by Douglas
Vaught, P.E. of V3 Energy LLC, the project manager, as needed. Monthly tracking of scope,
budget and schedule via contractor progress reports and labor and expense submittals will ensure
that progress is maintained, and that no project element goes awry.
3.3.2 Financial Reporting
Describe the controls that will be utilized to ensure that only costs that are reasonable, ordinary
and necessary will be allocated to this project. Also discuss the controls in place that will ensure
that no expenses for overhead, or any other unallowable costs will be requested for reimbursement
from the REF Grant Program.
COU Public Utilities, Public Works and City management will be briefed on the terms and
conditions of AEA’s REF Grant Program. COU will develop a project budget with only costs that
are reasonable, ordinary, and necessary for the project. Prior to purchase, each transaction will be
reviewed to ensure it is necessary and reasonable. This review will be based on the terms set forth
in the grant agreement. Only costs that are subject to the above process will be allocated to the
grant and requested for reimbursement. The City of Unalaska does not record overhead expenses
for any of their grant programs. Purchase orders will be used to authorize purchases and provide
coding to correct accounts.
Project managers are held accountable for achieving project budgets and complying with
applicable grant terms. COU’s accounting group will be briefed on the terms and conditions of the
REF grant to include the requirement that overhead or other unallowable costs are not included in
a request for reimbursement. COU’s Project Management Fixed Asset Accountant will review all
grant reports and requests for reimbursements to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions
of the grant.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 18 of 40 10/04/2022
SECTION 4 – QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
4.1 Project Team
Include resumes for known key personnel and contractors, including all functions below, as an
attachment to your application. In the electronic submittal, please submit resumes as separate
PDFs if the applicant would like those excluded from the web posting of this application.
4.1.1 Project Manager
Indicate who will be managing the project for the Grantee and include contact information. If the
applicant does not have a project manager indicate how you intend to solicit project management
support. If the applicant expects project management assistance from AEA or another government
entity, state that in this section.
Douglas Vaught, P.E., V3 Energy LLC, dvaught@v3energy.com. Owner and principal engineer of
an Anchorage, Alaska area-based consulting engineering firm focused on renewable wind energy
systems with emphasis on Alaska village power systems. Project work includes renewable energy
project development, wind turbine performance and layout optimization modeling, power system
energy balance modeling, wind turbine site selection, meteorological test tower installation, wind
resource data analysis, solar resource analysis, project economic analysis, feasibility studies,
power integration, and project management. Emphasis on the holistic integration of renewable
energy to supply electric, thermal and transportation power needs. Email: dvaught@v3energy.com.
4.1.2 Project Accountant
Indicate who will be performing the accounting of this project for the grantee. If the applicant does
not have a project accountant indicate how you intend to solicit financial accounting support.
Kelly Tompkins, City of Unalaska Project Management Fixed Asset Accountant, with support from
COU administrative personnel.
4.1.3 Expertise and Resources
Describe the project team including the applicant, partners, and contractors.
For each member of the project team, indicate:
• the milestones/tasks in 3.1 they will be responsible for;
• the knowledge, skills, and experience that will be used to successfully deliver the tasks;
• how time and other resource conflicts will be managed to successfully complete the task.
If contractors have not been selected to complete the work, provide reviewers with sufficient detail
to understand the applicant’s capacity to successfully select contractors and manage complex
contracts.
Design
City of Unalaska (Tasks 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10; guidance with others)
V3 Energy LLC (Tasks 2, 3, 6, 8, assist COU with others)
Electric Power Systems, Inc. (Task 6, electrical and integration design)
STG, Inc./other (Task 7, civil design)
Northern Geotechnical/other (Task 6, foundation design)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 19 of 40 10/04/2022
HDL/other (Task 6, foundation design)
EWT (Tasks 6, 7, 10)
ESS manufacturer (Task 6, TBD)
Construction
City of Unalaska (Tasks 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, guidance with others)
V3 Energy LLC (assist COU with all)
EWT (Tasks 4, 5, 7, 8, 9)
Construction contractor (to be awarded by competitive bid) (Tasks 4, 5, 7, 8)
EPS, Inc. (Tasks 5, 7, 9)
Note that the City of Unalaska currently manages a portfolio of nearly 50 Capital Improvement
Projects with a total value of close to $100 Million. The City has vast experience contracting,
managing, delivering, and operating complex capital projects. The proposed project is well within
the scope of projects that COU has successfully managed previously and is confident that it will do
so for this project.
4.2 Local Workforce
Describe how the project will use local labor or train a local labor workforce.
Given the high cost of travel to Unalaska, to the extent possible local labor is employed, but fishing
and seafood processing places high demand on labor resources, which is desirable but often
makes local hire goals challenging to meet. During the COU Wind Power Development and
Integration Assessment Project, Phase III, some local labor support was hired to assist with met
tower installations and troubleshooting. For design and permitting COU envisions few opportunities
for local labor hire, though wind project construction should provide ample opportunity for local
hire. Integral to a wind power operations plan, COU will train existing and/or new Department of
Public Utilities personnel to operate and maintain the wind turbines.
COU plans to satisfy the requirements of the federal Inflation Reduction Act regarding prevailing
wage required for all municipal projects and apprenticeship requirements. It is anticipated and
desirable to use local labor for the apprenticeship program which provides valuable training to the
local workforce.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 20 of 40 10/04/2022
SECTION 5 – TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
5.1 Resource Availability
5.1.1 Assessment of Proposed Energy Resource
Describe the potential extent/amount of the energy resource that is available, including average
resource availability on an annual basis. For pre-construction applications, describe the resource to
the extent known. For design and permitting or construction projects, please provide feasibility
documents, design documents, and permitting documents (if applicable) as attachments to this
application (See Section 11). Likelihood of the resource being available over the life of the project.
See the “Resource Assessment” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional
guidance.
