HomeMy WebLinkAboutBristolBayEnergyPlan2016 Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 1
Bristol Bay
Regional Energy Plan
Phase II - Stakeholder Engagement
Prepared by
Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference
3300 Arctic Blvd., Ste. 203
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Bristol Bay Native Association
P.O. Box 310
Dillingham, Alaska 99576
Information Insights
212 Front Street, Ste. 100
December 2015
A CKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank the many stakeholders in the Bristol Bay region who contributed their
time to attend energy meetings and generously shared their knowledge of the region through
interviews and comments.
Gusty Akelkok, Luki Akelkok, Sr., Michael Alakayuk, Michelle Anderson, Pete Andrew, Peducia Andrew,
Dennis Andrew, Melvin Andrew, Peducia Andrew, Kay Andrews, Greg Anelon, Martha Anelon, Gerold
Anelon, Fred (Ted) Angasan, Peter Angasan, Sr., Jennie Apokedak, Julianne Baltar, Bec ky Boettcher, Clinton
Boskofsky, Roland Briggs, Don Bumpus, Jon Burrows, Greg Calvert, Debbie Carlson, John Christensen, Jr.,
Peter Christopher, Sr., Eddie Clark, Crystal Clark, Thomas Deck, Francisca Demoski, Elijah Eknaty, Mischa
Ellanna, Brice Eningowuk, Will Evanoff, Michael Favors, Mariano Floresta, Diane Folsom, Ben Foss, Connie
Fredenberg, Annie Fritze, Betty Gardiner, Steven Gilbert, Lucy Goode, Clem Grunert, Paul Hansen, Eric
Hanssen, Adelheid Herrmann, Bill Hill, Nathan Hill, Larry Hill, Roy Hiratsuka, George Hornberger, David
Hostetter, Betsy Hostetter, William Ilutsik, Bruse Ilutsik, Allen Ilutsik, Kenny Jensen, Keith Jenson, Stephen
Jones, James Kallenberg, Shirley Kalmakoff, Joseph Kazimirowicz, Brenda Kerr, Jaylon Kosbruk, Terrence
Kosbruk, Gerald Kosbruk, Steven Kramer, Suzanne Lamson, Mark Lang, Emil Larson, Gwen Larson, Delores
Larson, Willard Lind, Jr., Peter Lockuk, Sr., Rose Loera, Billy Maines, Tom Marsik, Natalia Marttila, Tom
Matsik, Delissa McCormick, Tim McDermott, Amber McDonough, Mike Megli, Shannon Nanalook, Chris
Napoli, Herman Nelson, Sr., Melody Nibeck, Kenneth Nukwak, Sr., Henry Olsen, Dale Peters, William
Peterson, Cameron Poindexter, Alice Ruby, Jody Saiz, AlexAnna Salmon, Becky Savo, Mark Scotford, Austin
Shangin, Nikki Shanigan, Arthur Sharp, Senafont Shugak, Jr., Frank Simpson, Nick Smeaton, Don Strand,
Alexander Tallekpalek, Darryl Thompson, Tina Tinker, Moses Toyukak, Sr., Donna Vukich, John Wanamaker,
Joseph Wassily, William Weatherby, Laura Zimin
We would also like to thank the following organizations for sharing their data and expertise.
Their assistance was invaluable.
Alaska Energy Authority, Alaska Housing Finance Corporation, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium,
Alaska Village Energy Cooperative, Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation, Bristol Bay Borough, Bristol Bay
Borough School District, Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation, Bristol Bay Housing Authority,
Bristol Bay Native Corporation, City of Dillingham School District, lliamna Newhalen Nondalton Electric
Cooperative, Lake and Peninsula Borough, Lake and Peninsula School District , Naknek Electric Association,
Nushagak Electric Cooperative, Southwest Region School District and U.S. Department of Energy Office of
Tribal Energy
AUTHORS
Lawrence Sorensen, Tribal Energy Manager, Bristol Bay Native Association
Doug Griffin, Executive Director, Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference
Laura Vaught, Energy Coordinator, Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference
Jamie Hansen, Consultant, Information Insights
Jana Peirce, Senior Consultant, Information Insights
Richard Raines, Researcher, Information Insights
Cover Photo: Bob Waldrop. Inset Photos (clockwise from top left): INN Electric Cooperative, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Clickr Bee, Wolf Solar Electric
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 2
CONTENTS
Acknowledgments ..............................................................................................................1
Acronyms and Abbreviations ...........................................................................................6
Executive Summary ...........................................................................................................9
1 | Regional Energy Planning ..........................................................................................15
Planning Area ...............................................................................................................16
Subregions ....................................................................................................................17
Other Planning Efforts in the Bristol Bay Region ........................................................20
Strategies for Near and Mid-Term Projects ..................................................................21
2 | Energy Supply and Demand ......................................................................................23
Electric Power Producers ..............................................................................................23
Electric Rates ................................................................................................................24
Fuel Vendors and Prices ...............................................................................................28
Current and Projected Demand .....................................................................................29
Diesel Powerhouse and Distribution .............................................................................35
Renewable Energy ........................................................................................................41
Energy Efficiency and Conservation ............................................................................46
3 | Resource Potential.......................................................................................................54
4 | Public Outreach...........................................................................................................56
Outreach Activities .......................................................................................................56
5 | Energy Priorities and Needs.......................................................................................58
6 | Community and Energy Profiles ...............................................................................63
A | Community and Utility Interviews .............................................................................1
B | Energy Meeting Participants .......................................................................................1
C | Bristol Bay Industry Survey ........................................................................................1
D | Audience Polling Results .............................................................................................1
E | Analysis of Resource Potential ....................................................................................1
F | References......................................................................................................................1
G | Data Sources .................................................................................................................1
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 3
INDEX OF TABLES
Table 1: Proposed Regional Energy Roadmap ................................................................................. 10
Table 2: Bristol Bay region boundaries ............................................................................................ 17
Table 3: Bristol Bay subregional groupings ...................................................................................... 19
Table 4: Bristol Bay Communities in U.S. DOE START Program ........................................................ 20
Table 5: Factors for successful energy projects ................................................................................ 22
Table 6: Savings potential for community facilities through PCE ..................................................... 27
Table 7: Projected savings from 10% increase in diesel efficiency ................................................... 37
Table 8: Heat recovery systems completed or in development ....................................................... 38
Table 9: Line loss by community and subregion .............................................................................. 40
Table 10: Community-scale wood biomass heating projects completed or in development ............ 41
Table 11: Hydroelectric projects in Bristol Bay region ..................................................................... 42
Table 12: Hydrokinetic energy projects operational or in progress .................................................. 43
Table 13: Community-scale solar energy projects operational or in progress .................................. 44
Table 14: Wind projects in the Bristol Bay region ............................................................................ 45
Table 15: Summary of energy characteristics of regional housing stock .......................................... 47
Table 16: Average EE&C savings per household in the Bristol Bay region ........................................ 48
Table 17: Estimated energy savings and potential energy savings from residential EE&C ............... 50
Table 18: Savings potential for public and commercial facilities ...................................................... 50
Table 19: Participation by Community in Energy Audit Programs since 2008 .................................. 51
Table 20: Savings from Energy Efficient Lighting Upgrades in 7 Bristol Bay communities ................ 52
Table 21: Savings from energy efficient lighting upgrades in 33 small communities ........................ 52
Table 22: Savings from LED street lighting retrofits in 2 Bristol Bay communities ........................... 52
Table 23: Potential savings from sanitation system EE&C based on statewide audits ..................... 53
Table 24: Energy resource potential and certainty for new, community -scale projects ................... 54
Table 25: Subregional energy meetings ........................................................................................... 57
Table 26: Community energy priorities & needs identified by Bristol Bay regional stakeholders .... 58
Table 27: May 4 Energy Summit audience polling results ............................................................... D-1
Table 28: December 2013 Village Leadership Workshop ................................................................ D-2
Table 29: Wood biomass resource potential .................................................................................. E-2
Table 30: Geothermal resource potential ....................................................................................... E-3
Table 31: Hydropower resource potential ...................................................................................... E-4
Table 32: Wind energy resource potential ...................................................................................... E-5
Table 33: Coal resource potential ................................................................................................... E-6
Table 34: Oil and gas resource potential ........................................................................................ E-7
Table 35: Heat recovery (HR) resource potential ............................................................................ E-8
Table 36: Energy Efficiency savings potential ................................................................................. E-9
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 4
Table 37: Criteria used in resource potential analysis ................................................................... E-10
Table 38: Data sources for community profiles .............................................................................. G-1
Table 39: Data sources for energy profiles ..................................................................................... G-2
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 5
INDEX OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Regional Energy Planning timeline .................................................................................... 16
Figure 2: Bristol Bay regional energy planning area ......................................................................... 17
Figure 3: Data availability by energy sector ..................................................................................... 23
Figure 4: Electrical Sales by Utility ................................................................................................... 23
Figure 5: Regional electric generation by utility and resource, 2014 (MWh).................................... 24
Figure 6: Electric rates by community, 2014 .................................................................................... 25
Figure 7: Price of #1 fuel oil in hub communities ............................................................................. 28
Figure 8: Regional sales by customer type, 2014 ............................................................................. 29
Figure 9: Subregional electrical sales by customer type, 2014 ......................................................... 30
Figure 10: Trends in average monthly use by customer, Nushagak Electric Cooperative 2005 -2014 31
Figure 11: Trends in average monthly use by customer, INNEC 2005-2014 ...................................... 31
Figure 12: Trends in average monthly use by customer, NEA 2005-2014 ......................................... 32
Figure 13: Generation trends, 2010-2014 ........................................................................................ 32
Figure 14: Historical population trends by community, 2000-2014.................................................. 34
Figure 15: Diesel fuel used for electrical generation, 2014 .............................................................. 36
Figure 16: Diesel efficiency by utility and generation, 2014 ............................................................. 36
Figure 17: Bristol Bay residential energy use ................................................................................... 46
Figure 18: Bristol Bay residential energy costs compared with other ANCSA regions ...................... 47
Figure 19: Energy Efficient Housing Stock ........................................................................................ 49
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 6
A CRON YMS AND A BBREVIATIONS
AC Alternating Current
ACDC Alaska Community Development Corporation
ACEA Alaska Commercial Energy Audit (AEA)
ACEP Alaska Center for Energy and Power (UAF)
ADOLWD Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development
ADEC Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
AEDG Alaska Energy Data Gateway (ISER)
AHFC Alaska Housing Finance Corporation
AkAES Alaska Affordable Energy Strategy (AEA)
ALARI Alaska Local and Regional Information (ADOLWD)
ANCSA Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
ARIS Alaska Retrofit Information System (AHFC)
AEA Alaska Energy Authority
ANTHC Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium
AVEC Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
AVTEC Alaska Vocational Technology Center (ADOLWD)
AWEDTG Alaska Wood Energy Development Task Group
BBAHC Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation
BBB Bristol Bay Borough
BBBSD Bristol Bay Borough School District
BBEDC Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation
BBHA Bristol Bay Housing Authority
BBHC Bristol Bay Housing Corporation
BBNA Bristol Bay Native Association
BBNC Bristol Bay Native Corporation
B/C Benefit-Cost Ratio
BEES Building Energy Efficiency Standard
BTU British Thermal Unit
CCHRC Cold Climate Housing Research Center
CDR Conceptual Design Report
DCCED Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development
DCRA Alaska DCCED Division of Community and Regional Affairs
DMVA Alaska Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 7
DOE-IE United States Department of Energy Office of Indian Energy
EE or EE&C Energy Efficiency, or Energy Efficiency and Conservation
EECBG Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program
ESCO Energy Savings Company
EUI Energy Use Intensity
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
GW Gigawatt (1,000 megawatts)
HDD Heating Degree Days
HER Home Energy Rebate program (AHFC)
HUD United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
INNEC lliamna Newhalen Nondalton Electric Cooperative
ISER Institute of Social and Economic Research (UAA)
kBTU Thousand BTUs
kW Kilowatt
kWh Kilowatt hour
LED Light-Emitting Diode
LMI Low and Moderate Income (HUD)
LNG Liquefied Natural Gas
LPB Lake and Peninsula Borough
LPSD Lake and Peninsula School District
Met Tower Meteorological Tower (affixed with equipment to assess wind resource)
MMBTU One million BTUs
MW Megawatt
MWh Megawatt hour
N/A Not Applicable, or Not Available
NEA Naknek Electric Association
NEC Nushagak Electric Cooperative
NV Native Village
NAHASDA Native American Housing Assistance and Self Determination Act (HUD)
NPS National Park Service
N/O Not Operating
NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory
O&M Operations and Maintenance
PCE Power Cost Equalization
PV Photovoltaic
PVWatts PVWatts Calculator (NREL)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 8
R&R Renewal and Replacement (accounts)
REAP Rural Energy for America (USDA)
REF Renewable Energy Fund (AEA)
RPSU Rural Power System Upgrade (AEA)
RUBA Rural Utility Business Advisor Program (DCRA)
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SWAMC Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference
START Strategic Technical Assistance Response Team (DOE)
UAA University of Alaska Anchorage
UAF University of Alaska Fairbanks
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
VEEP Village Energy Efficiency Program (AEA)
WEAR Waste Erosion Assessment and Review (ADEC)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 9
E XECUTIVE S UMMARY
The Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan is part of a statewide effort led by the Alaska Energy
Authority to identify energy projects and priorities that will reduce the long-term cost of energy
and dependence on fossil fuels in Alaska. The process is designed to look at the total mix of
energy needs in rural Alaska, including electricity, heating and transportation, and consider all
local and regional energy resources as well as energy efficiency and conservation.
This document summarizes public input received in Phase II. The goal of this phase has been to
engage community and regional leaders, residents, utilities, industry representatives, and
other key stakeholders in dialog about their priorities for addressing energy needs in the
region and to develop a list of projects and priorities to be assessed for economic and
technical feasibility in the final phase of the planning process, Phase III.
The Phase III report will identify broadly supported strategies and a list of fundable projects
that can reduce energy costs in the Bristol Bay region while developing local and regional
energy resources.
Phase I Resource Inventory
Phase I provided an inventory of energy-related issues and resources in the region. While this
inventory necessarily represented a snapshot in time, it was designed as a tool to focus
conversations during Phase II on the most technically feasible and economically realistic
projects, given the region’s mix of resources and the current state of technology.
The Phase I report identified key issues in the region:
High and volatile fuel prices
High construction and maintenance costs for renewable energy projects due to remote
location and the distances between communities
High cost of building roads and transmission lines has resulted in few interconnections and
preponderance of “islanded systems.” Combined with small populations, this makes it
difficult to achieve economies of scale or to create a truly “regional” plan
High space heating costs for homes, businesses, and public facilities due to a cold climate
Heavy dependence on diesel fuel for electricity generation (96%). However, more renewable
projects are under development or have recently come online
Declining population trends in some areas makes it difficult to plan for future demand
Uncertainty about potential new large industrial loads and “megaconceptual” projects
Uncertainty about future availability of natural gas
Patchwork of land ownership with federal, state, and tribal lands. Location of many
renewable resources is on protected lands or too far from communities to develop
economically
Phase II Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input
In Phase II the planning team spoke with regional stakeholders, village and community leaders,
and residents about energy projects and priorities with the potential to advance the broad
strategies outlined in Phase I. Outreach activities included utility and community phone
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 10
interviews, subregional meetings, an industry survey, and a regional energy summit in
Dillingham on May 4, 2015. During these activities, common themes that unite the region were
identified, as well as instances where energy needs or priorities differ. Based on this input, the
planning team developed focus areas for projects and activities designed to meet regional energy
goals.
This proposed roadmap represents a synthesis of community/utility interest and resource
potential, meaning that it includes those items identified as local or regional priorities which offer
a clear path to reduce the long-term cost of energy and dependence on fossil fuels in the region.
This determination is based on currently available technology and community support
demonstrated by leadership and/or funding support for active and proposed projects. As this
report is a snapshot in time, this roadmap must be re-visited on a regular basis to ensure
opportunities are not missed and effort not wasted.
Table 1: Proposed Regional Energy Roadmap
Resource Next Steps Actions
Planning and Collaboration
Energy Planning
Establish
Energy
Committee
Establish regional and/or subregional energy committees to continue the
work of energy planning, support implementation of priorities, and share
information on energy projects and needs
Seek representation of all communities by soliciting resolutions from local
governing bodies appointing a local energy champion to the committee
Engage regional and subregional organizations and government entities to
ensure a regionwide perspective in energy planning and integrate work on
energy priorities into the mission and daily operations of governing bodies
and service providers across the region
Secure organizational support from regional entities for holding regular
meetings or teleconferences and an annual face-to-face meeting
Bulk Fuel Move forward on a cooperative purchasing structure with interested
communities to increase competition and reduce costs of bulk fuel
Assess feasibility of a bulk fuel storage area at Williamsport
Workforce
Development
Training Develop a subregional or regional partnership model to cross-train and share
locally-based utility operator/mechanics capable of handling routine
technical and some electronic issues in utility operations and maintenance
Develop training resources at the regional and subregional level to
incorporate site-specific experience
Energy Infrastructure
Bulk Fuel Upgrade &
Repair
Secure funds and technical assistance to re-site and repair bulk fuel storage
tanks that are located on eroding land in Igiugig, Port Heiden, and Togiak
Reconnaissance
and Feasibility
Assess options for alternative fuel delivery due to low river levels in
Koliganek, New Stuyahok, and Twin Hills
Diesel Efficiency Upgrade &
Repair
Implement training and equipment upgrades and develop maintenance plans
to achieve increases in generator diesel efficiency with a concentrated focus
on independent utilities
Heat Recovery Upgrade &
Repair
Maintain installed heat recovery systems and expand where additional waste
heat is available
Assess feasibility of expansion to heat additional facilities in Igiugig, Levelock,
Port Alsworth, and Dillingham
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 11
Resource Next Steps Actions
Design &
Construction
Complete projects in New Stuyahok and Togiak
Reconnaissance
& Feasibility
Develop new heat recovery projects in Manokotak and Twin Hills
Investigate stack heat recovery in Naknek
Assess opportunities for heat absorption technology for summer ice
production and flash freezing in Naknek and Levelock. Consider potential
pilot project for adapting technology for small-scale use.
Transmission &
Distribution
Upgrade &
Repair
Replace transmission line from Newhalen to Nondalton with armored
submarine cable
Repair or replace deteriorating transmission lines in Chignik, Chignik Lagoon,
and Chignik Lake
Address high line loss (over 12%) in Igiugig, Koliganek, Levelock, Perryville,
and Pilot Point. Assess economic options for reducing line loss in
communities with moderate line loss (6-11%)
Remedy issues in Manokotak generation & distribution system to prepare for
integration of renewable power if suitable wind site is located
Training Develop a partnership model to cross-train and share locally-based lineman
capable of addressing short & medium term issues across a subregion or the
entire Bristol Bay region
Reconnaissance
& Feasibility
Continue to monitor and assess the feasibility of subregional interties to
increase economies of scale and reduce costs of small-scale, independent
generation where feasible.
Energy Efficiency
Energy Efficiency
Residential Conduct outreach and education through energy fairs, school programs or
other means to promote awareness of EE&C savings opportunities, including
grants and loans
Assist homeowners with signing up for programs, and provide information on
do-it-yourself resources
Leverage federal funds from USDA and other sources to expand BBHA
weatherization services to more homes and communities
Oversight of weatherization contractors to ensure high quality of work and
professionalism
Non-residential Complete inventory and benchmarking of non-residential buildings in every
community in order to establish baseline data and identify projects with the
greatest savings potential
Encourage use of loans to complete commercial and public facility retrofits
with short to medium payback periods
Investigate public ESCO model to fund retrofits in large high-energy use
buildings or across multiple buildings
Develop or adopt building codes or standards to ensure new state- and
federally funded facilities built in the region meet a high standard of energy
efficiency. Consider changes to local building codes
Leverage federal funds from USDA and other sources to expand the number
of non-residential audits and retrofits
Undertake regional or subregional projects to replace remaining high energy-
use streetlights with LEDs
Secure funds and technical assistance to train staff and repair or replace
ageing and inefficient water and sewer systems in Aleknagik, Chignik, Chignik
Lake, Koliganek, Manokotak, New Stuyahok, Nondalton, and Togiak
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 12
Resource Next Steps Actions
Local Energy Generation
Biomass Upgrade &
Repair
Look at feasibility of expanding Kokhanok’s biomass system to additional
community buildings
Design &
Construction
Install biomass heat loop in Clark’s Point to connect Community Center, CPVC
office and City Office
Install high efficiency wood stoves in 3 community buildings in Nondalton
Install Tarm wood boiler(s) and/or high efficiency wood stove at the Booster
Club in New Stuyahok
Reconnaissance
& Feasibility
Update 2012 pre-feasibility study in Aleknagik
Conduct feasibility study for wood boilers at BBNA Main office and Family
Resource Center building in Dillingham
Assess community interest for continuing investigation of viable biomass
options in Iliamna
Geothermal Reconnaissance
& Feasibility
Assess interest and risk tolerance for additional reconnaissance and
feasibility work for geothermal in Chignik Lagoon, Chignik Lake, Perryville,
Port Heiden, and Naknek
Assess economics of using air, ground, or seawater heat pumps to reduce
space heating costs in interested communities (Chignik Lagoon, Chignik Lake,
Perryville, Port Heiden, and Naknek) at current electrical rates
Monitor
Developments
Continue to assess feasibility of heat pumps in reducing heating costs in the
region as electric rates change and technology develops
Monitor developments in low temperature geothermal technology
Hydro Upgrade &
Repair
Install electric boilers for space heating at Chignik Lagoon and address
erosion issues on hydro access road
Increase river intake at INNEC plant and hook up additional electric boilers
Design &
Construction
Address outstanding issues in Chignik Bay (Indian Creek Hydro) to proceed
with design and permitting, including upgrade of existing powerhouse
Complete design and permitting of Knutson Creek Hydro in Pedro Bay
(expected 2016). Identify funds for construction
Reconnaissance
& Feasibility
Conduct feasibility studies in Chignik Lake, Port Heiden, and Togiak to assess
opportunities for small-scale hydro, including sites identified in 1980s
screening studies
Hydrokinetic Feasibility &
Licensing
Pursue licensing of Igiugig in-river hydrokinetic pilot project based on
economic and technological viability and community interest
Monitor
Developments
Monitor technological advances in hydrokinetic energy, including tidal and
wave power. Pursue screening studies and site-specific feasibility if and when
technology matures
Natural Gas Reconnaissance
& Feasibility
Assess local and regional interest and risk tolerance for exploratory drilling in
the North Aleutian sedimentary basin
Monitor
Developments
Continue to monitor opportunities to import LNG. Assess detailed economic
feasibility of regasification and conversion if opportunities emerge
Solar Feasibility,
Design &
Construction
Develop solar PV and solar thermal projects where economically feasible,
especially in off-grid areas and in facilities with high summer energy use
Expand use of solar PV and solar thermal to additional buildings in Igiugig,
Perryville, and Dillingham depending on owner-interest and economics
Provide information and resources to other communities interested in
developing solar projects: Aleknagik, Chignik Lake, Kokhanok, Pedro Bay, Port
Alsworth, and Twin Hills
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 13
Resource Next Steps Actions
Wind
Upgrade &
Repair
Complete redesign of Kokhanok wind system
Design &
Construction
Work with AEA to integrate Clark’s Point residential turbines with grid
Based on review of submitted CDR in Pilot Point for a 100 kW wind farm with
dispatchable electric boiler, proceed to final design and construction,
including powerhouse controls
Complete powerhouse upgrade and finalize CDR in Koliganek. Identify
suitable site for turbine and assess funding options for construction
Upgrade powerhouse and distribution system in Port Heiden to support a
utility-scale wind system. Work with AEA wind managers to finalize a
fundable conceptual design
Reconnaissance
& Feasibility
Expand Igiugig vertical axis turbines if technology proves viable
Complete met tower studies in Egegik, Levelock, and New Stuyahok
Investigate alternative sites in Chignik Lake, Chignik Lagoon, and Manokotak
after discussions with AEA on small load concerns
Continue wind feasibility investigation in South Naknek depending on
community and utility interest
Planning Collect high-quality electrical load data in order to understand power/energy
uses and better model wind turbine options in the future.
Transportation
Transportation Design &
Construction
Complete construction of access roads to Wood River Bridge (Aleknagik)
Secure construction funds for road between Clark’s Point and Ekuk
Complete new dock in Iliamna and Levelock
Extend airport landing strips in Pedro Bay, Port Alsworth (also build public
landing strip), and Chignik Lagoon
Reconnaissance
and Feasibility
Continue to monitor or assess feasibility of new roads and bridges to meet
transportation needs between Iliamna and Nondalton, Ekwok and New
Stuyahok, and Manokotak and Dillingham
Next Steps
In Phase III, estimates of project costs and benefits will be developed for projects for which
sufficient data exist. The Phase III report will also provide an implementation plan with steps
local communities, utility owners, and regional stakeholders can take to implement their
priorities. It will be up to those in the region to decide which actions they would like to pursue
based on community/utility interest and available funding or financing options. The cost -benefit
information along with detail on available financing options provided in Phase III will help with
these decisions.
State support for implementing priorities will continue through AEA’s Community Assistance
program, which provides hands-on assistance in developing energy projects and addressing local
issues, and through the Alaska Affordable Energy Strategy (AkAES), which could provide a
future funding mechanism for energy infrastructure in areas of the state that do not have direct
access to a North Slope natural gas pipeline.
The Bristol Bay region is unique in that it has multiple subregional governing bodies and well -
established regional groups, including the Bristol Bay Partnership. Drawing on suggestions
provided in energy planning outreach efforts, the next step for BBNA, SWAMC, and AEA in
fostering the creation of regional and/or subregional energy committees will involve consultation
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 14
with all interested regional and subregional organizations. AEA is recommending the creation of
energy committees to assist with implementation and continue the work of energy planning into
the future. The agency has committed to helping support the creation of these groups as part of
the final phase of the regional planning process.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 15
1 | R EGIONAL E NERGY P LANNING
The Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan is part of a statewide effort led by the Alaska Energy
Authority to identify energy projects that will reduce the long-term cost of energy and
dependence on fossil fuels in Alaska. The process is designed to look at the total mix of energy
needs in rural Alaska, including electricity, heating and transportation, and consider all local and
regional energy resources as well as efficiency and conservation.
This document summarizes public input received in Phase II. The goal of this phase has been to
engage community, subregional, and regional leaders; residents; utilities; boroughs; school
districts; industry representatives, and other key stakeholders in dialog about their priorities for
addressing energy needs in the region, and to develop a list of projects to be assessed for
economic and technical feasibility in the final phase of the planning process.
The Phase III report will identify a list of fundable projects based on State criteria and broadly
supported strategies with the potential to reduce energy costs in the Bristol Bay region while
developing local and regional energy resources. This phase will include technical and economic
analysis of priority projects using standard statewide methodology and development of a regional
implementation plan.
In the Bristol Bay region, implementation will likely involve regional and/or subregional
committees addressing multiple energy issues with the support and guidance of regional groups,
including Bristol Bay Native Association, SWAMC, Bristol Bay Borough, Bristol Bay Economic
Development Corporation, Bristol Bay Partnership, Lake and Peninsula Borough, and others.
Once complete, the plan is intended to serve as both a guiding document for communities and
stakeholders and as a practical tool with information on the steps needed to move energy projects
forward. Completed plans will also be used as an input to AEA’s own statewide energy planning
efforts, such as the Alaska Affordable Energy Strategy (AkAES) established by the Alaska
Legislature in 2014 (Senate Bill 138).
Beyond the Current Planning Process
Although the state’s Regional Energy Planning project will close in 2015, each regional plan is
intended to continue as a living document and be updated as projects are implemented and
circumstances change. To this end, a goal of the statewide project has been to develop regional
capacity to continue the planning process. In the Bristol Bay region, where there are multiple
government structures, regional organizations may be capable of bringing together subregions to
ensure consistency and coordination and will be approached to serve as critical partners in this
process.
State support for implementing priorities identified through Regional Energy Planning will
continue through AEA’s Community Assistance program, which provides hands-on assistance to
communities in developing projects and addressing issues, and the Alaska Affordable Energy
Strategy (AkAES), which could provide a future funding mechanism for energy infrastructure
needed to deliver affordable energy to areas of the state that will not have direct access to a North
Slope natural gas pipeline (Figure 1).
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 16
The AkAES is a long-term, state-directed effort to help provide affordable energy to all areas of
the state if a natural gas pipeline is built from Alaska’s North Slope using revenues from a 20
percent set-aside of pipeline revenue.
In 2017, AEA will make recommendations to the Legislature on infrastructure needed to deliver
affordable energy to areas in the state that will not have direct access to a natural gas pipeline. To
assist in the identification of infrastructure projects, AEA plans to draw on the data collected and
publicly vetted through the Regional Energy Planning process.
Figure 1: Regional Energy Planning timeline
PLANNING AREA
The planning area for this project includes the communities within AEA’s Bristol Bay energy
planning region. This area largely overlaps with the Bristol Bay Native Corporation (BBNC)
boundaries established under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) (Figure 2). All
communities within the BBNC boundaries as well as Port Alsworth are included in the energy
region.
Six communities in the region are largely seasonal villages or have year-round populations under
25. They are Ekuk, Ivanof Bay, Kanatak, Pope-Vannoy Landing, Portage Creek, and Ugashik.
None have local electric utilities. While these communities have not been actively included in
Phase II, they appear in the Phase I resource inventory when a known renewable energy resource
exists or when they have notable residential or community-scale energy projects.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 17
Figure 2: Bristol Bay regional energy planning area
Table 2: Bristol Bay region boundaries
ANCSA
Region*
Tribal Health
Corporation*
Borough and
Census Areas School Districts
Western Alaska
CDQ Program
Legislative
Districts
For Profit:
Bristol Bay Native
Corporation
Nonprofit:
Bristol Bay Native
Association
Bristol Bay Housing
Authority
*Excluding
Port Alsworth
Bristol Bay Area
Health Corporation
Bristol Bay
Borough
Bristol Bay
Borough School
District
Bristol Bay
Economic
Development
Corporation
(17 communities)
Senate
District
S
House
District
37
Lake &
Peninsula
Borough
Lake & Peninsula
School District
Dillingham
Census Area
Dillingham City
School District
Southwest Region
School District
Subregions
The six subregions used throughout this plan are the ones used by the Bristol Bay Native
Association (BBNA). The communities included in each subregion are shown in
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 18
Table 3.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 19
Table 3: Bristol Bay subregional groupings
Bristol Bay Subregions
Nushagak Bay Subregion
Aleknagik
Clark’s Point
Dillingham
Nushagak River Subregion
Ekwok
Koliganek
New Stuyahok
Togiak Bay Subregion
Manokotak
Togiak
Twin Hills
Lakes Subregion
Igiugig
Iliamna
Kokhanok
Levelock
Newhalen
Nondalton
Pedro Bay
Port Alsworth
Peninsula Subregion
Chignik Bay
Chignik Lagoon
Chignik Lake
Perryville
Kvichak Bay Subregion
Egegik
Pilot Point
Port Heiden
King Salmon
Naknek
South Naknek
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 20
OTHER PLANNING EFFORTS IN THE BRISTOL BAY REGION
The Alaska Energy Authority’s regional energy planning process is not the only energy planning
effort in the Bristol Bay region. As with many other regions in the state, there are other
community, regional, and federal initiatives that deal specifically with energy or touch on similar
issues. Though outside the scope of the AEA regional energy plan, efforts have been made and
will continue to be made to coordinate and include findings of other planning processes in the
regional energy planning effort. A brief sketch of these efforts is below.
The DOE Office of Indian Energy and the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy provide
federally recognized Alaska Native villages or re gional and village corporations with technical
assistance designed to advance renewable energy and energy efficiency projects. This has been
accomplished through two programs open to tribal groups:
Alaska START Program. Starting in 2011, the competitive Alaska START Program has
provided intensive community planning efforts focused on verifying economic and
technical viability of projects’ power and revenue generation; developing a communication
and outreach strategy to communicate the costs and benefits of a project to the broader
Tribe and other community stakeholders; establishing terms and strategies for negotiating
land-lease, energy off-take, and/or power purchase agreements; selecting project ownership
options, partnership arrangements, and financing structures; developing requests for
proposals with appropriate technical guidelines and selection criteria; and developing
operations and maintenance or measurement and verification plans.
Table 4: Bristol Bay Communities in U.S. DOE START Program
Community Subregion Date
Native Village of Kokhanok Lakes 2015
Data source: (1)
U.S. DOE Technical Assistance. Similar to the START program, DOE provides on-demand
technical assistance limited to 40 hours per community request on priority areas such as
strategic energy planning, grantee support, transmission/interconnection, project
development, finance, and lease agreements. Applicants are eligible to submit multiple
requests per year.
Bristol Bay Partnership (BBAHC, BBEDC, BBHC, BBNA, BBNC) commissioned two energy plan
documents in 2008: Bristol Bay Energy Policy and Energy Crisis Recovery Plan: Phase One and
Implementation Strategies for the Bristol Bay Energy Policy and Energy Crisis Recovery Plan:
Phase Two. The reports, prepared by Nils Anderson, Jr. and Greta Gotoof Co-Man Services,
provide short, medium, and long-term strategies for all Bristol Bay communities to attain
affordable, reliable, safe and long term energy options. BBNA released an update, Bristol Bay
Energy Policy & Implementation Strategies – Status Report Update, in 2014.
The Lake & Peninsula Borough completed a regional energy plan in 2008 to evaluate energy
opportunities in the region focusing on electric generation, space heating, and transportation. A
screening study was conducted to identify projects with the highest potential for reducing energy
costs.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 21
Community plans for several communities in the region have been developed independently or
with assistance from BBNA. Many of these plans include elements of energy planning and
inventories of energy infrastructure.
STRATEGIES FOR NEAR AND MID-TERM PROJECTS
Look at Many Small Solutions rather than Focus on One Big Project
AEA designed the Regional Energy Planning process to facilitate bottom-up, short- to medium-
term energy planning driven by the needs and priorities of communities and regions. That means
an emphasis on community-focused planning and solutions that can be implemented at the local
level and sustained over the long term. Large, capital-intensive projects take years in planning
and development and may leave small communities with infrastructure that is expensive to
maintain and requires outside expertise to operate.
Like other forms of community planning, the goal of energy planning should be to create
sustainable, thriving communities. Rather than focus on one big energy project (or while waiting
for it to pass through bureaucratic and funding hurdles), communities and regional stakeholders
should consider the universe of smaller projects that can be completed more quickly and cheaply,
but which cumulatively can have a big impact.
Focus on Energy Efficiency in the Short Term
Given the current Alaska state budget crisis and the relatively low price of oil, there are strong
reasons to focus on energy efficiency opportunities in the near term:
The outlook for new State investment in major infrastructure projects is poor, but the State is
still funding popular programs to help pay for energy efficiency audits and upgrades.