The City of Unalaska Wind Power Development and Integration Assessment Project, Wind
Resource Assessment Report documents a mean wind speed of 7.1 m/s and mean wind power
density of 620 W/m2 at the 60-meter level of the Pyramid met tower (both reflect measured data
adjusted to long-term average measured at Dutch Harbor airport). The resource classifies as Class
IIB per IEC 61400-1, 3rd edition. This indicates acceptable extreme wind probability and moderate
turbulence. Wind shear is extremely low with a calculated power law exponent (α) value of 0.079.
5.1.2 Alternatives to Proposed Energy Resource
Describe the pros and cons of your proposed energy resource vs. other alternatives that may be
available for the market to be served by your project.
A joint venture between Ounalashka Corp. and Chena Power (OCCP) initiated a project to
construct a 30 MW geothermal power plant on the slopes of Makushin Volcano to supply electrical
power to the City of Unalaska, though delays have been experienced with financing and the need
to re-evaluate the resource, and hence project success is uncertain. While there is a signed PPA in
place between COU and OCCP, there are many uncertainties and risks that may prevent this
project from coming to fruition.
Should the geothermal project be developed, wind power would complement geothermal power
and would enable COU to attain its near-term goal of achieving a 100% renewable energy-
powered community with its longer-term goal of becoming a world leader in operating a carbon-
free economy. Given the sensitivity of electrical power reliability for seafood processors, a BESS is
planned as an integral system component and will enable diesel-off operation.
Should the geothermal power development project be abandoned, wind power would lower COU’s
power generation costs, improve system reliability and redundancy, and increase COU’s prospect
of achieving its goal of 100% renewable energy generation. Without geothermal, wind power can
be scaled up to continue COU’s vision of a 100% renewable energy-powered community. Lessons
learned in the proposed 2 MW wind project will be applied to the larger future project.
5.1.3 Permits
Provide the following information as it may relate to permitting and how you intend to address
outstanding permit issues. See the “Environmental and Permitting Risks” section of the appropriate
Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance.
• List of applicable permits
• Anticipated permitting timeline
• Identify and describe potential barriers including potential permit timing issues, public
opposition that may result in difficulty obtaining permits, and other permitting barriers
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 21 of 40 10/04/2022
FAA Obstruction Notification, Form 7460-1 (COU does not anticipate FAA objections based on
swift approval of a 60-meter met tower in Pyramid Valley with no requirement for obstruction
lighting). In the near term and through COU’s ongoing REF13 project, COU will work with EWT,
STG, and HDL to refine cost estimates for HH46 and HH69 foundations. Following a benefit/cost
analysis, tower height will be chosen, and Form 7460-1 submitted. COU anticipates accomplishing
this by 3/31/2023.
5.2 Project Site
Describe the availability of the site and its suitability for the proposed energy system. Identify
potential land ownership issues, including whether site owners have agreed to the project or how
you intend to approach land ownership and access issues. See the “Site control” section of the
appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance.
Pyramid Valley near Captain’s Bay was presumed the optimal site for wind power in Unalaska and
as such was considered the primary site of interest in COU’s Wind Power Development and
Integration Assessment Project, which is mostly complete with its transition to the REF13-funded
feasibility and conceptual design project. The Wind Resource Assessment demonstrated that the
Pyramid Valley wind resource is developable with an adjusted mean wind speed of 7.1 m/s at 60 m
and an IEC 61400-1, 3rd ed. Class IIB classification.
Within Pyramid Valley, COU owns a 200 ft. wide strip of land where the 60-meter met tower was
located and which is the planned wind turbine site. Ounalashka Corp. owns the adjacent land and
has been a cooperative partner in COU’s wind study by permitting the installation of three met
towers on their land in other locations in Unalaska and has given COU the right to enter their land
to access the Pyramid met tower.
5.3 Project Technical & Environmental Risk
5.3.1 Technical Risk
Describe potential technical risks and how you would address them.
• Which tasks are expected to be most challenging?
• How will the project team reduce the risk of these tasks?
• What internal controls will be put in place to limit and deal with technical risks?
See the “Common Planning Risks” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional
guidance.
The Pyramid Valley wind resource is well understood with 34 months of collected data. Given
terrain complexity, wind resource estimation at other site options in the valley require modeling, an
accepted industry practice. Existing modeling and prior EPS, Inc. reviews indicated that COU’s
diesel powerplant could operate unhindered with 1 MW of wind power capacity, but 2 MW capacity
requires further analysis and may require a BESS for the turbines to operate at full potential
without dynamic curtailment. If required, additional EPS analysis will determine storage and
inverter capacities of a BESS, which would be included as an integral element of the project but
funded by COU.
A risk for which STG, Inc. was hired to assess in October 2022 is the intersection of Captain’s Bay
Road and Pyramid Valley Road where the latter tees and winds through Westward Seafood
dormitories. STG has indicated that this transition is tight and may require road and adjacent slope
modification to enable passage of turbine components but not insurmountable and any challenges
can be worked through.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 22 of 40 10/04/2022
Other potential challenges include maintaining diesel generator efficiency as wind power comes
on-line and performing needed O&M tasks in the remote location of the project. The COU
powerhouse has installed and permitted two 1.2 MW diesel generators that can be used to
optimize loading in conjunction with the four larger units and COU mechanics will be cross trained
on turbine maintenance to respond to any issues that occur between contracted O&M service.
5.3.2 Environmental Risk
Explain whether the following environmental and land use issues apply, and if so which project
team members will be involved and how the issues will be addressed. See the “Environmental and
Permitting Risks” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance.
• Threatened or endangered species
• Habitat issues
• Wetlands and other protected areas
• Archaeological and historical resources
• Land development constraints
• Telecommunications interference
• Aviation considerations
• Visual, aesthetics impacts
• Identify and describe other potential barriers
An environmental analysis completed by Solstice Alaska Consulting, Inc. and included in Appendix
A of City of Unalaska Wind Power Development and Integration Assessment Project, Phase II
Report demonstrates relatively low environmental risks for wind power development in lower
Pyramid Valley.
COU anticipates that the FAA obstruction evaluation process presents a higher risk to project
planning, but distance to the Dutch Harbor airport, location of established approach and departure
patterns well away from Pyramid Valley, and FAA approval of a 60-meter met tower at the project
site with no obstruction lighting requirement enhances confidence that FAA will not object to
construction of wind turbines in lower Pyramid Valley.
5.4 Technical Feasibility of Proposed Energy System
In this section you will describe and give details of the existing and proposed systems. The
information for existing system will be used as the baseline the proposal is compared to and also
used to make sure that proposed system can be integrated.
Only complete sections applicable to your proposal. If your proposal only generates electricity, you
can remove the sections for thermal (heat) generation.
5.4.1 Basic Operation of Existing Energy System
Describe the basic operation of the existing energy system including: description of control system;
spinning reserve needs and variability in generation (any high loads brought on quickly); and
current voltage, frequency, and outage issues across system. See the “Understanding the Existing
System” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance.
The following text copied from Unalaska Wind Power Development and Integration Assessment
Project Phase II Report (the text provided by EPS, Inc.):
DPU uses high efficiency diesel generators for primary power generation. These generators are
two each of identical 5.2 MW Wartsila and 4.4 MW Caterpillar units, supplemented by two each 1.2
MW Caterpillar units. Wartsila and Caterpillar generators provide good response to power quality
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 23 of 40 10/04/2022
(frequency and voltage) requirements, but the Caterpillar units are sensitive to prolonged operation
below 50% load, which DPU tries to avoid because of maintenance and environmental concerns.
Industrial customers are more sensitive to voltage and frequency fluctuations than residential and
commercial loads. This is especially relevant during periods of high load demand when large
industrial machinery and control equipment are in use. To maintain acceptable frequency and
voltage control for these key loads and to maintain minimum spinning reserve, DPU parallels (load-
shares) two or more generators.
To protect and prioritize power supply to key industrial customers, DPU employs a progressive
load shedding program to reduce the risk of a system-wide outage. With this program, residential
and low sensitivity loads are shed first, and industrial and more sensitive loads are shed last. Load
shedding is automatically initiated when system under-frequency occurs due to a fault or other
problem.
Unlike most rural Alaskan systems where power quality standards are less rigorous, DPU
maintains frequency within +/- 0.15-0.20 Hz during normal operation. This provides a sufficient
spread between nominal and trip frequencies to ensure adequate system control without shedding
lower-priority customers too often.
Excellent power quality, i.e., very stable voltage and frequency, arguably is more important to
industrial users than residential and commercials customers. Seafood processors, with a need to
maintain cold rooms to preserve expensive product, are sensitive to potential disruption and may
self-generate and not be willing to connect to the power system, often though with generation
equipment less efficient and less reliable than DPU’s generators. Ultimately this is undesirable for
both self-generating processors and COU. COU loses revenue and self-generating seafood
processors must task staff with non-profit making work and incur higher expenses than if tied to the
DPU system.
5.4.2.1 Existing Power Generation Units
Include for each unit include: resource/fuel, make/model, design capacity (kW), minimum
operational load (kW), RPM, electronic/mechanical fuel injection, make/model of genset
controllers, hours on genset
Unit 1: Unit 10: Wartsila 12V32 – 5.2 MW
Unit 2: Unit 11: Wartsila 12V32 – 5.2 MW
Unit 3: Unit 12: Caterpillar C280-16 – 4.4 MW
Unit 4: Unit 13: Caterpillar C280-16 – 4.4 MW
Unit 5: Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) generators – 3 units – 50 kW each
Unit 6: Unit 8: Caterpillar 3516 – 1.2 MW
Unit 7: Unit 9: Caterpillar 3512B – 1.2 MW
5.4.2 Existing Energy Generation Infrastructure and Production
In the following tables, only fill in areas below applicable to your project. You can remove extra
tables. If you have the data below in other formats, you can attach them to the application (see
Section 11).
Is there operational heat recovery? (Y/N) If yes estimated
annual displaced heating fuel (gallons)
COU does not have a heat recovery to
serve thermal loads, but in FY2021 the
three ORC units used recovered jacket
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 24 of 40 10/04/2022
5.4.2.2 Existing Distribution System
Describe the basic elements of the distribution system. Include the capacity of the step-up
transformer at the powerhouse, the distribution voltage(s) across the community, any transmission
voltages, and other elements that will be affected by the proposed project.
COU has 35 kV sub-transmission and 12 kV distribution. The City’s 35 kV system was originally
installed in 1983 and 1984 as part of a series of smaller projects. Most of the lines are original 4/0
Aluminum conductors. They are limited in capacity due to cable size and 200-amp terminations in
switches and junction boxes. The entire distribution system consists of 12 kV and 35 kV buried
cables in PVC conduit.
The 35 kV system consists of a looped backbone, 200-amp pad-mounted junction cabinets every
500 to 1,000 feet, pad-mounted 4-way switches, and pad-mounted transformers throughout. The
35 kV is sourced from the new powerhouse on Amaknak Island and serves nearby large industrial
loads, including seafood processing, shipping, and harbor facilities. It is also used to provide power
to the town substation, located on Unalaska Island across the street from the new Town Hall
building. There are two main 35 kV backbone extensions that connect the Amaknak Island
distribution system to the Unalaska Island distribution system (one is a 1,200-foot submarine cable
channel crossing and the other is a town bridge crossing).
5.4.2.3 Existing Thermal Generation Units (if applicable to your project)
Generation
unit
Resource/
Fuel type
Design
capacity
(MMBtu/hr)
Make Model Average
annual
efficiency
Year
Installed
Hours
5.4.2.5 Annual Electricity Production and Fuel Consumption (Existing System)
Use most recent year. Replace the section (Type 1), (Type 2), and (Type 3) with generation
sources
(DPU 2021
data)
Month
Generatio
n (DHPH)
(kWh)
Generatio
n (OVPM)
(kWh)
Generatio
n (ORC)
(kWh)
Fuel
Consumpt
ion DHPH
(gal)
Fuel
Consum
ption
UVPM
(gal)
Peak
Load
(kW)
Minimu
m Load
(kW)
January 2,670,879 423,600 (16,867) 171,865 32,448 6,057 2,243
water heat to generate 352,829 kWh of
electricity. This equated to 22,760 gal of
diesel fuel saved.