Even without state funding, many EE&C projects often pay for themselves within a few
months or years. In the long-run, it costs more to wait to do efficiency upgrades than doing
them now, even if a loan is needed to cover up-front costs.
A good time to invest in energy efficiency is when oil prices are down. By using some of the
money not being spent on fuel (due to lower prices) on energy efficiency measures, the pain
of high energy costs will be less when oil prices do go back up.
Take Advantage of Federal Programs, especially for Tribally Affiliated Groups
The Department of Energy has recently increased its staffing and outreach in Alaska through the
Office of Indian Energy (DOE-IE). This is a good time to take advantage of federal energy
programs, especially for any entity with an Alaska Native affiliation (including federally
recognized tribes, ANCSA regional and village corporations, and Native nonprofits and energy
resource development organizations). Utilities may be able to partner with tribally affiliated
entities to leverage these federal funds. To date, one community in the region has participated in
the DOE-IE START program.
USDA Rural Development provides a source of federal funding open to all rural communities
regardless of Native affiliation. Rural Energy for America (REAP) and Rural Utilities Service
(RUS) are two USDA programs that can be used by Alaska utilities and small businesses to fund
clean energy and energy infrastructure projects.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 22
Create Energy Committees to Advance Shared Goals
While there is not a unified regional governing body in Bristol Bay, there are many unifying
ideas and structures in place. The creation of regional or subregional energy committees is one
way to advance shared energy goals in areas where there are similar resources and significant
potential for savings.
As part of the planning process, AEA has committed to help support the creation of energy
committees in the region. At the end of the project, committees will need to be self-sustaining or
find support from regional partners or entities. Broad goals and objectives for committees
include:
Bring energy champions together from across the region.
Track progress on accomplishment of plan goals, objectives, and activities.
Identify similar local priorities and opportunities to create economies of scale.
Share local knowledge and capacity to create the structure and relationships needed to
carry ideas forward.
Seek broad sustainable engagement that includes youth.
Keep a clear focus on regional energy goals and priorities.
Look for ways stakeholders can support the long-term sustainability of energy committees
and regional energy planning.
Periodically assess need to revise plan goals and objectives in light of new information.
Pay Attention to Factors for Success
Energy planning and project development are slow and iterative processes. A spirit of optimism
is useful for keeping everyone focused on the goal, but it should not prevent clear-eyed vetting of
proposed projects in which risks are analyzed as well as benefits. The following lessons learned
about developing successful energy projects came from regional energy planners and project
developers at the 2013 Alaska Rural Energy Conference (Table 5).
Table 5: Factors for successful energy projects
TO BE SUCCESSFUL…
Energy projects must be Energy projects must have Energy planners must have
Economically viable
Technologically feasible
Supported by the local
community, resource
owners, utility operators,
and state and local
governing entities
A local champion
Long-term, reliable and
sustainable fuel sources
Hope and optimism
Many conversations with
stakeholders
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 23
2 | E NERGY S UPPLY AND D EMAND
Alaska’s Regional Energy Planning process is
intended to look at the total mix of energy needs in
rural Alaska for electricity, heating and
transportation and to consider all local and
regional energy resources including efficiency and
conservation. However, data issues prevent a
consistent level of detail and analysis.
Good data is available on supply and demand for
electrical power from the Power Cost Equalization
(PCE) program, the Regulatory Commission of
Alaska (RCA), and from utilities themselves.
Space heating costs account for over 80 percent of
home energy budgets in Alaska and around 55 percent of the energy costs in public and
commercial buildings. Good data on heating fuel use, including heating efficiency and types of
fuels used for heating, is increasingly available from the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation
through the Alaska Retrofit Information System (ARIS). Data is better for residential buildings.
While we know that transportation costs directly affect total energy and food costs, especially in
rural areas, there is little data routinely or consistently collected on transportation costs and fuel
consumption. Wholesale fuel cost and sales data is largely the proprietary data of fuel vendors.
ELECTRIC POWER PRODUCERS
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) is a
nonprofit, member-owned cooperative supplying
electricity for 56 communities in Alaska. AVEC serves
three Bristol Bay communities: Ekwok, New Stuyahok,
and Togiak. AVEC manages and operates a small
powerhouse in each community. At present, all electricity
is generated from diesel generators. In 2014, AVEC sold
4,746 MWh of electricity, 9 percent of total regional sales.
Iliamna-Newhalen-Nondalton Electric Cooperative
Iliamna-Newhalen-Nondalton Electric Cooperative, Inc. (INNEC) is a member-owned, non-
profit rural electric cooperative supplying electricity to three communities: Iliamna, Newhalen,
and Nondalton. Since 1983 INNEC has produced electricity using diesel generators in
Newhalen. With the completion of the Tazimina Hydroelectric Facility in 1998 a significant
amount of electricity has been generated from hydroelectric , moving from less than 50 percent in
1998 to over 99 percent in 2013. In 2014, INNEC sold 3,755 MWh of electricity in the region,
about 7 percent of total regional sales.
Electricity
Good Data
Heating
Some Data
Many Gaps
Transportation
Significant
Data Gaps
Figure 3: Data availability by energy sector
Figure 4: Electrical Sales by Utility
Data source: (2)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 24
Naknek Electric Association
Naknek Electric Association (NEA) serves three communities: King Salmon, Naknek, and South
Naknek. NEA generates electricity using diesel generators. In 2014, NEA sold 19,119 MWh of
electricity in the region, about 36 percent of total regional sales.
Nushagak Electric Cooperative
Nushagak Electric & Telephone Cooperative (NEC), Inc. is a member owned and operated
cooperative that provides electric, telephone, cable TV, and internet services. Two communities,
Dillingham and Aleknagik, are connected via intertie and are supplied with electricity from diesel
generators in Dillingham. In 2014, NEC sold 18,183 MWh of electricity in the region, about 34
percent of total regional sales.
Independent Utility Generation
Sixteen Bristol Bay communities included in this report have independent utilities. Though
covering the majority of communities in the region, independent utilities are in the region’s
smallest communities. In 2014, independent utilities sold 7,647 MWh of electricity in the region,
about 14 percent of total regional sales.
Figure 5: Regional electric generation by utility and resource, 2014 (MWh)
ELECTRIC RATES
For most communities in the Bristol Bay region, there are two sets of electric rates: the
residential electric rate, which is set by the utility based on cost of electricity production and
profit share (if applicable); and the effective rate of electricity, which is a reduced rate paid by
residents in communities enrolled in the Power Cost Equalization Program (PCE). All Bristol
Bay communities are eligible for PCE. Two communities, Clark’s Point and Perryville, were not
enrolled in PCE in 2014 but both resumed participation in the program in 2015.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement & Public Input | 25
Both rates vary considerably across the region. Unsubsidized residential rates range from $0.44/kWh in Dillingham and Aleknagik on
Nushagak Electric Cooperative’s grid to $1.00/kWh in Twin Hills, which is an independent utility. The PCE effective rates (the
subsidized rates) ranges from $0.14/kWh in Koliganek to $0.64/kWh in Twin Hills for the first 500 kWh of monthly reside ntial use
Figure 6). For comparison, residential rates were $0.15/kWh in Anchorage and $0.18/kWh in Fairbanks in July 2015.
Figure 6: Electric rates by community, 2014
Notes: Perryville rates are from 2013 because this is the last year in which Perryville data is available; Clark’s Point and Perryville re-enrolled in the PCE program
in 2015 so 2015 data is not yet available. Data source: (2)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement & Public Input | 26
Power Cost Equalization and Community Facilities
The Power Cost Equalization Program (PCE) also subsidizes the rates of community buildings
and facilities. The PCE statute defines a community facility as a water, sewer or charitable
educational facility, public outdoor lighting, or a community building whose operation is not paid
for by the State or Federal government or by a private commercial organization. A community
building is a community facility that is not operated for profit and is open to the general public.
The Alaska Energy Authority determines eligible community facilities based on applicat ions and
information submitted by the facility owner and utility provider.
As with the residential PCE program, there are limits on the amount of PCE-eligible electricity
(kWh) that may be used by a community facility. This monthly limit is set based on the number
of residents in a community and comes to no more than 70 kWh per resident per month. In a
community with 100 residents the total amount of electricity (kWh) that is eligible for PCE cost
reductions is equal to 7,000 kWh per month, spread across all eligible community facilities.
In this region several communities are not using the PCE program to the fullest extent, leaving
significant opportunity for communities to save thousands of dollars on electricity bills for public
facilities and buildings (Table 6). In other regions, planners identified several reasons that
communities are not able to take advantage of this program. This relates to tu rnover in utility
management, lack of training, lack of coordination between community facility owners and
utilities as well as the lengthy processing time of PCE community facility applications and
rejection notices that do not provide information on why an application was rejected.
Both Clark’s Point and Perryville re-enrolled in the PCE program in 2015. Clark’s Point is not
shown in Table 6 because data is not yet available. The analysis for Perryville is based on 2013
data, which was the last year for which data was available at the time this report was completed.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement & Public Input | 27
Table 6: Savings potential for community facilities through PCE
Subregion
Community
or Utility
PCE kWh per person PCE Savings
Potential
Subregion
Community
or Utility
PCE kWh per person PCE Savings
Potential Eligible Used Eligible Used
Kvichak Bay
Egegik 70 70 At/Near Max
Nushagak
River
Ekwok 70 22 5+ buildings
NEA 70 70 At/Near Max Koliganek 70 26 10+ buildings
Pilot Point 70 64 1 to 5 buildings New Stuyahok 70 20 10+ buildings
Port Heiden 70 35 1 to 5 buildings
Peninsula Chignik Bay 70 68 At/Near Max
Lakes Igiugig 70 69 At/Near Max Chignik Lagoon 70 43 1 to 5 buildings
INNEC 70 66 1 to 5 buildings Chignik Lake 70 18 10+ buildings
Kokhanok 70 26 10+ buildings Perryville 70 0 5+ buildings
Levelock 70 27 5+ buildings
Pedro Bay 70 36 1 to 5 buildings
Togiak
Bay
Manokotak 70 1 10+ buildings
Port Alsworth 70 0 10+ buildings Togiak 70 27 10+ buildings
Twin Hills 70 38 1 to 5 buildings
Nushagak
Bay
NEC 70 24 10+ buildings
Legend
High Savings Potential (5+ buildings)
Medium Savings Potential (1 to 5 buildings)
Limited savings potential (At or near max)
Data source: (2)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 28
FUEL VENDORS AND PRICES
Diesel fuel, home heating oil, unleaded gas, and other petroleum products are available from
multiple vendors due to the sheer size of this region. Delta Western, Vitus Marine, Crowley, and
Everts Air Fuel are some of the fuel suppliers serving Bristol Bay communities via barge and air.
Several communities do not buy directly from fuel vendors, buying instead through Trident
Seafoods or development corporations. As with the rest of rural Alaska, high fuel costs are a
continuing concern and problem. Previous work in the region detailed significant interest in bulk
fuel purchasing groups (3). This concept along with siting a bulk fuel depot at Williamsport,
which would provide access to Cook Inlet, offer the potential for increasing competition and
reducing prices in the fuel market.
Fuel Prices
Figure 7: Price of #1 fuel oil in hub communities
Note: Prior to 2011, fuel price data was not always collected in the same month for all
communities. In Figure 7, price data for the closest month (up to 3 months) was used
when data from the same month as other communities was not available. Data source: (4)
Looking at the retail price of #1 fuel oil, most hub communities experienced a steady rise in
prices between 2010 and 2014 with a leveling or decrease in prices in 2013 and 2014. Two
exceptions to this are Togiak and Naknek, which have experienced steady price increases since
2011. The difference between Anchorage fuel prices and all Bristol Bay hub communities is
larger in 2014 than in 2005 (Figure 7).
Bulk Fuel Storage
All communities in the region have bulk fuel storage facilities; the community representatives
contacted through the energy planning process indicated the storage capacity is adequate at
present. Two primary issues affecting multiple communities are: erosion and, at times urgent,
relocation needs of bulk fuel storage facilities and the difficulty of securing delivery of bulk fuel.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 29
Details on storage capacity and community-specific storage concerns are in the Community and
Energy Profiles (starting on page 63).
Natural Gas
Regional interest in natural gas ranges from drilling in the Peninsula and Kvichak Bay subregions
to monitoring access to LNG regionwide. A 2014 study investigating factors of market viability
for LNG use in remote coastal communities found the combined demand for LNG in King
Salmon, Naknek and South Naknek and the total demand in Dillingham may offer a sufficiently
large electric load to support economically efficient LNG storage options (5).
CURRENT AND PROJECTED DEMAND
Over 53 GWh of electricity are produced and sold in the region annually (Figure 8). The
overwhelming majority of electricity sold in the Bristol Bay region is produced by diesel
generators. The notable exception to this is the INNEC grid in which less than one percent of
electricity is produced using diesel generators; the primary source being the Tazimina
hydroelectric facility. Large and medium scale utility expansion projects are not planned for the
near term. INNEC is investigating additional intake options but this is largely to maintain current
capacity.
Electric Sales by Customer Type
Regionwide 63 percent of electricity is used by
commercial and government customers, 26 percent
by residential customers, and seven percent by
community buildings. Utility use accounts for the
remaining four percent (Figure 8).
There is considerable variation by subregion, with
commercial and government customers accounting
for 74 percent of electric sales in Kvichak Bay and
63 percent in Nushagak Bay where Naknek and
Dillingham, respectively, are located (Figure 9).
Residential sales are a more significant component
of demand, accounting for 42-43 percent of
demand, in the southwest Bristol Bay subregions of
Togiak Bay and Nushagak River. Community
facilities use 14 percent of the electricity produced in the Peninsula, and powerhouse
consumption is greatest, at 12 percent, in the Lakes subregion.
Tracking electric use by customer type is an important first step in targeting energy efficiency
and conservation efforts. The following charts are helpful in showing variations between
subregions, but the community-level data provided in the community profiles starting on page 63
are the best tool to determine whether residential, community or commercial customers are the
top electricity users and where the greatest opportunity is for energy efficiency or conservation
measures.
Figure 8: Regional sales by customer type, 2014
Data source: (2)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 30
Figure 9: Subregional electrical sales by customer type, 2014
Data source: (2)
Trends in Electric Demand by Customer Type
A look at average monthly use per customer in the Bristol Bay region shows that trends in
electric consumption over the past ten years have also varied by customer type. Trend data for
Nushagak Electric, which serves Dillingham and Aleknagik, show an overall reduction of 4
percent in average monthly use with the steepest drop over this period among residential
customers. This is likely due in part to the impact of higher energy costs, the resulting ramp up of
energy efficiency and weatherization programs, and increased individual conservation efforts.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 31
Figure 10: Trends in average monthly use by customer, Nushagak Electric Cooperative 2005-2014
Data source: (4)
In the communities on the INNEC grid—Iliamna, Newhalen, and Nondalton—the trend is
striking with significant increases in commercial and community use starting in 2009 offset by
much smaller declines in average residential use. This increase corresponds to the years of
intensive investment and build up for the Pebble Mine project.
Figure 11: Trends in average monthly use by customer, INNEC 2005-2014
Data source: (4)
The NEA grid, serving King Salmon, Naknek, and South Naknek, shows a 25 percent reduction
in average electrical use among residential customers and a 17 percent increase in average use by
community facilities.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 32
Figure 12: Trends in average monthly use by customer, NEA 2005 -2014
Data source: (4)
Recent Trends in Electrical Generation
Overall regional generation has increased slightly (2.3 percent) since 2010, following a similar
trend in population (a gain of 2.7 percent). The relatively flat generation trend is even more
apparent when generation is broken out by subregion—with only the Lakes subregion showing
an increase of more than 1 GWh from 2010 to 2014 (Figure 13).
Figure 13: Generation trends, 2010-2014
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 33
Data sources: (4) (6)
Population Trends and Projections
Since 2000, the population in the Bristol Bay region has fallen by three and a half percent. This
change has not been even across the region. Areas with the sharpest declines are also the
communities with 200 residents or less. Over the next 25 years, Alaska’s state demographers
predict an increase in population in the Dillingham Census Area and Lake and Peninsula
Borough (6 and 4 percent, respectively) and a 19 percent decline in the Bristol Bay Borough (7).
Load Forecasts
Load forecasting in a region as large as Bristol Bay is challenging. However, tracking population
changes at the community level is one of the best tools for load forecasts. Population growth
means new housing subdivisions, stores, and facilities all of which use electricity. While
reductions in population do not reduce electricity usage on a one-to-one basis, we expect the
electrical load trend to generally follow population trends.
Disruptions to this established load trend may occur due to losses or additions of major
commercial customers or community wide energy efficiency steps. For example, a new fish
processing plant will be setting up in Levelock. The community has been investigating the most
cost effective way to meet the large energy needs of a summer-only consumer. The loss scenario
is when a major customer, partially or entirely, closes or switches to independent electrical
production. In the end all of these changes, whether it is population change or the addition or loss
of large users, will have the same effect of increasing or decreasing efficiency and cost of diesel
generation systems.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 34
Figure 14: Historical population trends by community, 2000-2014
2000 2014 Change Avg. Annual
Population Census Est.Since 2000 Growth
Over 500
Dillingham 2,466 2,431 -1.4%-0.1%
Togiak 809 876 8.3%0.6%
Naknek 678 523 -22.9%-1.5%
201 to 500
Manokotak 399 500 25.3%1.7%
New Stuyahok 471 499 5.9%0.4%
King Salmon 442 335 -24.2%-1.6%
Koliganek 182 231 26.9%1.8%
Newhalen 160 207 29.4%2.0%
101 to 200
Aleknagik 223 197 -11.7%-0.8%
Port Alsworth 104 179 72.1%4.8%
Kokhanok 174 167 -4.0%-0.3%
Nondalton 221 164 -25.8%-1.7%
Ekwok 130 119 -8.5%-0.6%
Port Heiden 119 114 -4.2%-0.3%
Egegik 116 106 -8.6%-0.6%
Perryville 112 101 -9.8%-0.7%
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 35
Data source: (6)
Transportation and Heating Fuel
No public data is available on the volumes of fuels used for transportation and space heating.