5.4.2.4 O&M and replacement costs for
existing units
Power Generation Thermal Generation
i. Annual O&M cost for labor $2,150,000
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor $1,525,000
iii. Replacement schedule and cost for
existing units
23 years; $25 million
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 25 of 40 10/04/2022
5.4.2.5 Annual Electricity Production and Fuel Consumption (Existing System)
Use most recent year. Replace the section (Type 1), (Type 2), and (Type 3) with generation
sources
(DPU 2021
data)
Month
Generatio
n (DHPH)
(kWh)
Generatio
n (OVPM)
(kWh)
Generatio
n (ORC)
(kWh)
Fuel
Consumpt
ion DHPH
(gal)
Fuel
Consum
ption
UVPM
(gal)
Peak
Load
(kW)
Minimu
m Load
(kW)
February 4,091,400 13,800 (49,184) 364,205 1,051 8,720 3,393
March 5,063,066 600 (60,236) 320,118 98 8,670 628
April 4,559,703 12,900 (48,305) 290,892 958 8,425 777
May 3,204,561 80,400 (27,591) 203,462 7,010 6,581 0
June 2,866,051 180,900 (17,135) 186,921 13,949 6,104 2,779
July 3,647,088 193,500 (27,041) 239,526 14,736 8,201 0
August 4,552,216 26,400 (23,833) 296,900 2,548 8,376 1,515
Sept. 4,592,666 53,100 (31,076) 297,525 4,041 8,666 0
October 4,565,904 53,400 (39,012) 289,111 4,118 8,324 0
November 3,478,682 44,100 (21,279) 223,710 3,352 7,457 1,290
December 3,064,046 60,600 (22,167) 197,891 4,426 4,277 3,106
Total 46,356,262 1,143,300 (383,726) 3,082,126 88,735
DHPH – Dutch Harbor Powerhouse
OVPM – Unalaska Valley Power Module
“0” reading in minimum load means outage occurred
ORC – Organic Rankine Cycle generators (hence shown negative)
5.4.2.6 Annual Heating Fuel Consumption (Existing System)
Use most recent year. Include only if your project affects the recovered heat off the diesel
genset or will include electric heat loads. Only include heat loads affected by the project.
Month Diesel
(Gallons)
Electricity Propane
(Gallons)
Coal
(Tons)
Wood
(Cords,
green tons,
dry tons)
Other
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Total
5.4.3 Future Trends
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 26 of 40 10/04/2022
Describe the anticipated energy demand in the community, or whatever will be affected by the
project, over the life of the project. Explain how the forecast was developed and provide year by
year forecasts. As appropriate, include expected changes to energy demand, peak load, seasonal
variations, etc. that will affect the project.
A joint venture between Ounalashka Corporation and Chena Power (OCCP) is working to develop
a 30 MW capacity geothermal power project on the east flank of nearby Makushin Volcano that if
successful will supply electrical power to COU via undersea cable. A PPA between OCCP and
COU has been signed with an original system online date of May 2024. This deadline, however,
has twice been extended to provide OCCP with time to re-test the resource and obtain necessary
financing.
To achieve the sales goal specified in the PPA, COU anticipates that self-generating seafood
processors will switch to grid connection (following distribution system expansion and upgrade to
achieve this objective). The increased electrical sales, combined with conversion of fuel oil heat to
electrically powered air-source heat pumps and new industry, will increase electrical demand
beyond the capacity of the geothermal plant. OCCP also plans to attract new customers to
Unalaska and projects that demand will quickly outpace supply from their geothermal facility in
which case any electricity produced by the wind generation will augment the renewable energy
portfolio of Unalaska and will hopefully allow it to provide 100% renewable energy to all customers.
Wind generation will most likely be expanded to meet this goal. This project will make a significant
contribution to this goal while demonstrating the additional generation capacity is available to be
brought online.
COU has a near-term goal of a 100% renewable energy-powered community with a longer-term
goal of becoming a world leader in operating a carbon-free economy. Inclusion of wind power with
or without geothermal power is integral to these plans.
5.4.4 Proposed System Design
Provide the following information for the proposed renewable energy system:
• A description of renewable energy technology specific to project location
• The total proposed capacity and a description of how the capacity was determined
• Integration plan, including upgrades needed to existing system(s) to integrate renewable
energy system: Include a description of the controls, storage, secondary loads, distribution
upgrades that will be included in the project
• Civil infrastructure that will be completed as part of the project—buildings, roads, etc.
• Include what backup and/or supplemental system will be in place
See the “Proposed System Design” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional
guidance.
The proposed project is the construction of two EWT DW58-1000 wind turbines on COU land in
Pyramid Valley of Unalaska. A wind resource study was initiated in 2017 at COU expense to
demonstrate the feasibility of developing wind power to serve the community. Although wind power
may seem an obvious conclusion for a community in the Aleutian Islands, Unalaska’s geography is
constrained by mountains and bays and site options were limited. The wind study demonstrated a
developable wind power class 4, IEC Class IIB wind resource.
The proposed project is 2 MW of wind power capacity. This is the wind power capacity limitation on
COU land in Pyramid Valley, with future wind expansion adjacent Ounalashka Corporation land.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 27 of 40 10/04/2022
Using recent DPU electric load data, Homer system modeling of two DW58-1000 HH69 wind
turbines at the Pyramid site estimate 12% average wind penetration and up to 70% instantaneous
penetration, the latter of which may require a BESS to mitigate the need for dynamic curtailment
control. This issue is presently under review by EPS. The project site is near a high-capacity three-
phase buried distribution that serves the water treatment plant. EPS is presently evaluating turbine
connection requirements to this distribution line.