DIESEL POWERHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTION
Fuel for Electrical Generation
Over 3.6 million gallons of diesel fuel are used per year to generate electricity in the Bristol Bay
region (Figure 15).
Diesel Efficiency
Diesel efficiency in the region currently ranges from 4.0 to 18.2 kWh per gallon (Figure 16). The
red line showing AEA’s benchmark performance targets—12.5 kWh per gallon for small (less
than two million kWh generated per year) and 14.5 kWh per gallon for large systems—indicates
that diesel efficiency particularly in small independent utilities is not within range of performance
benchmarks.
A 10 percent increase in diesel efficiency across all utilities would realize substantial savings,
amounting to an average $0.02 savings for each kWh of electricity generated on the INNEC,
51 to 100
Iliamna 102 97 -4.9%-0.3%
Chignik Bay 79 96 21.5%1.4%
Twin Hills 69 87 26.1%1.7%
South Naknek 137 84 -38.7%-2.6%
Levelock 122 80 -34.4%-2.3%
Pilot Point 100 78 -22.0%-1.5%
Chignik Lagoon 103 72 -30.1%-2.0%
Chignik Lake 145 70 -51.7%-3.4%
Igiugig 53 53 0.0%0.0%
50 or Under
Clark's Point 75 48 -36.0%-2.4%
Pedro Bay 50 47 -6.0%-0.4%
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 36
NEC, and NEA grids, an average of $0.03 in AVEC utilities, and an average of $0.04 for
independent utilities (Table 7). These amounts reflect a snapshot in time and do not attempt to
capture projections of fuel costs.
Figure 15: Diesel fuel used for electrical generation, 2014
Data source: (2)
Figure 16: Diesel efficiency by utility and generation, 2014
Data source: (2)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 37
Table 7: Projected savings from 10% increase in diesel efficiency
Community by
Utility Owner
or Type
FY14 Fuel
Used for
Generation
(gals.)
FY14 Diesel
Efficiency
(kWh/gal.)
10%
increase in
efficiency
(kWh/gal.)
New
Fuel Use
(gals.)
Annual
Fuel
Savings
(gals.)
Annual
Savings
($)
Savings
per KWh
Ekwok 46,990 11.3 12.5 42,718 4,272 18,454 $ 0.03
New Stuyahok 101,469 13.6 14.9 92,245 9,224 40,403 $ 0.03
Togiak 228,112 13.1 14.5 207,375 20,737 90,001 $ 0.03
AVEC 376,571 13.0 14.3 342,337 34,234 148,858 $ 0.03
Chignik Bay 62,113 13.6 15.0 56,466 5,647 21,852 $ 0.03
Chignik Lagoon 39,284 10.8 11.9 35,713 3,571 16,106 $ 0.04
Chignik Lake 37,232 10.4 11.4 33,847 3,385 17,431 $ 0.05
Egegik 55,836 11.7 12.8 50,760 5,076 23,400 $ 0.04
Igiugig 29,439 11.4 12.6 26,763 2,676 $ 17,583 $ 0.05
Kokhanok 39,466 10.3 11.3 35,878 3,588 $ 21,383 $ 0.05
Koliganek 60,032 10.8 11.9 54,575 5,457 $ 24,504 $ 0.04
Levelock 40,000 11.7 12.8 36,364 3,636 $ 15,055 $ 0.03
Manokotak 113,206 9.3 10.3 102,915 10,291 $ 43,018 $ 0.04
Pedro Bay 17,247 10.7 11.8 15,679 1,568 $ 8,388 $ 0.05
Perryville1 26,929 17.6 19.3 24,481 2,448 $ 11,114 $ 0.02
Pilot Point 36,248 11.4 12.6 32,953 3,295 $ 12,950 $ 0.03
Port Alsworth 65,848 12.2 13.4 59,862 5,986 $ 29,632 $ 0.04
Port Heiden 54,330 9.5 10.5 49,391 4,939 $ 20,645 $ 0.04
Twin Hills 29,180 4.9 5.4 26,527 2,653 $ 11,115 $ 0.08
Independent Utilities 706,390 11.0 12.1 642,173 64,217 $ 294,179 $ 0.04
Iliamna/Newhalen/
Nondalton 5,123 18.2 20.0 4,657 466 $ 2,175 $ 0.02
INN Electric
Cooperative
5,123 18.2 20.0 4,657 466 $ 2,175 $ 0.02
Naknek/King Salmon/
S. Naknek 1,258,272 16.1 17.7 1,143,884 114,388 $ 403,791 $ 0.02
Naknek Electric
Association
1,258,272 16.1 17.7 1,143,884 114,388 $ 403,791 $ 0.02
Dillingham/
Aleknagik 1,253,779 15.1 16.6 1,139,799 113,980 $ 396,650 $ 0.02
Nushagak Electric
Cooperative
1,253,779 15.1 16.6 1,139,799 113,980 $ 396,650 $ 0.02
Notes: 1/ Perryville data from FY2013 PCE Annual Report. Data source: (2)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 38
Heat Recovery
Heat recovery lowers community energy costs by reducing the cost of heating public buildings
near the powerhouse. Fifteen communities in the Bristol Bay region have operational heat
recovery systems and another two have active development projects to install heat recovery
systems (Table 8).
Even when generators operate at maximum efficiency, 60% of all energy in the diesel fuel will be
released as heat. The waste jacket heat can be run through a heat exchanger that transfers the heat
to a heat loop that can warm nearby buildings. This process can recover 10 to 20% of the energy
in the fuel. The heat can be measured and, if a heat sales contract is developed, sold to
consumers, providing another revenue source for the utility. Potential users are often schools.
While excess or waste heat is primarily a byproduct of diesel generation, heat can be harnessed
from hydro plants in situations where there is excess hydro (e.g. water going over the spillway)
that can be used as a dump load to power an electric heater.
Table 8: Heat recovery systems completed or in development
Kvichak Subregion
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Operational Egegik City of Egegik Provides excess heat to the school
and adjacent community center
Naknek NEA Provides excess heat to the BBB
school and a few adjacent homes
Pilot Point Pilot Point
Electric
Provides excess heat to the school
Port Heiden Port Heiden
Utilities
Provides excess to the fire
department and VPSO buildings
Lakes Subregion
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Operational
Igiugig Igiugig Electric Provides excess heat to
pumphouse and recreational
center buildings
Expand system to
heat water tank
Kokhanok City of
Kokhanok
Provides excess heat to the
school
Levelock Levelock
Electric
Provides excess heat to the
school
Expand to
community, tribal
buildings, and
youth recreational
center
Newhalen INNEC Provides excess heat to the city
office and fire hall
Pedro Bay Pedro Bay
Village Council
Provides excess heat to multiple
community buildings; originally
connected to school which
closed
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 39
Nushagak Bay Subregion
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Operational Dillingham NEC Provides excess heat to school,
court, DOT, and utility buildings
Determine
feasibility for
expansion to
UAF-BB
campus
Feasibility Dillingham SWAMC Capturing excess heat used to
heat school when in session for
ice making during
summer/fishing season
Determine
technical and
economic
feasibility
Nushagak River Subregion
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Operational Koliganek Village
Council
Provides excess heat to
school, clinic, & city offices
Design &
Construction
New
Stuyahok
SRSD/AVEC Project to capture the
recovered heat from the
AVEC power plant cooling
system by installing heat
exchangers at the plant and
school boiler module and
~700 feet of underground
piping
Construction in
2015
$548,000/ AEA
REF & Local
Match
Peninsula Subregion
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Operational Chignik
Lagoon
Village
Council
Provides excess heat to
the school
Chignik Lake Village
Council
Provides excess heat to
the school
Perryville Village
Council
Provides excess heat to
the school
Togiak Bay Subregion
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Design &
Construction
Togiak City Heat recovery between
AVEC power plant and
multiple buildings: Water
Treatment Plant, Clinic,
Police Station, City Office,
and Old School Community
Activity Building
Construction in
2016
$486, 180/ AEA
REF & Local
Match
Port Alsworth Tanalian
Electric
Cooperative
Provides excess heat to old
school, duplex, and teacher's
house
Need to connect
new school, school
housing, and
community
building.
Unknown
(funding is a
concern)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 40
LINE LOSS
Line loss reflects the percent of electricity (kWhs) generated by a utility that is not sold. Line loss may be due to physica l losses in the
distribution network (possibly caused by deteriorating lines and old or under -sized transformers) or unmetered use. The result is a direct
financial loss to the utility and waste of thousands of gallons of diesel fuel per year. Line loss also affects the PCE rate available to a
utility; losses above 12 percent reduce the PCE subsidy. As of 2014, five communities had li ne loss above 12 percent. Four communities
(Clark’s Point, Manokotak, Port Heiden, and Twin Hills) are not included in the analysis because of discrepancies in reported line loss.
Table 9: Line loss by community and subregion
Subregion
Community
or Utility
Total kWhs
generated
Line
loss
kWhs
lost
Diesel lost
(gals.) Subregion
Community
or Utility
Total kWhs
generated
Line
loss kWhs lost
Diesel lost
(gals.)
Kvichak Bay Egegik 650,903 7% 48,253 4,139 Nushagak
River
Ekwok 532,671 6% 32,987 2,910
NEA 20,231,754 6% 1,112,943 69,217 Koliganek 649,836 28% 182,994 16,905
Pilot Point 461,224 19% 89,669 7,047 New Stuyahok 1,378,601 1% 19,633 1,445
Lakes Igiugig 336,581 13% 44,885 3,926 Peninsula Chignik Bay 845,836 11% 94,096 6,910
INNEC 4,099,287 8% 344,265 430 Chignik Lagoon 424,463 1% 3,505 324
Kokhanok 437,928 7% 31,849 2,870 Chignik Lake 386,321 10% 37,056 3,571
Levelock 466,860 19% 88,705 7,600 Perryville 511,004 22% 113,811 5,998
Pedro Bay 185,127 10% 17,969 1,674
Port Alsworth 802,350 6% 52,042 4,271 Togiak Bay Togiak 2,997,095 4% 109,454 8,331
Nushagak
Bay
NEC 18,956,000 4% 773,150 51,137 Legend
High Savings Potential (12%+ line loss)
Medium Savings Potential (6% to 11% loss)
Limited Savings Potential (5% or less line less)
Data source: (2)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 41
RENEWABLE ENERGY
Renewable resources currently used to meet energy needs in the region include wind and hydro
for electricity and woody biomass for space heating (8) (9). (For information on the potential for
other renewable resources, see Table 24.)
Biomass
The Bristol Bay region has been the site of multiple studies and inventories of biomass potential
at the regional, subregional, and community levels. From 2004 to 2007, BBNA oversaw a
regionwide project on woody biomass, the Bristol Bay Region Native Allotment Forest
Inventory. The inventory, performed by Tanana Chiefs Conference Forestry Program, selected
261 native allotment parcels in three regional subunits. In 2013, BBNA conducted a survey of
woody biomass uses in Dillingham and Aleknagik.
Five Bristol Bay communities have taken advantage of the Alaska Wood Energy Development
Task Group grants to complete pre-feasibility assessments of local wood biomass resources.
Another four in the Lake and Peninsula Borough conducted feasibility studies using an AEA
Renewable Energy Fund grant. Kokhanok is the only community with an operational biomass
heating system for two community buildings. Other communities including Iliamna, Nondalton,
Clark’s Point, and New Stuyahok have completed pre-feasibility studies that show pursuing a
biomass project at present may be economically viable (Table 10). Depending on the decision of
city and tribal governments, additional biomass projects may start-up in the region.
Table 10: Community-scale wood biomass heating projects completed or in development
Lakes Subregion
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Operational Kokhanok Lake and
Peninsula
Borough
A GARN cordwood boiler
heats Kokhanok Village
Council Building and the
Community Building.
Study feasibility
of expanding to
nearby buildings.
Past funding: $391,375
AEA REF/Local Match
(includes feasibility
studies for 4 other
communities)
Pre-feasibility
Completed
Iliamna Village
Council
Pre-feasibility completed in
2013. Investigated heating
village office and adjacent
shop building.
Found not
economically
viable; but
prudent to
continue
investigation.
AWEDTG
Nondalton City & Village Pre-feasibility completed in
2013 for installing high
efficiency wood stoves at
tribal office, community
building, and St. Nicholas
Church.
Found to be
economically
justified. Seeking
funds for
installation.
AWEDTG
Nushagak Bay Subregion
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Pre-Feasibility
Completed
Aleknagik
City Pre-feasibility study
completed in 2012.
Not currently viable.
May revisit after
Update 2012 pre-
feasibility study. New
application has been
submitted to AWEDTG.
AWEDTG
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 42
Nushagak Bay Subregion
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
washeteria or other new
buildings constructed or
using 10,000+ gallons of
fuel.
Clark’s Point City Pre-feasibility study
completed in 2013. Not
recommended for Water
Treatment Plant and
clinic, but viable for
other buildings studied.
Design and install heat
loop to connect
Community Center,
CPVC, and City Office
AWEDTG
Dillingham BBNA Studies on interest and
wood availability
completed.
Conduct feasibility
study of wood boiler
heating for BBNA Main
office and Family
Resources center.
Nushagak River Subregion
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Pre-Feasibility
Completed
New
Stuyahok
Stuyahok
Limited
Pre-feasibility study
completed in 2013 for
cordwood system.
Install two Tarm Solo
40 wood boilers and
one high efficiency
wood stove in the
Booster Club
AWEDTG
Hydroelectric
The Bristol Bay region has two operating conventional hydroelectric projects: Tazimina hydro on
the INNEC grid serving Iliamna, Newhalen, and Nondalton and Packer’s Creek hydro which
started operation in 2015 serving Chignik Lagoon. Two projects are in the design and permitting
phase: Chignik Bay and Pedro Bay.
Table 11: Hydroelectric projects in Bristol Bay region
Bristol Bay Region
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Operational Chignik Lagoon Village
Council
Packer's Creek Hydro: 177
kW run-of-river with 9-ft
dam.
Monitor to see if able
to produce estimate of
90% of power
Erosion control on
access road to hydro
facility
Install dispatchable
boilers for space
heating
$5,541,171/ AEA
REF/Local match
Iliamna,
Newhalen,
Nondalton
INNEC Tazimina Hydro: 824 kW
run-of-river project.
Expandable to 1.5 MW.
Dispatchable electric
boilers installed in
Newhalen & Nondalton.
Maintain current
capacity, increase river
intake
Hook-up additional
electric boilers
$12,000,000/
AEA REF, Federal,
INNEC loan
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 43
Bristol Bay Region
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Design &
Permitting
Chignik Bay City
Indian Creek Hydro:
Restoring antiquated 60
kW hydropower
System. 520 kW facility
proposed. Recommended
for design and permitting.
Upgrade existing
powerhouse and address
outstanding
environmental,
geotechnical, and historic
preservation issues.
$207,500/
AEA REF
Pedro Bay Village
Council
Knutson Creek Hydro: 150
kW run-of-river
Complete design and
permitting in 2016
$292,500/ AEA
REF/Local match
Previously
Considered
Dillingham,
Aleknagik
NEC Nushagak Area
Hydropower Project
Proposed capacity: 1.5
MW Lake Elva; 2.7 MW
Grant Lake
Feasibility complete, NEC
not pursuing
$1,904,705/ AEA
REF
Nuvista Interim feasibility
conducted at Chikuminuk
Lake, at the upper
reaches of the Nuyakuk-
Nushagak drainage in
northern Wood Tikchik
State Park. Possibility of
serving NEC grid.
Nuvista ended efforts to
pursue project.
Port Alsworth Tanalian River Hydro- 75-
200 kW, run-of-river
Reconnaissance study not
completed due to federal
land accessibility issues
Hydrokinetic (In-River, Tidal and Wave)
Igiugig is the only community in the Bristol Bay region with a hydrokinetic in-stream pilot
project. The project had two turbines assembled and deployed in the summer of 2014 in the
Kvichak River. The device was retrieved after a month deployment. The project is continuing
with re-design and continued testing in 2015. The energy output capacity is small (5 to 40 kW).
Table 12: Hydrokinetic energy projects operational or in progress
Bristol Bay Region
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
In Progress Igiugig Village
Council
Pilot project using 25 kW
turbine for in-river
electricity generation.
Pursue licensing for
project; Determine
technical and economic
feasibility for village-
wide electricity
generation.
Solar
Solar is not a year-round energy resource in the Bristol Bay region. However, less expensive
solar panels, federal tax credits and grant support, and net metering programs have combined to
shorten the payback period for solar projects. This combined with the increase in electricity
demand in the summer, due to fish processing and packing operations, means solar at both small-
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 44
scale and community-scale may be an option. This is particularly the case in smaller communities
with very high costs of diesel fuel and electricity or for residents not connected to utility lines.
Utilities in the Bristol Bay region do not have any installed solar arrays. However, homes,
commercial buildings, and community buildings are installing small solar PV arrays on their own
(Table 13). There are few residential solar thermal systems installed in the region. Using solar
thermal technologies to reduce heating costs is often economic; however, these systems are
significantly more complex to set up and maintain than solar PV arrays, making the lack of
trained and knowledgeable operators in the region a potential barrier to expanding use.