An existing, high quality gravel road serves the water treatment plant and passes near the project
site. A short road extension – approximately 800 ft. – from the water treatment will be constructed
on COU land to reach the southernmost turbine site with an additional 900 ft. of road to reach the
northernmost turbine. The necessary civil construction for this project has been evaluated by STG,
Inc., though a construction contract will be awarded by competitive bid per COU contracting rules.
The backup power system for the wind turbines is the existing diesel-electric generators in the DPU
powerplants, which also serves as the base case scenario for economic valuation purposes.
5.4.4.1 Proposed Power Generation Units
Unit # Resource/
Fuel type
Design
capacity
(kW)
Make Model Expected
capacity
factor
Expected
life
(years)
Expected
Availability
1 wind 1,000 EWT DW58-
1000 HH69
31.9 20 95
2 wind 1,000 EWT DW58-
1000 HH69
31.9 20 95
5.4.4.2 Proposed Thermal Generation Units (if applicable)
Generation
unit
Resource/
Fuel type
Design
capacity
(MMBtu/hr)
Make Model Expected
Average
annual
efficiency
Expected
life
5.4.5 Basic Operation of Proposed Energy System
• To the best extent possible, describe how the proposed energy system will operate: When will
the system operate, how will the system integrate with the existing system, how will the
control systems be used, etc.
• When and how will the backup system(s) be expected to be used
See the “Proposed System Design” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional
guidance.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 28 of 40 10/04/2022
The two EWT wind turbines at Pyramid will be integrated into the powerplant SCADA system and
operate autonomously at optimum power output at all times unless manually secured for
maintenance or dynamically curtailed via power setpoint control for power system stability.
Inclusion of a BESS though will minimize the latter.
5.4.3.1 Expected Capacity Factor
(95% availability)
31.9%
5.4.5.2 Annual Electricity Production and Fuel Consumption (Proposed System) (from Homer
model, 95% turbine availability)
Month Generation
(2 DW58-
1000
HH69)
(kWh)
Generation
(Diesel
generators)
(kWh)
Generation
(Type 3)
(kWh)
Fuel
Consumption
(Diesel-
Gallons)
Fuel
Consumption
[Other]
Secondary
load
(kWh)
Storage
(kWh)
January 643,202 2,055,756 516,331
February 668,167 3,430,789 847,955
March 694,474 4,399,923 1,089,127
April 396,557 4,175,365 1,028,728
May 254,603 2,960,989 722,357
June 222,534 2,648,842 647,961
July 279,762 3,383,078 828,353
August 313,865 4,246,857 1,047,791
September 512,297 4,117,886 1,018,682
October 483,478 4,077,655 1,007,654
November 505,493 2,990,457 733,365
December 615,179 2,461,006 607,704
Total 5,589,611 40,948,602 10,096,008
5.4.5.3 Annual Heating Fuel Consumption (Proposed System)
Month Diesel
(Gallons)
Electricity Propane
(Gallons)
Coal
(Tons)
Wood
(Cords,
green tons,
dry tons)
Other
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 29 of 40 10/04/2022
December
Total
5.4.6 Proposed System Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs
O&M costs can be estimated in two ways for the standard application. Most proposed renewable
energy projects will fall under Option 1 because the new resource will not allow for diesel
generation to be turned off. Some projects may allow for diesel generation to be turned off for
periods of time; these projects should choose Option 2 for estimating O&M.
Option 1: Diesel generation ON
For projects that do not result in shutting down
diesel generation there is assumed to be no
impact on the base case O&M. Please indicate
the estimated annual O&M cost associated with
the proposed renewable project.
Base Case: $3,675,000
With Wind Project: $3,442,500
Option 2: Diesel generation OFF
For projects that will result in shutting down
diesel generation please estimate:
1. Annual non-fuel savings of shutting off
diesel generation
2. Estimated hours that diesel generation
will be off per year.
3. Annual O&M costs associated with the
proposed renewable project.
1. $
2. Hours diesel OFF/year:
3. $
5.4.7 Fuel Costs
Estimate annual cost for all applicable fuel(s) needed to run the proposed system (Year 1 of
operation)
Diesel
(Gallons)
Electricity Propane
(Gallons)
Coal
(Tons)
Wood
Other
Unit cost
($)
Annual
Units
Total
Annual
cost ($)
5.5 Performance and O&M Reporting
For construction projects only
5.5.1 Metering Equipment
Please provide a short narrative, and cost estimate, identifying the metering equipment that will be
used to comply with the operations reporting requirement identified in Section 3.15 of the Request
for Applications.
There will be a primary metering cabinet and a pad-mount switch. The specifics of the electrical
integration will be identified closer to the project construction, but these components would typically
cost approximately $150 – 175,000.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 30 of 40 10/04/2022
5.5.2 O&M reporting
Please provide a short narrative about the methods that will be used to gather and store reliable
operations and maintenance data, including costs, to comply with the operations reporting
requirement identified in Section 3.15 of the Request for Applications
The wind turbines will be integrated into the COU SCADA system for monitoring and dispatch
purposes. Creation of a unique project code will allow cost tracking within the present municipal
financial management software (MUNIS Enterprise Resource Planning from Tyler Technologies).
The Project Management Fixed Asset Accountant will track all costs for the project. The City
Engineer and Utilities Director will monitor performance and compliance with reporting
requirements.