Table 13: Community-scale solar energy projects operational or in progress
Bristol Bay Region
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Operational Dillingham Multiple
Entities
Solar arrays on UAF Bristol
Bay Campus, USFW
building, and commercial
buildings
Igiugig Multiple
Entities
Solar thermal installed on 3
buildings
Expand use of solar thermal
Perryville Native
Village
3 kW solar array on
community building
Expand use to homes and
community buildings
Wind
Bristol Bay has few operational utility-scale wind projects, but several communities are in the
process of developing wind projects (Table 14). In Perryville and Igiugig, both with operational
wind systems, electricity generation is small scale with turbines with under 3 kW capacity. The
project in Perryville uses small-scale turbines for residential electricity generation. The system in
Igiugig is a pilot project using vertical-axis wind turbines. Four communities have utility scale
wind projects in development or re-design, in the case of Kokhanok and one, Clark’s Point, is in
the process of installing residential scale turbines in a system similar to Perryville.
Communities with met towers installed prior to 2010 that have not pursued further design and
development of wind systems include Chignik Lagoon, Chignik Lake, and Manokotak. These
communities are mentioned because the decision not to pursue wind is not fully accepted by the
communities as noted during outreach visits by the planning team and leadership at BBNA. In all
cases, AEA has specific reasons for not continuing development ranging from small loads that
will make integration and maintenance of wind systems technically complicated , plans for
changes in maintenance and upkeep of existing diesel systems, and concern that the wind
resource is not viable for utility scale electricity generation. BBNA and communities involved
have disagreed with AEA’s positions particularly as it relates to sites for met towers. Details are
noted in Table 14.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 45
Table 14: Wind projects in the Bristol Bay region
Bristol Bay Region
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Operational Igiugig Village
Council
6 - 1.2 kW vertical axis wind
turbines installed as pilot
project
If proven, will be expanded
Perryville
Village
Council
10 residential (2.5-2.9 kW
each) turbines installed
Design &
Installation
Clark’s Point City
Installing 7 residential
turbines
Work with AEA on
integration with
powerhouse
Kokhanok Local
Utility &
Borough
2 - 90kW wind turbines,
originally planned as high
penetration system. System
redesign in process. First
commissioned in 2010.
Electrical & generator
upgrades; test wind system
at low and medium level
penetration
$190,000 AEA
REF/local match
000 (re-design
costs only)
Koliganek Village
Council
Wind and heat recovery
system. Draft CDR
complete.
Complete powerhouse
upgrade & finalize CDR;
identify suitable sites for
wind.
$112,050/ AEA
REF/Local Match
(for assessment &
CDR only)
Pilot Point City 100 kW wind farm with
dispatchable electric boiler,
powerhouse upgrades
needed to integrate the
wind farm into the Pilot
Point grid.
CDR submitted. City of Pilot
Point will complete a met
tower study, final design,
permitting, construction
and startup of wind farm
$1,571,240/ AEA
REF, Local Match
Port Heiden Lake and
Peninsula
Borough
LPB proposed a high
penetration 330 kW design
and construction project.
Limited funding for
permitting and design until
conceptual design is
approved. The current
diesel powerhouse and
distribution system are not
capable of supporting a
utility-scale wind system.
$250,000/ AEA
REF
Feasibility Egegik Lake and
Peninsula
Borough
Wind feasibility study, met
tower installed 8.2014 and
1 year of data needed
Determine wind resource
and if sufficient, continue
with project development
$66,666/ AEA
REF, Local Match
Levelock Lake and
Peninsula
Borough
LPB has added money to
install a 34 meter met
tower to collect bankable
data. The met tower was
installed in July 2014.
Determine wind resource
and if sufficient, continue
with project development
$11,000/ AEA
REF, Local Match
New Stuyahok AVEC Feasibility assessment for a
proposed 300kW wind
project with associated
integration components
Identify site for met tower
and conduct new feasibility
study.
$150,000/ AEA
REF, Local Match
Met Tower
Installed
Chignik Lagoon Village
Council
2 met towers installed &
studies completed in 2005
& 2011. 2013 feasibility
study map shows level 6
wind class but 2011 study
found level 1 wind class
Community interested in
investigating alternative
sites; AEA concerned by
small load and believes
alternative sites are not
developable.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 46
Bristol Bay Region
Status Community Lead Project Description Next Step Cost/Funding
Chignik Lake Village
Council
Met tower installed in
2011, found level 4 wind
class with high turbulence
Community interested in
investigating alternative
sites; AEA concerned by
small load.
Manokotak City Met tower installed in
2009, found level 2 wind
class
Community interested in
investigating alternative
sites; AEA is waiting for
utility plan to remedy
condition of generation &
distribution system to
ensure sustainable project.
Previously
Considered
Chignik Bay Village
Council
1 met tower installed in
2004-6, found level 6 wind
class with high turbulence.
Community focusing on
hydro power
Togiak City Met tower installed 2004-6,
found level 3 wind class
Community not pursuing
wind resource development
at present
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
Energy Characteristics of Regional Housing Stock
The 2014 Alaska Housing Assessment by the
Cold Climate Housing Research Center (10)
profiled the residential energy use and cost in the
Bristol Bay region:
Energy Use: The average home in the region is
1,232 square feet and uses 136,000 BTUs of
energy per square foot annually. This is close
to the statewide average of 137,000 BTUs per
square foot per year. Two-thirds (66%) is used for space heating, 16 percent for hot water,
and 18 percent for electricity.
Energy Efficiency: The average annual energy rating in the region is 2-star plus, based on data
from over 830 homes. Not surprisingly, newer homes have better energy performance. On
average, homes built in the 1940s are currently rated at 1-star plus, compared to an average
rating of 3-star plus for homes built after 2000.
Housing Quality: Within current housing stock, newer homes are tighter. On average, homes
built in the last decade nearly meet the 2012 BEES standard of 4 air-changes per hour at 50
Pascals (ACH50). In contrast, homes built in the 1940s are 3.4 times leakier than those built
since 2000.
Energy Cost and Affordability: The average annual home energy cost in the region is $7,054,
which is approximately 2.5 times more than the cost in Anchorage, and 3.3 times more than
the national average. Approximately 21% of households in the Bristol Bay region spend 30% or
more of total income on housing costs, including rent, water, sewer, and energy costs.
Figure 17: Bristol Bay residential energy use
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 47
Table 15: Summary of energy characteristics of regional housing stock
Avg. Energy
Rating
Avg. House
Size
Avg. Annual
Energy Use
Avg. Home
Energy Cost1
Avg. Energy
Use Intensity
(EUI)
Avg. Energy
Cost Index
(ECI)2
Avg. Home
Heating
Index3
2-star plus 1,232
square feet
155
MMBTU
$7,054
per year
136 kBTU
per square foot
$6.42
per square foot 8.2
Notes: 1/ Includes all end uses, estimated using January 2013 energy prices and including reductions from the
PCE program. 2/ The amount of money spent on energy per year divided by square footage. 3/ The en ergy used
per square foot per year divided by the area’s heating degree days. Data source: (10)
Regional Comparison: Of the 12 ANCSA regions, average annual home energy costs in the
Bristol Bay region are sixth highest overall and the fourth highest per square foot (10).
Figure 18: Bristol Bay residential energy costs compared with other ANCSA regions
Source: (10)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 48
Residential Energy Efficiency & Conservation (EE&C)
More than a third of all occupied homes in the region have completed energy efficiency upgrades
either through the Home Energy Rebate (HER) program, a low-income weatherization program,
or with a recently built and BEES-certified home (Figure 19). Bristol Bay Housing Authority
(BBHA) builds all new homes in the region above BEES standards.
Participation in AHFC’s Home Energy Rebate program is open to homeowners for their primary
residence; there is no upper income limit. The HER program requires homeowners to pay for
recommended upgrades up front and reimburses them for direct labor and materials up to a
certain amount once work is done and a “post” audit is completed. In the Bristol Bay region
about 35 percent of homeowners receiving HER audits have completed upgrades and received
rebates.
AHFC’s weatherization services in the region are provided by Bristol Bay Housing Authority
(BBHA) and the Alaska Community Development Corporation (ACDC). There is no cost to the
resident or community for participation in the program.
Energy efficiency and weatherization measures completed since 2008 have reduced energy
consumption in participating Bristol Bay households by 27% to 29% per year, according to
AHFC program data. That translates to 300 to 450 gallons of heating oil per retrofitted home
(Table 16). Most of the energy savings is in home heating, although lighting upgrades result in
some electrical savings.
Collectively, Bristol Bay residents are saving almost $1.3 million per year from residential
energy-efficiency upgrades already completed. If all remaining older homes were upgraded, an
additional $2.3 million in annual fuel savings could be captured (Table 16).
Table 16: Average EE&C savings per household in the Bristol Bay region
EE&C Program No. of Homes
Annual Energy
Savings
Average Energy
Savings
Estimated Fuel
Savings1
Savings at
$4.50/gal.
Home Energy
Rebate
33 rebates
+ 5 in process
out of 99 audits
(35% completion
rate)
60.8
MMBTU 27% 437
gallons
$1,966
per year
Weatherization2 675
homes
43.4
MMBTU 29% 311
gallons
$1,401
per year
Note: 1/ Assumes all heating is done with fuel oil. It does not include savings in diesel fuel from reductions in
electrical generation. 2/ Includes AHFC weatherization projects plus homes weatherized by BBHA with other
funding. Average annual savings is based on AHFC weatherization data only. Data source: (11)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 49
Figure 19: Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Data sources: (11) (10) (12)
On a regional basis, residential energy efficiency (EE) measures account for over 28,000
MMBTU (1 MMBTU = 1 million British Thermal Units) annually in energy savings, over
200,000 gallons of heating fuel per year and $1.28 million in avoided fuel costs for the region
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 50
(Table 17). If the remaining energy inefficient housing stock is upgraded (or in some cases
rebuilt), the savings from residential EE&C could save another 55,000 MMBTU per year. This
would save another 394,000 gallons of heating oil and nearly $2.3 million more in avoided fuel
costs annually. This does not include savings from lighting or appliance upgrades o r other
measures that reduce electrical use (or the diesel used to generate electricity).
Table 17: Estimated energy savings and potential energy savings from residential EE&C
EE&C Savings Achieved EE&C Savings Opportunity
Subregion
Annual
Energy
Savings
(MMBTU)
Annual
Diesel
Savings
(Gallons)
Annual
Fuel Cost
Savings
($)
Remaining
Residential
EE&C
Opportunity
Annual
Energy
Savings
(MMBTU)
Annual
Diesel
Savings
(Gallons)
Annual
Fuel Cost
Savings
($)
Kvichak Bay 3,967 $ 28,484 $168,750 74% 12,764 91,646 $536,949
Lakes 7,838 $ 56,278 $375,428 33% 3,533 25,369 $75,070
Nushagak Bay 6,780 $ 48,679 $286,256 76% 22,508 161,609 $950,990
Nushagak R. 3,038 $ 21,813 $147,673 59% 4,937 35,447 $227,422
Peninsula 2,127 $ 15,269 $85,260 57% 3,531 25,352 $125,617
Togiak Bay 4,470 $ 32,096 $215,368 57% 7,639 54,848 $363,636
Bristol Bay 28,220 $ 202,620 $1,278,735 64% 54,912 394,271 $2,279,685
Notes: Assumes all non-BEES-certified, income-eligible homes are weatherized and remaining owner-occupied
homes participate in Home Energy Rebate program. Assumes average energy savings for region based on 2008 -14
ARIS data. Assumes retail heating fuel costs for communities as of August 2014.
Public and Commercial Facilities
NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING AUDITS
The savings from energy efficiency and conservation changes in non-residential buildings is also
large, though harder to quantify. Public and commercial building owners can typically save 20
percent on energy costs by performing both behavioral changes (like setting back thermostats)
and efficiency upgrades identified in energy audits (Table 18).
Table 18: Savings potential for public and commercial facilities
Savings from
Behavioral Changes
Only
Behavioral Changes plus
the Most Cost-Effective
Retrofits
Savings from
Implementing All Audit
Recommendations
10-15% Savings 15-25% Savings 25-35% Savings
Data source: (13)
COMMUNITY ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS
Since 2005, a sequence of state and federal programs have funded community-scale, energy
efficiency improvements in public facilities in rural Alaska, including indoor lighting retrofits,
LED street lighting, heating system upgrades, insulation and sealing, and installation of
programmable thermostats and other energy saving building controls.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 51
Table 19: Participation by Community in Energy Audit Programs since 2008
Community
Community
EE&C Grants
EE Lighting
Upgrades
Other Building EE
Audits and Upgrades
Water and Sewer
System EE
Grouped by
Subregion
VEEP / EECBG
/ VEUEM1
LED Street
Lighting
School EE
Audit2
Health
Clinic EE
Sanitation
EE Audit
Sanitation
EE Retrofits3
Kvichak Bay
Egegik X A
King Salmon
Naknek X P
Pilot Point X X
Port Heiden X
South Naknek X A A
Lakes
Igiugig A
Iliamna
Kokhanok X
Levelock X P
Newhalen X X A
Nondalton X P A A P
Pedro Bay X
Port Alsworth A
Nushagak Bay
Aleknagik X A
Clark's Point X X
Dillingham X
Ekwok X A A
Koliganek X p A A
New Stuyahok X p A
Peninsula
Chignik Bay X
Chignik Lagoon X
Chignik Lake X X A
Perryville X A
Togiak Bay
Manokotak X X A A
Togiak X P A
Twin Hills X A A P
Region 22 12 12 1 8 2
Notes: X=Completed, A=Audit, P=Planned or in Progress. 1/ ANTHC study funded building audits. Additional
funding or local investment may be needed to finance recommended improvements. 2/ VEEP improvements
in Manokotak included community-wide lighting upgrades. 3/Water and Sewer audits and work performed
and reported by ANTHC. Data sources: (14) (15) (16)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 52
Communities, tribes and boroughs in the Bristol Bay region have taken significant action on
energy efficiency audits and upgrades using the community-scale programs. As of early 2015, at
least 22 Bristol Bay communities had participated in the popular EECBG and VEEP programs
(Table 19).
ENERGY EFFICIENT LIGHTING UPGRADES
Many communities in the region completed interior or exterior lighting retrofits on multiple
community buildings as part of VEEP and EECBG-funded projects. They are saving an average
of $1,650 and 3,100 kWh per building per year, based on data from seven Bristol Bay
communities. Lighting upgrades generally have shorter payback periods than other building
efficiency measures making them smart investments even without the incentive of grant funding
(15). While a majority of Bristol Bay communities have participated in the EECBG and VEEP
programs there is still savings opportunity for more lighting retrofits in the region —both for
communities that have not participated in the programs as well as communities in which only
schools or only city- or tribal-owned buildings received lighting retrofits.
Table 20: Savings from Energy Efficient Lighting Upgrades in 7 Bristol Bay communities
One-time
Investment
Annual
Savings
Annual Electricity
Saved (kWh)
Average Simple
Payback Period
Average per community $19,652 $9,187 17,289
2.1 years Average per Building $3,527 $1,649 3,103
Total $137,561 $64,309 121,026
Data source: Based on lighting upgrades completed with VEEP and EECGB grants through 2013 in Aleknagik,
Chignik, Clark’s Point, Egegik, Manokotak, Newhalen, and Togiak (15).
Table 21: Savings from energy efficient lighting upgrades in 33 small communities
One-time
Investment
Annual
Savings
Annual Electricity
Saved (kWh)
Average Simple
Payback Period
Average per Community $26,414 $7,359 17,249
3.6 years Average per Building $4,737 $1,320 3,094
Total $871,664 $242,840 569,219
Data source: Based on VEEP and EECBG-funded lighting upgrades completed through 2013 (15).
LED STREET LIGHTING
Rural Alaska communities that have replaced street lights with LEDs are saving an average of
$10,000 per year, with an average payback period of 3.7 years. In the Bristol Bay region, six
communities reported during outreach visits or interviews having completed full LED retrofits,
and another four reported partial retrofits that will continue as old lights burn out. The data
presented in Table 22 is based on two communities for which data was available.
Table 22: Savings from LED street lighting retrofits in 2 Bristol Bay communities
One-time
Investment
Annual
Savings
Annual Electricity
Saved (kWh)
Average Simple
Payback Period
Average per Community $14,440 $4,579 8,326 3.2 years Total $28,880 $9,159 16,652
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 53
Data source: Based on VEEP and EECBG-funded lighting upgrades completed through 2013 in Clark’s Point and Manokotak (15).
SCHOOL AND OTHER BUILDING AUDITS
Many of the region’s schools, clinics, and some other community buildings been audited through
AHFC’s commercial energy audit program or with other funding. Because these programs
typically pay for audits but, unlike VEEP or residential EE programs, do not pay for retrofits,
many of the potential savings identified in audits have not been achieved and there is not good
information on which EE upgrades have been done.
The Lake and Peninsula Borough approved a school package in 2013, designating that 10% of a
$20 million bond be used for energy efficiency upgrades in Lake and Peninsula School District
(LPSD) schools. Working with Siemens, Inc., LPSD applied for and received the VEEP grant for
lighting and window upgrades in two of the LPSD’s eleven schools in Perryville and Egegik.
Siemens conducted investment grade energy audits on all eleven schools and in spring 2014
began work on LED lighting and control replacements in eleven schools and building automation
upgrades in nine schools. The project wrapped up in May 2015. Siemens estimates the cos ts
savings across all schools will total $165,000 in year 1 with a 12.5 year simple payback and an
overall energy savings of 15.6%. With assistance from Siemens, the Lake and Peninsula Borough
was able to fund this project through school bonds, state energy grants, and a 70% reimbursement
for the cost of the work from the Alaska Dept. of Education and Early Development.