SECTION 6 – ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY AND BENEFITS
6.1 Economic Feasibility
6.1.1 Economic Benefit
Two DW58-1000 turbines HH69, 95%
availability, 6.77 m/s adjusted mean at 50
meters, 5.59 GWh/y, 20 yr. project life,
from REF15 economic model
spreadsheet Annual Lifetime
Anticipated Diesel Fuel Displaced for Power
Generation (gallons) 447,169 8,943,380
Anticipated Fuel Displaced for Heat
(gallons) 0 0
Total Fuel displaced (gallons) 447,169 8,943,380
Anticipated Diesel Fuel Displaced for Power
Generation ($)
$1,873,000
($4.19/gal, COU’s
Sept. 2022 delivered
fuel cost)
$50,470,000
1.5%/yr. fuel cost
escalation, 0% discount)
Anticipated Fuel Displaced for Heat ($) n/a n/a
Anticipated Power Generation O&M Cost
Savings (Diesel only) $232,500 $4,650,000
Anticipated Thermal Generation O&M Cost
Savings n/a n/a
Total Other costs savings (taxes, insurance,
etc.)
Total Fuel, O&M, and Other Cost Savings
6.1.2 Economic Benefit
Explain the economic benefits of your project. Include direct cost savings and other economic
benefits, and how the people of Alaska will benefit from the project. Note that additional revenue
sources (such as tax credits or green tags) to pay for operations and/or financing will not be
included as economic benefits of the project.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 31 of 40 10/04/2022
Where appropriate, describe the anticipated energy cost in the community, or whatever will be
affected by the project, over the life of the project. Explain how the forecast was developed and
provide year-by-year forecasts
The economic model used by AEA is available at https://www.akenergyauthority.org/What-We-
Do/Grants-Loans/Renewable-Energy-Fund/2022-REF-Application. This economic model may be
used by applicants but is not required. The final benefit/cost ratio used will be derived from the
AEA model to ensure a level playing field for all applicants. If used, please submit the model with
the application.
AEA’s REF15 Excel evaluation model (file name 2022.11.01 REF Round 15 Evaluation Model)
calculates a benefit/cost ratio of 1.05 for the proposed project with the following assumptions:
1. Capital cost: $12.37M (from Section 3.2.4, design/construction less $0.42 for design)
2. Displaced electric (wind AEP): 5,589,611 kWh/year
3. Wind O&M: 2% of capital cost or $262K/year
4. Start year: 2024
5. Fuel community: Unalaska
6. Diesel generator size for O&M: 601-1,300 kW
7. Project life: 20 years
COU notes, however, that community fuel oil price projections for electric sector in the Diesel Fuel
Prices tab underestimates COU’s actual recent diesel fuel prices. For instance, AEA’s projections
are $2.46/gal in 2022, $2.43 in 2023, $2.17 in 2024, $2.31 in 2025, etc. In reality, COU has paid an
average $4.19/gal to date in 2022. From Oct. 2012 to Sept. 2022, diesel fuel for electric power
generation in Unalaska has averaged $2.59/gal with a variation per the graphic below.
Homer software was used for an alternative calculation of project economic valuation. Base
assumptions were:
1. Capital cost: $12.37M
2. Project life: 25 years
3. Real discount rate: 3%
4. Initial fuel cost: $1.10/L ($4.16/gal); 1.5%/yr escalation
5. Wind O&M: $116,000/yr for 2 turbines
6. Diesel O&M: $15.16/hr
7. System fixed costs: $4.72M/yr
8. Wind AEP: 5,589,611 kWh/yr
$0.00
$1.00
$2.00
$3.00
$4.00
$5.00
$6.00
Oct-12May-13Dec-13Jul-14Feb-15Sep-15Apr-16Nov-16Jun-17Jan-18Aug-18Mar-19Oct-19May-20Dec-20Jul-21Feb-22Sep-2210 Year Unalaska Diesel Pricing
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 32 of 40 10/04/2022
Compared to a base case (current) scenario LCOE of $0.455/kWh, two DW58-1000 HH69 turbines
with a BESS have a LCOE of $0.428/kWh, which equates to a benefit/cost ratio of 1.063.
6.1.3 Economic Risks
Discuss potential issues that could make the project uneconomic to operate and how the project
team will address the issues. Factors may include:
• Low prices for diesel and/or heating oil
• Other projects developed in community
• Reductions in expected energy demand: Is there a risk of an insufficient market for energy
produced over the life of the project.
• Deferred and/or inadequate facility maintenance
• Other factors
Compared to fossil fuel generation with its relatively low capital costs and high fuel costs, wind
power entails high capital costs and free fuel cost, periodic O&M aside. With that, once installed
and operational, lower than projected fuel costs would result in less monetary savings than
anticipated, but that only translates to a longer payback period. Recent history has demonstrated
however that low fuel prices inevitably are followed by high prices, making future fuel cost
forecasting nearly impossible. Wind power (or any renewable energy generation option) is a hedge
against future fuel costs and as such will provide COU with a measure of generation price stability
for its customers.
The geothermal project could be seen as a risk, but it is not. There is presently enough diesel-
powered electricity between DPU and the self-generators to more than satisfy the sales
requirements of the PPA. Should the geothermal project come online (best case scenario is 2027),
it is only feasible for COU and its ratepayers for self-generators terminate self-generation and
purchase geothermal electricity. Any geothermal sales above the required minimum set in the PPA
are split 50/50 with OCCP. However, wind generation would be COU-controlled project and the
ratepayers would reap 100% of the economic benefits from wind power. Thus, geothermal is a win-
win in regards to wind generation. The City gets more renewable energy production and rate
payers will see reduced electricity rates.
6.1.4 Public Benefit for Projects with Direct Private Sector Sales
For projects that include direct sales of power to private sector businesses (sawmills, cruise ships,
mines, etc.), please provide a brief description of the direct and indirect public benefits derived from
the project as well as the private sector benefits and complete the table below. See Section 1.6 in
the Request for Applications for more information.
Not applicable.
Renewable energy resource availability (kWh per month)
Estimated direct sales to private sector businesses (kWh)
Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use at private sector businesses ($)
Estimated sales for use by the Alaskan public (kWh)
Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use by the Alaskan public ($)
6.2 Other Public Benefit
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 33 of 40 10/04/2022
Describe the non-economic public benefits to Alaskans over the lifetime of the project. For the
purpose of evaluating this criterion, public benefits are those benefits that would be considered
unique to a given project and not generic to any renewable resource. For example, decreased
greenhouse gas emission, stable pricing of fuel source, won’t be considered under this category.
Some examples of other public benefits include:
• The project will result in developing infrastructure (roads, trails, pipes, power lines, etc.) that can
be used for other purposes
• The project will result in a direct long-term increase in jobs (operating, supplying fuel, etc.)
• The project will solve other problems for the community (waste disposal, food security, etc.)
• The project will generate useful information that could be used by the public in other parts of the
state
• The project will promote or sustain long-term commercial economic development for the
community
The main public benefit of this project is demonstrating the feasibility of installing utility-scale (1
MW+ capacity) wind generation in the remote, dynamic, and complex environment of the Aleutian
Islands. This project would be the first of its kind in the Aleutians and the westmost utility scale
wind turbine to be installed to date in Alaska. There is some lingering skepticism in the community
regarding the feasibility of wind generation due to failures of residential-scale wind generators ten
years ago in Unalaska. This project would put those fears to rest and generate greater public
support for expanded wind power development in Unalaska. It will also provide an example for
other remote communities in the Aleutians to follow.
Through the apprenticeship program used to construct and install these turbines as well as the
ongoing maintenance requirements, this project will bring another skill to the local workforce that
will provide opportunities for the local workforce. This project will provide an opportunity for local
youth to gain skills and pursue opportunities in the growing renewable energy sector.
This project will also give hope to a community that has seen the effects from climate change in
subsistence activities, including a sense of pride and control that this community can be part of the
solution in the face of a global phenomenon with unknown long-term consequences. It will allow
the residents of Unalaska to embrace the Unangan value of: “live with and respect the land, sea
and all nature (Tana}nangin I}ayuusalix an}a}iimchin a}na{txichin).”
This project will bring the community closer to its goal of generating electricity with 100%
renewable resources and enabling seafood processors to process wild-caught seafood with 100%
renewable power. The Unalaska economy will become an example of air, sea, and human
sustainability, providing an example to other communities that renewable energy can be the center
of a vibrant, sustainable economy.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 34 of 40 10/04/2022
SECTION 7 – SUSTAINABILITY
Describe your plan for operating the completed project so that it will be sustainable throughout its
economic life.
At a minimum for construction projects, a business and operations plan should be attached and the
applicant should describe how it will be implemented. See Section 11.
7.1.1 Operation and Maintenance
Demonstrate the capacity to provide for the long-term operation and maintenance of the proposed
project for its expected life
• Provide examples of success with similar or related long-term operations
• Describe the key personnel that will be available for operating and maintaining the
infrastructure.
• Describe the training plan for existing and future employees to become proficient at operating
and maintaining the proposed system.
• Describe the systems that will be used to track necessary supplies
• Describe the system will be used to ensure that scheduled maintenance is performed
The City has a long history of planning, managing, operating, and maintaining projects ranging
from small feasibility projects to large construction projects. These projects have included
construction of a 9 MGPD water treatment plant; a chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT)
wastewater treatment plant; a new 19 MW powerhouse; and most recently a $45 million-dollar
dock facility. In support of these facilities there is a facilities maintenance division with a wide
range of multi-craftsmen; a vehicle and heavy equipment division responsible for maintaining over
160 pieces of rolling stock and fixed machinery to include graders, loaders, generators, balers, and
trucks; and a supply division that orders and maintains spare inventories of critical parts and
supplies needed to service the City’s rolling stock, machinery, and structures. The supply division
also generates work orders based on manufacturer recommended service schedules.
7.1.2 Financial Sustainability
• Describe the process used (or propose to use) to account for operational and capital costs.
• Describe how rates are determined (or will be determined). What process is required to set
rates?
• Describe how you ensure that revenue is collected.
• If you will not be selling energy, explain how you will ensure that the completed project will be
financially sustainable for its useful life.
The City uses MUNIS software, an enterprise resource planning tool from Tyler Technologies.
MUNIS is used to manage financials, procurement, human resources, payroll, and revenues.
Operational and capital costs are tracked on a real-time on-going basis, summarized and
presented to City Council monthly, and audited by a third-party each fall prior to publishing in the
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR).
Rate studies are performed by a third-party consultant every three years, with rates adjusted
accordingly. Along with operational costs, the rate study accounts for capital spending and major
maintenance items. The City operates all utilities on a revenue-neutral basis where possible, with
the revenues covering the expenses; in some cases, City Council has authorized transfers from
the general fund to the proprietary funds to keep rates lower for residents.
There is a Utility Billing Clerk in the finance department that oversees billing and revenue
collection. The Utility Director manages the budgets and assists with the capital project
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 35 of 40 10/04/2022
management. Revenue projections, operating and payroll budgets, and careful planning of related
capital improvements are crucial to ensuring the success of a new utility project.
7.1.2.1 Revenue Sources
Briefly explain what if any effect your project will have on electrical rates in the proposed benefit
area over the life of the project. If there is expected to be multiple rates for electricity, such as a
separate rate for intermittent heat, explain what the rates will be and how they will be determined
Collect sufficient revenue to cover operational and capital costs
• What is the expected cost-based rate (as consistent with RFA requirements)
• If you expect to have multiple rate classes, such as excess electricity for heat, explain what
those rates are expected to be and how those rates account for the costs of delivering the
energy (see AEA’s white paper on excess electricity for heat).
• Annual customer revenue sufficient to cover costs
• Additional incentives (i.e. tax credits)
• Additional revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable energy subsidies or
programs that might be available)
The City uses four rate classes for electrical sales: Residential, Small General, and Residential.
These rates are set to cover the operational and capital costs associated with the power
generation. Based on feasibility studies, wind resource analysis, and the anticipated capital and
O&M costs for wind energy in Unalaska, the City anticipates wind power can be delivered to the
customer cheaper than diesel generation.
With the current investment tax credits available to install and operate renewable energy projects,
the savings could be quite substantial, depending on the future price of diesel.