AEA’s Commercial Building Energy Audit (CBEA) program funds whole-building energy audits
for privately-owned buildings up to a limit based upon the size and type of building. Results from
participants indicate average energy savings of roughly one-third as a result of energy efficiency
investments. Most commercial building audits are done in urban areas of Alaska, data on
participation by Bristol Bay communities was not found.
WATER AND SEWER
Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) has performed energy audits of sanitation
systems in eight rural communities in the Bristol Bay region. Sanitation systems are one of the
single largest energy users in rural communities, accounting for 10 to 35 percent of a
community’s energy use. ANTHC estimates that for every one dollar spent on energy retrofits of
rural sanitation facilities (including the cost of audits) there will be a 50 cent return each year to
communities plus a 50 cent annual return to the State’s operating budget through lower PCE
payments (17). Table 23 shows estimated cost savings from EE upgrades based on analysis of
over 50 rural communities in the Interior, Southwest, and Western Alaska. To date, no sanitation
system retrofits have been completed in the region and two are in progress or planned (Table 19).
Table 23: Potential savings from sanitation system EE&C based on statewide audits
Number of
Water
Systems
Audited
One Time
Investment
Electricity
Savings
(kWh)
Diesel
Savings
(Gallons)
Cost
Savings
($)
Average
Simple
Payback
(years)
51 $107,214 22,010 2,663 $25,404 4.2
Data source: (18)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 54
3 | R ESOURCE P OTENTIAL
Table 24: Energy resource potential and certainty for new, community-scale projects
Egegik King Salmon Naknek Pilot Point Port Heiden South Naknek Igiugig Iliamna Kokhanok Levelock Newhalen Nondalton Pedro Bay Port Alsworth Chignik Chignik Lagoon Chignik Lake Perryville Biomass L L L L L L H H H L H H H L L L L L
Geothermal L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
Hydro L L L L M L L H M L H H M M H H M M
Solar
Wind L M M M L M L M H L M M L L L L L M
Coal M L L M M L L L L L L L L L M M M M
Oil & Gas L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
Heat Recovery L L H H H L L H H M H H L H L L H H
Energy Efficiency H H H H H H M H M H H M M H H H H M
Kvichak Bay Lakes Peninsula
Phase I of the Regional Energy Planning process included an inventory of all potential energy
resources in the Bristol Bay region. In Phase II, a preliminary assessment of resource potential
was performed. The goal was to develop a consistent set of criteria for rating resource potential
that could be applied across communities and regions. This a ssessment looks at the resource
potential for producing energy savings from new, community-scale project development given
the best available information (i.e. projects that are already in operation or under development are
Aleknagik Clark's Point Dillingham Ekwok Koliganek New Stuyahok Manokotak Togiak Twin Hills Biomass L H M H H H L L L
Geothermal L L L L L L L L L
Hydro L L L L L L L L L
Solar
Wind M L M L M M M M L
Coal L L L L L L L L L
Oil & Gas L L L L L L L L L
Heat Recovery L L H L H L L L L
Energy Efficiency H H H H H M M H H
Nush. Bay Nush. River Togiak Bay
The first letter in each square
represents resource
potential. The subscript
indicates the level of
certainty in the resource
potential rating. HighHL HM HH
MedML MM MH
LowLL LM LH
Low Med High
Color Key
Potential 4Certainty 4
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 55
not counted towards the resource’s potential to generate additional savings in a community).
These Potential ratings of Low (L), Medium (M), or High (H) are accompanied by a Certainty
rating (also L, M, H) which indicates the amount of feasibility work that has been done or the
availability of other information. Low certainty generally signifies that no reconnaissance or
other resource assessment has been performed. See Appendix E for a detailed description of the
criteria used in the analysis.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 56
4 | P UBLIC O UTREACH
OUTREACH ACTIVITIES
Public outreach and stakeholder engagement are major components of the second phase of
AEA’s regional energy planning process. In the Bristol Bay region, these goals were met through
a variety of activities:
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Summit (2015)
Subregional Energy Meetings (2015)
Community and Utility Interviews (2015)
Bristol Bay Industry Survey (2015)
Breakout Sessions at SWAMC Annual Meetings (2014, 2015)
Energy Session at Bristol Bay Village Leadership Workshop (2013)
Project Website: www.bristolbayenergy.org (2012-2015)
The input received through these outreach activities have been incorporated throughout this
report and included in the Community and Energy Profiles, which start on Page 63.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Summit | May 2015
An Energy Summit on May 4, 2015 in Dillingham was the capstone event for Phase II of the
regional energy planning process. Over 40 representatives from across the region attended, along
with regional and statewide organizations. Most communities were represented. See Appendix B
for a list of participants. Summit topics were tailored to the needs and issues raised during
subregional energy meetings held in March. Presentations were provided by AEA’s technical
staff, ANTHC, Bristol Bay Development Fund, Bristol Bay Housing Authority, Lake and
Peninsula School District, Marsh Creek, Siemens, Inc, and by community and regional
representatives.
A roundtable discussion with regional organizations explored current projects, services, and ideas
for regional energy solutions. Topics covered electric utilities, governance, health care, and water
and sewer. The summit ended with two interactive sessions. The first focused on identifying a
regionwide energy vision. The group did not reach consensus on a final vision statement, but
provided several areas which they would like to see addressed in future energy meetings. The
second session used audience polling technology to rank regional energy strategies and assess
overall interest in the structure and make-up of future energy planning committee(s) in the Bristol
Bay region. Polling results appear in Appendix D.
Subregional Energy Meetings | March 2015
In March 2015, members of the planning team held meetings in Chignik Lagoon, Dillingham,
Iliamna, and King Salmon to discuss energy projects and priorities. The meetings were scheduled
in consultation with communities, and three representatives from every community in the region
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 57
were invited to attend the closest meeting to their community. Travel arrangements were
provided for those who needed it. The agenda included presentations on the Phase I Resource
Inventory and on community and technical resources from AEA. Roundtable discussions
explored community/utility energy issues and goals. Representatives were also asked to review
and update the draft Community and Energy Profiles. See Appendix B for a list of participants.
Table 25: Subregional energy meetings
Dates Subregional Meetings Community
March 23 Iliamna Iliamna, Kokhanok, Newhalen, Nondalton, Port Alsworth, Pedro Bay
March 24 Chignik Lagoon Chignik, Chignik Lagoon, Chignik Lake, Perryville, Pilot Point,
Port Heiden
March 25 King Salmon Egegik, Igiugig, King Salmon, Levelock, Naknek, South Naknek, Ugashik
March 26 Dillingham Aleknagik, Clark's Point, Dillingham, Ekuk, Ekwok, Koliganek, Manokotak,
New Stuyahok, Togiak, Twin Hills
Community and Utility Interviews | Jan – Feb 2015
The community-level outreach for the Phase II planning effort included telephone interviews
with community and utility representatives from each Bristol Bay community in January and
February 2015. The purpose of the interviews was to review the draft Community and Energy
Profiles.
Bristol Bay Industry Survey | Feb – May 2015
Project team members designed an online survey requesting information on energy usage,
generation sources, expected load changes, and energy efficiency measures related to commercial
facilities. Businesses in fish processing, air service, fuel delivery, tourism, and large public
service were contacted to complete the survey. The survey tool is presented in Appendix C.
Significant outreach in the form of phone calls and emails was conducted. Three businesses
completed the survey. Due to the small pool of responses, additional data on energy usage was
not collected or analyzed for this report.
Bristol Bay Village Leadership Workshop | Dec 2013
The project team partnered with the Bristol Bay Native Corporation to host a half-day workshop
in Anchorage in conjunction with the regional corporation’s Village Leadership Workshop on
December 5, 2013. The agenda included presentations on energy resources and opportunities in
the Bristol Bay region and energy project financing options. Audience polling was used to
engage participants and gather input on energy priorities and policy options. Participants in the
annual workshop typically include about 200 village corporation officers and directors and
village/city council officers and members. See polling results in Appendix D.
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 58
5 | E NERGY P RIORITIES AND N EEDS
In addition to providing a comprehensive list of energy projects and initiatives in the region, the
subregional meetings and stakeholder interviews in Phase II enabled planners to identify
additional priorities and needs that are not currently part of an active project. The timeframes
shown in Table 26 indicate a best guess for project timing given available resources, technology
readiness, community/utility interest, and competing priorities.
Short range: expected to start within 1-5 years
Medium range: expected to occur between 5-10 years
Long range: expected to occur beyond 10 years
Table 26: Community energy priorities & needs identified by Bristol Bay regional stakeholders
Community/Utility Subregion Timeframe Priority
Planning
Egegik Kvichak Bay Ongoing Anticipate and plan for impacts of efficiency in very small communities; A lot
of villages are getting smaller – if people get too efficient, it gets harder to get
fuel deliveries.
Naknek Kvichak Bay Ongoing Net metering, integrating renewable energy production with the grid
Igiugig Lakes Ongoing Planning for efficiency - the more efficient individuals get, the less efficient the
power plant gets.
Levelock Lakes Ongoing Plan for erosion affecting river front and infrastructure
Aleknagik Nushagak Bay Ongoing Need a planner to facilitate & administer plans in play and for the future;
Update 2013 strategic plan - do not have an energy component currently
Dillingham Nushagak Bay Ongoing Explore the feasibility of developing renewable sources of energy including
wind, hydro, geothermal, biomass, tidal, and solar; and of developing non-
diesel sources of energy including peat and natural gas; Work with Nushagak
Cooperative, Choggiung and other entities to develop feasibility assessments
and a capital plan for developing new energy sources to supplement or
replace existing infrastructure
Utility Management/Training
Port Heiden, Pilot
Point
Kvichak Bay Short Strong potential to add more community facilities to the PCE program
Pilot Point Kvichak Bay Short Install meter boxes on homes; no back-up power at present
Igiugig Lakes Short Generator training – funding for AVTEC or regional training
Kokhanok, Levelock,
Pedro Bay, Port
Alsworth
Lakes Short Strong potential to add more community facilities to the PCE program
Kokhanok, Levelock,
Pedro Bay, Port
Alsworth
Lakes Short Subregional on-call utility operator, fully trained and able to have full-time
work by responding to regular needs and emergencies
Clark’s Point,
Dillingham, Aleknagik
Nushagak Bay Short Strong potential to add more community facilities to the PCE program
Ekwok, Koliganek,
New Stuyahok
Nushagak
River
Short Strong potential to add more community facilities to the PCE program
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 59
Community/Utility Subregion Timeframe Priority
Chignik Lagoon,
Chignik Lake,
Perryville
Peninsula Short Strong potential to add more community facilities to the PCE program
Chignik Bay, Chignik
Lagoon, Chignik Lake,
Perryville
Peninsula Short Subregional lineman – on call to deal with routine maintenance and
emergencies
Manokotak, Togiak,
Twin Hills
Togiak Bay Short Strong potential to add more community facilities to the PCE program
Energy Infrastructure (Powerhouses, Distribution Lines, Bulk Fuel)
Bulk Fuel
Port Heiden Kvichak Bay Short Bulk fuel tanks on edge of eroding area, solution needed ASAP
Igiugig Lakes Short New site for bulk fuel tank farm, current site is eroding into river; new diesel
delivery truck
Kokhanok Lakes Medium Need new fuel truck
New Stuyahok Nushagak
River
Short Additional work on fuel storage and transport planned, but no current funding
Togiak Togiak Bay Short Tank farm upgrade, tanks are old and threatened by erosion since it’s near the
coast and the seawall. Upgrade wasn’t funded in the past due to
environmental concerns.
Powerhouse
Dillingham Nushagak Bay Medium Interest in pilot studies for distributed energy systems; Determine a practical
strategy and possible incentives to develop shared energy systems within
small subdivisions and commercial campuses.
Chignik Lagoon Peninsula Short/Medium Re-size generators to ensure efficient electricity production; new fuel truck
needed
Chignik Lake Peninsula Medium 2 new generators needed
Twin Hills Togiak Bay Medium New, low-maintenance generators needed
Heat Recovery
NEA Kvichak Bay Medium Investigate stack heat recovery, increasing capacity by using same BTU from
diesel; Investigate heat absorption for ice production in summer
Levelock Lakes Medium Investigate heat absorption for flash freezing; technology currently used at
larger scale but need pilot project for small scale use
Manokotak Togiak Bay Medium Interest in installing heat recovery system
Twin Hills Togiak Bay Medium Interest in installing heat recovery system
Transmission & Distribution
Egegik, Pilot Point,
NEA
Kvichak Bay Short Line loss above 6% in all communities, potential for significant savings
Pilot Point Kvichak Bay Short Investigate meters, upgrade distribution lines and transformers
Igiugig, INNEC,
Kokhanok, Levelock,
Pedro Bay, Port
Alsworth
Lakes Short Line loss above 6% in all communities, potential for significant savings
INNEC Lakes Short Upgrade distribution infrastructure Newhalen to Nondalton - replace with
armored submarine cable
Kokhanok Lakes Medium Powerline cables need to be replaced
Levelock Lakes Medium Expand distribution system; additional powerlines need for more residents
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 60
Community/Utility Subregion Timeframe Priority
Aleknagik Nushagak Bay Medium Funding for substation construction; Consider energy when designing new
public facilities. They will require energy which requires transmission lines and
potentially more electrical capacity (3 phase).
Ekwok, Koliganek Nushagak
River
Short Line loss above 6% in both communities, potential for significant savings
New Stuyahok &
Ekwok
Nushagak
River
Short Intertie between Ekwok & New Stuyahok to capitalize on economies of scale;
connect Ekwok to renewable generation once New Stuyahok’s wind project is
operational
Chignik, Chignik
Lake, Perryville
Peninsula Short Line loss at high levels up to 22% in Perryville, significant savings are available
to all three communities
Chignik Peninsula Short Transmission lines need attention; requested lineman through AEA, never
heard a response
Chignik Lagoon Peninsula Short/Medium Transmission lines are in poor condition, need look at distribution lines as
well; upgrade needed for metering
Chignik, Chignik
Lake, Chignik Lagoon
Peninsula Medium Previously studied, interest remains in connecting three communities via
intertie to take advantage of renewable power
Manokotak, Twin
Hills
Togiak Bay Medium Neither community reported line loss in 2014; significant savings may be
available but requires complete reporting
Manokotak Togiak Bay Long Interest in intertie to Dillingham
Togiak, Twin Hills Togiak Bay Long Interest in intertie connecting Twin Hills and Togiak
Energy Efficiency & Conservation
Naknek Kvichak Bay Short Increase EE of school buildings is top priority, working on a proposal for
funding, Additional weatherization
Pilot Point Kvichak Bay Short More weatherization needed; unsure if best to tear down or weatherize
dilapidated homes
South Naknek Kvichak Bay Short Weatherization and energy efficiency
Igiugig Lakes Short ANTHC Rural Energy Initiative has been funded to conduct an energy audit for
the sanitation system; complete and implement recommendations; more
weatherization in homes in village
Iliamna Lakes Short New community building that is energy efficient
Newhalen Lakes Short Increase energy efficiency by remodeling school and school gym
Aleknagik Nushagak Bay Medium Increase use of weatherization and EE programs; incorporate EE into facility
design
Dillingham Nushagak Bay Short/Medium Increase education & awareness on EE and building energy use; improve EE of
homes, businesses and public buildings, promote energy conservation in
heating, electricity, & transportation
Chignik Peninsula Short New round of weatherization
Chignik Lagoon Peninsula Short Commercial/community building weatherization, secure funding
Chignik Lake Peninsula Short Additional energy efficiency measures in homes & buildings
Perryville Peninsula Short Weatherization needed in older homes
Water and Sewer
Nondalton Lakes Short Water system – half replaced in project with ANTHC but remaining old system
has serious leaks (losing up to 70,000 gallons of water per day); need funds to
finish water system upgrade
Aleknagik Nushagak Bay Medium Piped septic system needs upgrade, 27 years old and does not connect to all
homes in community
Koliganek Nushagak
River
Short Need an upgraded water & sewer system. There are many leaks and there are
homes that don’t have any water or sewer; water quality is being monitored
for 2nd year
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 61
Community/Utility Subregion Timeframe Priority
New Stuyahok Nushagak
River
Medium Water/sewer lines need upgrading
Chignik Peninsula Short Water reservoir is falling apart, expected fix in April 2015; Water/sewer Leaks -
pipes need to be updated
Chignik Lake Peninsula Short/Medium Water and sanitation system upgrade
Manokotak Togiak Bay Medium Water/Sewer pipes near the end of their useful life
Togiak Togiak Bay Medium Water and sewer lines within township were put in 1974
Local Energy Generation
Biomass
Geothermal
NEA Kvichak Bay Medium Conduct site tests to determine resource potential
Port Heiden Kvichak Bay Medium Continue geothermal project pre-feasibility study, need more temperature
monitor wells
Chignik Lagoon,
Chignik Lake
Peninsula Medium Investigate geothermal potential and/or ground source heat pumps
Perryville Peninsula Medium Expand buildings to which ground source heating is available
Hydro
Port Heiden Kvichak Bay Medium Conduct new study on hydro potential
Chignik Lake Peninsula Medium Explore hydro possibilities
Togiak Togiak Bay Medium Explore options for small hydro
Hydrokinetic
Igiugig Lakes Medium Monitor hydrokinetic turbine; if successful expand use
Natural Gas
Chignik, Chignik
Lake, Chignik Lagoon
Peninsula Long Interest in natural gas drilling in North Aleutian sedimentary basin
Solar
Igiugig Lakes Short More solar for residences and community buildings
Kokahnok Lakes Short More solar for residences and community buildings
Pedro Bay Lakes Short Expand use of solar thermal
Port Alsworth Lakes Short Add solar arrays to residences and public buildings
Aleknagik Nushagak Bay Short Add solar PV arrays to provide electricity for landfill or laundry facility
Dillingham Nushagak Bay Short Add solar arrays on residential and public buildings
Chignik Lake Peninsula Short Install solar PV arrays on residences and community buildings
Twin Hills Togiak Bay Short Add solar arrays to homes and community buildings
Wind
South Naknek Kvichak Bay Medium Investigate wind power
Aleknagik Nushagak Bay Medium Interest in installing anemometer to collect wind data, there needs to be a
plan in place given the terrain
Chignik Lagoon Peninsula Short Investigate wind power to supplement hydro and reduce diesel use; new sites
available due to land clearing for transmission and access road to hydro facility
Chignik Lake Peninsula Short Met tower removed in 2011, interested in exploring wind potential at other
sites
Manokotak Togiak Bay Short Community interested in new wind study
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 62
Community/Utility Subregion Timeframe Priority
Transportation
Iliamna, Nondalton Lakes Medium Bridge between Iliamna and Nondalton; Dock/Barge landing & staging area in
Iliamna
Levelock Lakes Medium Need new dock, current is being affected by erosion
Pedro Bay Lakes Medium Airport extension to enable larger shipments of fuel
Port Alsworth Lakes Medium Public airstrip would reduce freight/fuel costs
Ekwok, New
Stuyahok
Nushagak
River
Medium Road needed between Ekwok and New Stuyahok
Koliganek Nushagak
River Medium Low water levels make barging in fuel increasingly difficult, now considering
flying in fuel
New Stuyahok Nushagak
River
Medium River used for fuel transport to New Stuyahok has low water, it is easier to
bring fuel via barge to Ekwok.