7.1.2.2 Power Purchase/Sale
The power purchase/sale information should include the following:
• Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s)
• Potential power purchase/sales price - at a minimum indicate a price range (consistent with the
Section 3.16 of the RFA)
Identify the potential power buyer(s)/customer(s) and anticipated power purchase/sales price
range. Indicate the proposed rate of return from the grant-funded project. Include letters of support
or power purchase agreement from identified customers.
Not applicable as the project will be owned by COU and operated by its utility, Dept. of Public
Utilities.
SECTION 8 – PROJECT READINESS
8.1 Project Preparation
Describe what you have done to prepare for this award and how quickly you intend to proceed with
work once your grant is approved.
Specifically address your progress towards or readiness to begin, at a minimum, the following:
• The phase(s) that must be completed prior to beginning the phase(s) proposed in this application
• The phase(s) proposed in this application
• Obtaining all necessary permits
• Securing land access and use for the project
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 36 of 40 10/04/2022
• Procuring all necessary equipment and materials
Refer to the RFA and/or the pre-requisite checklists for the required activities and deliverables for
each project phase. Please describe below and attach any required documentation.
With its own financial resources, COU initiated wind power reconnaissance and feasibility work in
2017 with its Wind Power Development and Integration Assessment Project, which was awarded
to V3 Energy, LLC. This project included a survey of wind power site options in Unalaska, erection
of two 60 meter, one 34 meter, and one 10 meter met towers for one to three years, culminated
with preparation of a Wind Resource Analysis Report in Feb. 2022.
COU applied for and was awarded feasibility and conceptual design funding in REF Round 13 to
continue its wind power development effort. With AEA approval, the original scope of the project
was modified to emphasize design elements to prepare the project for final design and
construction. This has included a review of site geotechnical conditions by HDL, a budgetary
pricing estimate by STG that included a site visit in Oct. 2022 to assess on-island construction
resources and turbine transport and site access requirements, a budgetary quotation from EWT for
a DW58-1000 turbine, and an electrical connection and integration analysis by EPS (report is
pending).
The turbines will be constructed on COU land in Pyramid Valley and connected to an underground
34.5 kV that serves the nearby Water Treatment Plant and which has plenty of available amperage
to accommodate 2 MW wind capacity. The FAA obstruction evaluation will be implemented shortly.
It will be a formality as the site is well away from the airport and usable airspace and the 60-meter
met tower at the site was readily approved in 2018 with no lighting requirements.
8.2 Demand- or Supply-Side Efficiency Upgrades
If you have invested in energy efficiency projects that will have a positive impact on the proposed
project, and have chosen to not include them in the economic analysis, applicants should provide
as much documentation as possible including:
1. Explain how it will improve the success of the RE project
2. Energy efficiency pre and post audit reports, or other appropriate analysis,
3. Invoices for work completed,
4. Photos of the work performed, and/or
5. Any other available verification such as scopes of work, technical drawings, and payroll for
work completed internally.
This work has not been completed yet, but will be further elucidated through the REF13 scope of
work.
SECTION 9 – LOCAL SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION
Describe local support and opposition, known or anticipated, for the project. Include letters,
resolutions, or other documentation of local support from the community that would benefit from
this project. Provide letters of support, memorandum of understandings, cooperative agreements
between the applicant, the utility, local government and project partners. The documentation of
support must be dated within one year of the RFA date of October 4, 2022. Please note that letters
of support from legislators will not count toward this criterion.
Unalaska City Council passed and adopted Resolution 2022-47 on November 22, 2022 in support
of continuing the City’s commitment to renewable energy sources with a vision of eventually
becoming carbon-free. The City Council has supported wind development for more than 20 years
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 37 of 40 10/04/2022
in one form or another, in acknowledgement of the Aleutian Islands’ nickname as the “birthplace of
the winds.” Wind power feasibility and development was placed on the City’s Capital and Major
Maintenance Plan in 2018, which continued funding approved as needed to perform feasibility and
resource studies in preparation of possible development.
SECTION 10 – COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER AWARDS
Identify other grants that may have been previously awarded to the Applicant by AEA for this or
any other project. Describe the degree you have been able to meet the requirements of previous
grants including project deadlines, reporting, and information requests.
COU was awarded $139,000 in REF Round 13 for wind power feasibility. In the 11 months since
the grant award was signed, COU has made extensive progress, including redefining the project to
focus on design elements, deciding on a two-turbine project to demonstrate wind power to the
community while awaiting a decision on geothermal development, initiating electrical and
geotechnical design, obtaining EWT review and budget quote, and commissioning an access,
transport, and constructability review. These REF13 project efforts will continue during the Round
15 application review process with economic cost/benefit analysis of HH46 vs. HH69, array layout
on COU land, FAA obstruction evaluation, refinement of the electrical integration analysis, and
further discussion with HDL, STG and EWT regarding turbine foundation options and attendant
construction costs.
SECTION 11 – LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR PRIOR PHASES
In the space below, please provide a list of additional documents attached to support completion of
prior phases.
V3 Energy LLC: City of Unalaska Wind Power Development and Integration Assessment Project,
Wind Resource Assessment Report, 2/18/2022
EWT-Americas Inc.: Budget Quotation for DW 58*1000 HH46m (note that this quotation was
doubled for two turbines; COU is awaiting an updated quote from EWT), 11/11/2022
STG, Inc. Budgetary Pricing Estimate for Dutch Harbor EWT Wind (note that some budget
information in this application was based on a single turbine version of STG’s estimate and hence
there are minor discrepancies, all of which would be absorbed by COU’s project match), 12/3/2022
HDL Engineering Consultants LLC: Geotechnical Suitability Evaluation, Unalaska Wind Turbine
Site, 6/10/2022
EPS, Inc.: Electric connection and powerplant integration analysis (pending)
SECTION 12 – LIST OF ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION
In the space below, please provide a list of additional information submitted for consideration.
See Section 11.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 15
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 23046 Page 40 of 40 10/04/2022