Chignik Lagoon Peninsula Medium Airport lighting/runway expansion
Manokotak Togiak Bay Medium Access road to Dillingham
Twin Hillls Togiak Bay Medium Low water on river making it increasingly difficult to barge in fuel; Road pads
are on tundra and moss at risk of serious deterioration
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | 63
6 | C OMMUNITY AND E NERGY P ROFILES
This section contains profiles for communities in the Bristol Bay region. The first part contains
general information about the location, economy, historical and cultural resources, planning,
demographics, contacts and infrastructure in each community. It provides a broad overview of
community size, location and resources to give context to the energy profile.
The second part of each profile is the energy profile, which provides an overview of energy
production and distribution. It is intended to provide a snapshot of local energy conditions. The
energy profile also includes a partial inventory of non-residential buildings in the community and
its participation in state and federal energy efficiency programs.
The data sources used to compile the profiles are shown in Appendix F. Though based on the
latest available data from state and federal sources, we know that not all information is accurate
due to sampling and reporting errors. To try to correct these inaccuracies, we emailed draft
versions of the Community and Energy Profile to contacts in each community in April through
July 2015 in preparation for subregional energy meetings and follow-up community interviews.
The profiles in this report include the revisions we received.
Community Profile: Aleknagik
Incorporation 2nd Class City (inc. 1973)
Location
Longitude ‐158.6178 Latitude 59.2731
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Dillingham Census Area
School District Southwest Region School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Aleknagik Sales (5%), Bed (9%) N/A
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
40.3 7 11,751
Year
Notes Future Plan Development
Community Plans Year
2005
Local Contacts Phone Fax
cityalekclerk@gmail.com 907‐842‐5953 907‐842‐2107
aleknagiktraditional@yahoo.com 907‐842‐2080 907‐842‐2081
907‐842‐2385 907‐842‐1662
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 221 219 (228)Percent of Residents Employed 58.1%
Median Age 29 22 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 44 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)75.8%
Median Household Income N/A $51,705 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)86.6%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?Yes
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 1,200'x25'2,030'x60' 1,250'x50'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
Public; Gravel/Dirt/Turf
Yes
Nushagak Electric Co‐op Diesel Dillingham
1.85 miles north of N. shore
No
City of Aleknagik
Aleknagik is located at the head of Wood River on the southeast
end of Lake Aleknagik, 16 miles northwest of Dillingham.
Aleknagik is a traditional Yup'ik Eskimo area, with historical
influences from the Seventh‐Day Adventists, Russian Orthodox,
and Moravians. Fishing and subsistence activities are practiced.
Subsistence & commercial fishing village. Summer fishing camps.
20 commercial fishing permits. 16 business licenses.
Energy efficiency for all buildings from design stage; more
weatherization for homes; install anemometer/interest in
community wind power; biomass pre‐feasibility study; Add solar PV
arrays to provide electricity for community buildings; include
energy in community planning
Community Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
Natural Hazard Plan
No
Email
Native Village of Aleknagik
Aleknagik Natives Limited
Well 14
Piped, Septic
Septic system ~27 y/o, upgrades/plant needed
Energy Profile: Aleknagik
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)18,956,000 Avg. Load (kW)174
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)387
Unit 1 N/A Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)15
Unit 2 Total (kWh/yr)18,956,000 Diesel Used (gals/yr)1,253,779
Unit 3
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
Powerhouse
Distribution Substation Complete 2015
Operators No. of Operators
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.17 Fuel Cost $0.24
Residential 989 5,389,830 5,450 Residential Rate $0.44 Non‐fuel Cost $0.19
Community 46 898,782 19,539 Commercial Rate Total Cost $0.44
Commercial 446 11,548,038
25,892 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 346,200 Diesel (1 gal)$3.85 $6.26 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge
Moody's Mar.44,700 By Air
City 11,000
Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Miss. Lodge 18,000
SW Reg. School 10,000
Notes
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Nushagak Electric Cooperative
4.1%
No
Outage History/Known Issues
Training/Certifications
Receives power from Dillingham. PCE includes both.
Potential Status
Medium
Projects
None
Low
Pending
Dillingham Area Wind/Hydro Assessment
Aleknagik feasibility/met tower
Low
Low
Low
Low
Competitive bidding from Dillingham vendors. Barge delivery.
Not Rated
Low
High CompleteEECBG
Investigating Wind Options
Hydro Not Feasible
30%
5%
64%
2%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
18
18.2
18.4
18.6
18.8
19
19.2
19.4
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (GWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Aleknagik
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
65 60 58% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
15.4% 6.8%
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality High 3‐star 914 120
Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
Utility 11‐12
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
ADF&G Bunk House 1 No
ADF&G Bunk House 2 No
ADF&G Shed No
Airport Storage 1981 336 No
Aleknagik K‐8 School 1982 12,426 Yes Yes
Chuck Hoyt Seasonal Cabin No
City Dock No
City Office 3,315 No
City Office 1982 3,300 No
Clinic 2007 2,562 No
Coho Cove LLC 1 No
Coho Cove LLC 2 No
Community Center 1972 1,730 No
Mark Smith Rental No
Mission Creek Lodge ‐ Steambath No
Mission Creek Lodge (Employee Housing)No
Mission Creek Lodge Bldg. 1 No
Mission Creek Lodge Bldg. 2 No
Moody's Marina No
Moravian Church No
Municipal North Shore City Hall No
Municipal North Shore Community Center/Office No
Municipal North Shore Maint. Bldg.1982 2,300 No
Municipal South Shore Maint. Bldg 1982 2,250 No
Municipal Warm Storage Facility 2007 950 No
Orthodox Church No
1 3 7 4
27
44
25
14
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
12%0%
88%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Energy Profile: Aleknagik
Non‐residential Building Inventory (continued)
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
School Garage No
School House Inn No
School House Inn B&B No
School Pumphouse No
School Storage 1 1958 192 No
School Storage 2 1995 293 No
Silver Finn No
South Shore City Shop 2 2,251 No
South Shore Office Bldg. 1 1999 No
South Shore Office Bldg. 2 1988 No
Traditional Council Bldg.No
Wood River Escape (Seasonal)No
W‐T State Park Garage No
W‐T State Park House No
Yutanna Barge No
Community Profile: Chignik Bay
Incorporation 2nd Class City
Location
Longitude ‐158.4022 Latitude 56.2953
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Cirniq ("big wind") None
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
38.4° 7 N/A
Year
Notes Expired
Community Plans Year
2006
Notes Phone Fax
907‐749‐2280 907‐749‐2300
907‐749‐2445 907‐749‐2423
907‐842‐5257 907‐842‐5932
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 79 91 Percent of Residents Employed 69.1%
Median Age 37 45.3 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 3 2.22 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)59.0%
Median Household Income N/A $97,500 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)52.8%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?No Location
Water/Wastewater System City of Chignik Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 2600'x60'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?Yes
Notes
No
State owned; gravel
Yes
City of Chignik Diesel
Chignik
Piped 38
Piped
Dam for reservoir leaks; needs upgrade Yes
City of Chignik
Chignik Bay Tribal Council cbaytc@aol.com
Bristol Bay Native Assoc. Inc.
Email
Located on Anchorage Bay on the south shore of the Alaska
Peninsula. It lies 450 miles southwest of Anchorage and 260
miles southwest of Kodiak.
A village called "Kalwak" was originally located here; it was
destroyed during the Russian fur boom in the late 1700s. Chignik
was established in the late 1800s as a fishing village and cannery.
Coal mining occurred from 1899 to 1915. Today, two of the
historical canneries are still in operation. The community is
presently a mixture of non‐Natives and Alutiiq. Subsistence on fish
and caribou is important to residents' livelihoods.
Fishing is the primary industry. Local government,
education/health services, and manufacturing are large
employers.
Secure funds for design and construction of Indian Creek Hydro;
upgrade/repair on distribution system; new round of
weatherization; Water reservoir & distribution system need
significant repairs; Additional housing needed; street light &
airport lighting upgrade to LEDs; new dock construction
Chignik Bay Community Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
Natural Hazard Plan
No
Energy Profile: Chignik Bay
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)845,836 Avg. Load (kW)62
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)138
Unit 1 John Deere Fair/12,527 230
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/ga 14
Unit 2 John Deere Good/10,934 230
Total (kWh/yr)845,836 Diesel Used (gals/y 62,113
Unit 3 John Deere Good/6,844 117
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse Low 2009 upgrade Complete
RPSU Distribution Med.
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
1
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.21 Fuel Cost $0.33
Residential 65 180,318 2,774 Residential Rate $0.55 Non‐fuel Cost $0.17
Community 10 97,040 9,704 Commercial Rate $0.55 Total Cost $0.50
Commercial 57 453,736
7,960 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 20,646 Diesel (1 gal)$3.90 $4.19 6‐13; 3‐15
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$220.24 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 2
City Heating Oil 96,000 By Air
City Diesel 32,000 Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
City (Trident uses)Diesel 32,000
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
City of Chignik
11.1%
Yes; Not in use
Training/Certifications
APPO, BFO, PPO, Clerk
Good
High cool. temp., pump fail., batt. explosion. Dist. Cond. damage.
Seniors do not pay for delivery.
High
Potential Status
Seeking funds for design
Projects
Not pursuing, focus on hydro
Chignik Hydroelectric Project
Low
Low
Pending
Met tower found high turbulence
Low
Low
Low
No, purchase through Trident which gets better price.
Not Rated
Low
High Both CompleteEECBG;VEEP
Barge delivery in May & Oct.
Delta West.
via Trident
24%13%
60%
3%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Chignik Bay
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
44 38 66% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
11.4% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Low N/A N/A N/A
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
City
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Adult Entertainment Bar No
Beauty & Barber Shop No
Boiler Building 480 No
Chignik Bay School 1995 30,000 No
City Office 4,189 No
City Shop 3,500 No
Clinic No
Community College No
Community Hall 2,301 No
Community. Maint. Shop No
Cultural Center No
Daycare No
EMS Bldg No
Firehall and Emergency Shelter 1,102 No
Grocery Store No
New Fire Dept.No
New Gym 1993 5,100 No
New Teen Center No
Old Generator Bldg 520 No
Old Water Pumphouse 120 No
Post Office No
Public Safety Bldg No
Regional High school Yes; Lights No
School Powerhouse 1988 1,746 No
School Powerhouse No
Senior Center No
Small Boat Motor Service No
Sporting Goods & Tackle Shop No
Subregional Clinic 2009 4,456 No
Swimming Pool No
Teacher Housing Tri‐Plex 4,384 No
Tribal Council Office 1,591 No
0 1 6 00
62
8 5
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
2%0%
98%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Energy Profile: Chignik Bay
Non‐residential Building Inventory (continued)
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
VPSO Office 1,141 No
Washeteria No
Water Treatment Plant 600 No
Community Profile: Chignik Lagoon
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐158.5314 Latitude 56.31
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Nanwarnaq None
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7
Year
Notes
Community Plans Year
2004
2010
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐840‐2225 907‐840‐2270
907‐840‐2206
907‐842‐5257 907‐842‐5932
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 103 78 Percent of Residents Employed 37.1%
Median Age 27 36 Denali Commission Distressed Community Yes
Avg. Household Size 4 2.69 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)66.7%
Median Household Income N/A $138,542 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System Native Village of Chignik Lagoon Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 1810'x60'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
No
State owned; gravel‐dirt
Yes
Dock is makeshift, mostly used for personal boats.
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility Diesel
Chignik Lagoon
Piped 28 50,001‐100,000
gallons/dayPiped
Two operators, one more in training No
Chignik Lagoon Native Corp.
Native Village of Chignik Lagoon
Bristol Bay Native Assoc. Inc.
Email
Located on the south shore of the Alaska Peninsula, 450 miles
southwest of Anchorage. It lies 180 air miles south of King
Salmon, 8.5 miles west of Chignik, and 16 miles east of Chignik
Lake.
Chignik Lagoon took its name from its location and proximity to
Chignik. The people of this area have always been sea‐dependent,
living on otter, sea lion, porpoise, and whale. During the Russian
fur boom from 1767 to 1783, the sea otter population was
decimated. Chignik Lagoon has developed as a fishing village,
experiencing an influx of fishermen in the summer. The population
swells by 200 during fishing season.
Local government, education/health services, and information
are the only forms of employment. There are 22 fishing permits
and 11 business licenses.
Monitor & maintain Packer's Creek Hydro; Heat Recovery‐ electric
boilers with excess hydro; Investigate wind power (alternative sites
for met tower); Re‐size powerhouse, smaller more efficient
generator(s); Examine distribution/ transmission lines in poor
condition; geothermal/ground source heat pumps; Weatherization
on community buildings; additional housing; airport
lighting/runway extension
Community Plan
Chignik Lagoon Alt. Energy Action Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
Natural Hazard Plan
Energy Profile: Chignik Lagoon
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)424,463 Avg. Load (kW)57
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)128
Unit 1 John Deere Fair/33,435 148
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)11
Unit 2 John Deere Fair/69,442 160
Total (kWh/yr)424,463 Diesel Used (gals/yr)39,284
Unit 3 John Deere Fair/18,279 145
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse High
RPSU Distribution Med.
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
3 BFO, PPO, Clerk
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.26 Fuel Cost $0.44
Residential 49 224,901 4,590 Residential Rate $0.63 Non‐fuel Cost NR
Community 6 42,974 7,162 Commercial Rate Varies Total Cost $0.44
Commercial 6 138,196
23,033 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 14,887 Diesel (1 gal)$4.50 $4.85 6‐13, 3‐15
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)$5.00 3‐15
Propane (100#)
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 2 Crowley
Village Heating Oil 35,824 Good By Air
Village Gasoline 17,587 Good Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Village Diesel 22,327 Good
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
Training/Certifications
Projects
Chignik Lagoon Power Utility
Unacceptable
0.8%
Yes; School
Outages due to iced fuel lines, 1 engine replaced in 2014.
No delivery charge for Seniors.
High
Potential Status
Packers Creek Hydro Project ‐ 167 kW Operational in March 2015
Low
Low
Pending
Not feasible; exploring alt. sitesFeasibility
No
Not Rated
High
High
HR on diesel gensets to school; Electric boilers Operational; In progress(hydro)
School has own tank farm, serves generators.
Low
Low
Medium
53%
10%33%
4%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Chignik Lagoon
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
31 36 68% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
N/A N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Low N/A N/A N/A
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
CL Utility 19/HPS yes Replaced with 14 LEDs
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
ACS Phone Co.No
Chignik Bible Church No
Chignik Lagoon School 1988 12,878 No
Church No
Clinic 1985 1,302 No
Fire & Heavy Equip. Storage No
Fire Equip. Bldg No
GCI Phone Co.No
Incinerator No
IRA Office No
New Post Office No
New Water Pumphouse No
Old Tank Farm No
Old Village Post Office No
Pumphouse No
School Generator Building 1987 384 No
School Powerhouse 1987 240 No
Store No
Subsistence Bldg No
Teacher Housing No
Village Council Office No
Village Generator No
Village Water Source No
Youth Center No
00
9 4
22
29
3 0
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
0%0%
100%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Chignik Lake
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐158.2554 Latitude 56.2554
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Igyaraq None
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 9,612
Year
Notes
Community Plans Year
Historical Setting / Cultural Resource Phone Fax
907‐845‐2212 907‐845‐2217
907‐845‐2212 907‐845‐2217
907‐842‐5257 907‐842‐5932
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 145 73 Percent of Residents Employed 60.0%
Median Age 21 32.5 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 4 2.7 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)93.3%
Median Household Income N/A $66,667 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?No Location
Water/Wastewater System Lake and Peninsula Borough Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 2800'x60'
Dock/Port Barge Access?No Ferry Service?No
Notes
No
State owned; gravel
No
Chignik Lake Electric Utility, Inc. Diesel
Chignik Lake
Piped 26
Piped
Yes
Chignik Lake Village chigniklakecouncil@gmail.com
Chignik River Limited
Bristol Bay Native Assoc. Inc.
Email
Located on the south side of the Alaska Peninsula next to the
body of water of the same name. It lies 13 miles from Chignik,
265 miles southwest of Kodiak, and 474 miles southwest of
Anchorage.
The present population traces its roots from the Alutiiq near Illnik
and the old village of Kanatag near Becharof Lake. The community
was the winter residence of a single family in 1903. Other families
moved from surrounding communities in the early 1950s when a
school was built. Chignik Lake is a predominantly Alutiiq fishing
village.
Local government, education/health services, and construction
are main employers. There are 4 fishing permits and 2 business
licenses.
Energy efficiency measures, determine alternative sites for wind
study; Explore intertie opportunities with Chignik or Chignik
Lagoon; 2 new generators; Water and sanitation system upgrade;
Install solar PV arrays on residences and community buildings
Energy Priorities and Projects
Natural Hazard Plan
Energy Profile: Chignik Lake
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)386,321 Avg. Load (kW)29
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)65
Unit 1 John Deere Poor/10,635 147
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)10
Unit 2 John Deere Poor/3,085 125
Total (kWh/yr)386,321 Diesel Used (gals/yr)37,232
Unit 3 John Deere Poor/22,682 90
Unit 4 John Deere Fair/22,959 80
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse High
RPSU Distribution High
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
2
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.33 Fuel Cost $0.57
Residential 41 130,201 3,176 Residential Rate $0.85 Non‐fuel Cost $0.18
Community 9 41,035 4,559 Commercial Rate Total Cost $0.75
Commercial 5 164,075
32,815 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 13,954 Diesel (1 gal)$4.95 $6.01 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$220.24 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 2 Trident
Tribe Heating Oil 56,000 Fair By Air
Tribe Gasoline 15,000 Fair Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
Chignik Lake Electric Utility
9.6%
Yes; School
Training/Certifications
APPO, BFO, PPO, Clerk
Unacceptable
Numerous gen. shutdowns. No PCE data prior to 7‐11.
Free delivery for Elders.
Medium
Potential StatusProjects
Low
Low
Pending
Not feasible; exploring alt. sitesMet tower/Feasibility in 2011
Low
Low
Medium
Coordinate rates through Trident.
Not Rated
High
High
HR to School In progress
Street light upgrade Complete
Haul from Chignik Lagoon via boat.
37%
12%
47%
4%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Chignik Lake
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
36 22 58% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
11.1% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Medium N/A N/A N/A
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
Tribe 16 Yes 2014 Switched to LEDs
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Bed & Breakfast No
Boat Storage Area No
Chignik Lake Clinic 2007 2,583 No
Chignik Lake K‐12 1984 19,030 Yes Yes
Church 1985 1,920 No
Code Red Bldg.No
Community Bldg.No
DOT Grader Storage No
Equipment Storage 1964 800 No
Hotel No
IGAP Building 1980 1,200 No
Metal Shop 1988 2,500 No
Office No
Post Office, Store, & Dwelling No
Power Plant/Water Laundry No
Pump House 1980 12,000 No
Russian Orthodox Church No
School Generator Building 1985 800 No
School Shop 1984 1,440 No
State of AK Storage Building 1993 1,104 No
Store No
Sub Building 1998 2,500 No
Subsistence Bldg./Teen Center No
Teacher Housing No
Washeteria No
0003
16
28
0
11
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
42%
0%
58%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Clark's Point
Incorporation 2nd Class (inc. 1971)
Location
Longitude ‐158.5508 Latitude 58.8442
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Dillingham Census Area
School District N/A
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
N/A Sales (5%) N/A
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 N/A
Year
Notes No record
Community Plans Year
Local Contacts Phone Fax
cityofclarkspoint@gci.net 907‐236‐1221 907‐236‐1412
907‐278‐3602 907‐276‐3924
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 75 62 Percent of Residents Employed 50%
Median Age 31 45 Denali Commission Distressed Community Yes
Avg. Household Size 43 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)88.7
Median Household Income N/A $31,250 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (201x)66.7%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes (Inactive)
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?No Location
Water/Wastewater System Clark's Point Water System Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3,200'x60'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service? No
Notes
No
Public; Gravel
Yes
Clark's Point Electric Diesel No
Bluff above town.
Piped
No
Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Village of Clark's Point
City of Clark's Point
Clark's Point is located on a spit on the northeastern shore of
Nushagak Bay, 15 miles from Dillingham and 337 miles southwest
of Anchorage.
The community was named for John Clark, who was the manager
of the Alaska Commercial Company store at Nushagak. In 1929, a
major flood occurred. The village has been plagued by severe
erosion. A housing project in 1982 was constructed on high and
safe ground on the bluff. The community was founded on fishing
operations of non‐Native settlers, although presently it is
predominantly Yup'ik Eskimo. The population increases by about
300 in summer months due to the commercial fishery.
Subsistence fishing village. Seasonal fishing camps. 10 commercial
fishing permits. 0 business licenses.
Work with AEA on integration of small wind turbines to utility grid;
Investigate hydro and/or solar for more renewable power
generation
Natural Hazard Plan
No
Energy Priorities and Projects
Email
Energy Profile: Clark's Point
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr) Avg. Load (kW)53
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr) Peak Load (kW)117
Unit 1 Caterpillar Fair/62,524 113
Hydro (kWh/yr) Efficiency (kWh/gal)
Unit 2 Caterpillar Fair/25,431 250
Total (kWh/yr) Diesel Used (gals/yr)
Unit 3 Caterpillar Fair/45,551 113
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse In Progress
RPSU Distribution In Progress
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
2
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE Fuel Cost
Residential Residential Rate Non‐fuel Cost
Community Commercial Rate Total Cost
Commercial Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use Diesel (1 gal)$6.00 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge
City Heating Oil 20,000 Good By Air
City Gasoline 16,000 Good Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
City of Clark's Point
Yes; Users Unknown
Training/Certifications
BFO, Clerk, PPO
Acceptable
One outage due to blown transformer.
Low
Potential StatusProjects
Low
High
Pending
Installing7 residential turbines
Low
Low
Low
Not Rated
Low
High Both Complete
Delivery by barge.
1) EECBG 2) Streetlight Replacement
0%
0%0%
0%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Clark's Point
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
20 24 45% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
25.0% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Low N/A N/A N/A
Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
City of CP 8/HPS Yes 2012 Replaced with LEDs
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Carpenter Shop No
Catholic Church No
City Office 419 No
Clinic 2006 1,604 No
Cold Storage No
Commercial Steakhouse No
Fisherman Bunkhouse No
Fishery Connexes No
Generator Shed No
Laundromat No
Maint. Shop 880 No
Mechanic Bunkhouse No
Mechanist Generator/Storage No
Office No
Old Bunkhouse No
Old Mess Hall No
Old Movie Hall No
Old Post Office No
Powerhouse 616 No
Rental House No
Saguyak Inc. Bldg.No
School No
School 1985 9,676 No
School Fuel Pumphouse 1985 64 No
School Generator Bldg 1988 365 No
School Storage Bldg 1997 265 No
State Storage Bldg 1 No
State Storage Bldg 2 No
Storage/Bunk No
Store No
Trident Water Pumphouse No
USPO No
2 3 0
7 9
18
2 5
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
0%0%
100%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Energy Profile: Clark's Point
Non‐residential Building Inventory (continued)
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Village Council Camp No
Village Council Clinic & Center No
Village Council Generator House No
Village Council Office 1 No
Village Council Office 2 No
Watchman House No
Water & Sewer Plant 600 No
Water Station No
Way Station No
SRE Bldg 2 West (Heated) 1,250 Yes
Community Profile: Dillingham
Incorporation 1st class (inc. 1963)
Location
Longitude ‐158.4575 Latitude 59.0397
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Dillingham Census Area
School District Dillingham City School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Sales (6%), Bed (10%), Alchl (10%), Gaming (6%), prop. tax $2,540
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
7 11,306
Year
Notes Expired
Community Plans Year
2010
Local Contacts Phone Fax
cityclerk@dillinghamak.us 907‐842‐5212 907‐842‐2060
dorothy@curyungtribe.com 907‐842‐2384 907‐842‐4510
inunn@choggiung.com 907‐842‐3511 907‐842‐3512
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 2466 2329 Percent of Residents Employed 68.3%
Median Age 33 34 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 33 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)59.2%
Median Household Income N/A $69,792 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)37.4%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 2 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System City of Dillingham Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 6,400'x150'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
No
Public; Asphalt
Yes
Nushagak Cooperative Diesel Aleknagnik
3.75 miles NW of airport.
Piped 855 100,001‐500,000
gallons/dayPiped
1/2 community have on‐site W/S No
Curyung Tribal Council
Choggiung Ltd.
City of Dillingham
Northern end of Nushagak Bay in northern Bristol Bay, at the
confluence of the Wood and Nushagak Rivers.
The area around Dillingham was inhabited by both Eskimos and
Athabascans and became a trade center when Russians erected
the Alexandrovski Redoubt Post in 1818. The town was named
after U.S. Senator Paul Dillingham in 1904, who had toured Alaska
extensively with his Senate subcommittee during 1903. The city
was incorporated in 1963 as a 2nd class city. Dillingham is now a
1st class city with highly mixed population of non‐Natives and
Natives.
Subsistence. Major fishing, transportation, and public service hub
for the Bristol Bay area. 229 commercial fishing permit holders. 248
AK business licenses.
Energy efficiency (EE) in buildings, homes, and transportation; EE
awarness & education; Explore the feasibility of developing
renewable sources of energy; Explore the feasibility of distributed
energy systems; Expand heat recovery system
Comprehensive Plan
Natural Hazard Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
Email
Energy Profile: Dillingham
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)18,956,000 Avg. Load (kW)1,937
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)4,305
Unit 1 Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)15
Unit 2 Total (kWh/yr)18,956,000 Diesel Used (gals/yr)1,253,779
Unit 3
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
Powerhouse
Distribution Substation Complete 2015
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
6
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.17 Fuel Cost $0.24
Residential 989 5,389,830 5,450 Residential Rate $0.44 Non‐fuel Cost $0.19
Community 46 898,782 19,539 Commercial Rate Total Cost $0.44
Commercial 446 11,548,038
25,892 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 346,200 Diesel (1 gal)$3.85 $5.86 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)$6.80 4‐13
Propane (100#)$147.62 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge
Delta West.44,000 By Air
Peter Pan Seaf.Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Nushagak Elec.1,850,000
Bristol Fuels Notes
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Nushagak Electric Cooperative
4.1%
Yes
Training/Certifications
Clerk, BFO
7 generators, 5 replaced since 2005
Produces for Aleknagik. PCE includes both.
Low
Potential Status
Hydro Not Feasible
Projects
Dillingham Area Wind/Hydro Assessment
Medium
Medium
Pending
Not pursuingDillingham Area Wind/Hydro Assessment
Private use & BB Campus & USFW
Low
Low
Low
Not Rated
High
High
Operating, Expansion PossibleHR to schools, court, DOT, utility buildings
CompleteEECBG
Vendors: Bristol Alliance Fuels, Delta, Vitus
30%
5%
64%
2%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
18
18.2
18.4
18.6
18.8
19
19.2
19.4
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (GWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Dillingham
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
773 264 51% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
7.5% 10.0%
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality High 3‐star 1,597 124
Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Admin. Bldg 1939 11,100 No
Admin. Offices, MS & HS 75,578 Yes
Admin/Classroom Bldg 12,525 Yes
AK DOT & Public Fac.No
AKDF&G No
Alascom No
ARFF Bldg 7,042 Yes
Bahai Church No
Ball Bros. Inc. Bldg. No
Big Foot Retail No
Boat Storage No
Bristol Inn No
City Dock Bldg.No
City Hall 7,515 No
Commercial Company Bldg.No
Court Bldg.No
Dillingham Health Center 1,296 Yes
Dillingham Post Office Yes
Dillingham RTH Unit Yes
Electric Coop.No
Elementary School 1990 29,659 Yes
Fire Hall No
Garage No
George/Joann Nelson Commercial Rental No
Hotel No
Icicle Seafoods No
Jim B. Storage No
Kallstrom Camp No
Kanakanak Hospital 125,996 No
Kanquiqutaq Bldg.No
L&M Supply No
Library 4,722 No
Maintenance Shop 4,800 Yes
8 35 45 76
234
452
100 92
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
18%0%
82%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Energy Profile: Dillingham
Non‐residential Building Inventory (continued)
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Medical Office No
Middle/High School 1990 75,578 Yes
Morovian Church No
N&N Market No
Office Bldg.No
Peter Pan Seafoods Bldg.No
PHS Quonset Bldg.No
Police Dept.
Public Safety Dept.7,200 No
School ATCO Trailer 1980 960 No
School Dist. Office 1984 4,598 No
School Shop 1980 8,500 No
School Storage 1980 1,600 No
Schroeder Garage No
Sea Inn No
Senior Center 7,500 No
Shop 1,200 Yes
Smith's Duplex 720 Yes
South Shore House 720 Yes
SW Region School No
Territorial School 1990 11,375 Yes
University of Alaska Bldg.No
Village Corp. Office No
Ward Bldg.No
Warm Sand Storage 2,800 Yes
Warm Storage (Heated)3,000 Yes
Water Treatment Plant No
Wells Fargo No
Wren Aircraft No
Youth Center No
Community Profile: Egegik
Incorporation 2nd Class City (inc. 1995)
Location
Longitude ‐157.3758 Latitude 58.2156
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Egegik ("Throat") Raw Fish (3% + 2% Bor.), Bed (6%) Guide Tax ($3/p/d)$12,109
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 N/A
Year
Notes Expired
Community Plans Year
2012
Local Contacts Phone Fax
cityofegegik@starband.net 907‐233‐2400 907‐233‐2231
907‐233‐2211 907‐233‐2312
907‐561‐4777 907‐561‐4778
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 116 109 Percent of Residents Employed 67.7%
Median Age 36 49 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 33 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)39.5%
Median Household Income N/A $77,917 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)42.2%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?No Location
Water/Wastewater System City of Egegik Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 1,500'x75 5,600'x100
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
No
Public & Private; Gravel
Yes
City of Egegik Diesel No
15,000 ft. SE of community
Well 50,001‐100,000
gallons/day
Yes
Egegik Village
Becharof Corporation
City of Egegik
Located on the south bank of the Egegik River, near base of
Aleutian Chain. 100 miles southeast of Dillingham and 326 miles
southwest of Anchorage by air.
The village was reported by Russians as a fish camp called "Igagik"
(meaning "throat") in 1876. Local people would travel each year
from Kanatak on the gulf coast through a portage pass to Becharof
Lake and then hike or kayak on to the Egegik Bay area for summer
fish camp. In 1895, an Alaska Packers Association salmon saltery
was established at the mouth of Egegik River, and a town
developed around the former fish camp. Egegik incorporated as a
second‐class city in 1995.
Major salmon production port. Twelve commercial fishing permit
holders. Four business licenses.
Determine wind resource & develop if feasible Community Action Plan
Natural Hazard Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
Email
Energy Profile: Egegik
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)650,903 Avg. Load (kW)69
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)153
Unit 1 Mitsubishi Good/6,322 200
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)12
Unit 2 John Deere Good/7,659 180
Total (kWh/yr)650,903 Diesel Used (gals/yr)55,836
Unit 3
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse Low 2013 Upgrade Complete
RPSU Distribution In Progress
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
3
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.33 Fuel Cost $0.44
Residential 74 146,389 1,978 Residential Rate $0.86 Non‐fuel Cost $0.19
Community 17 117,375 6,904 Commercial Rate Total Cost $0.63
Commercial 16 321,001
20,063 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 17,885 Diesel (1 gal)$4.59 $4.95 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$308.81 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 2 Crowley
City Heating, #1, #2 100,000 Good By Air
Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
City of Egegik
7.4%
Yes; School & Community Center
Training/Certifications
APPO, PPO
Good
None
Low
Potential StatusProjects
High
Low
Pending
Egegik Wind Feasibility Study Met tower installed, In Progress
Low
Low
Low
None
Not Rated
Low
High
OperationalHR to school and community center
In progressVEEP ‐ LPSD
Delivery by barge in Spring & Fall. No bid.
24%
19%
53%
3%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Egegik
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
15 261 73% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
N/A N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Low N/A N/A N/A
Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
City yes
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Church (Baptist)No
City Hall/Office 2,500 No
City Shop/Maint. Building 4,000 No
City Warehouse 1994 1,104 No
Clinic 2003 2,497 No
Egegik K‐12 School 1962 9,651 Yes Yes
Egegik School/Multi‐Purpose/Powerhouse 1971‐1997 7,182 Yes
Fisherman's Lodge 4,124 No
Incinerator Bldg. 1,200 No
Post Office No
Power Plant No
School Gym 1997 3,600 No
Store No
Village Council No
Water Plant 2,160 No
Replaced with 80W LEDs
0 10 25 10
48
113
69
1
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
0%0%
100%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Ekwok
Incorporation 2nd Class City
Location
Longitude ‐157.4753 Latitude 59.3497
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Dillingham Census Area
School District Southwest Region School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Iquaq ("end of the bluff") None
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7
Year
Notes
Energy Priorities and Projects Community Plans Year
2005
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐464‐3336 907‐464‐3378
907‐464‐3311 907‐464‐3328
907‐278‐3602 907‐276‐3924
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 130 115 Percent of Residents Employed 67.9%
Median Age 32 27.3 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 4 3.11 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)90.8%
Median Household Income N/A $31,667 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)64.2%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?No Location
Water/Wastewater System N/A Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3319'x75'
Dock/Port Barge Access? Ferry Service?
Notes
Email
Ekwok is located along the Nushagak River, 43 miles northeast of
Dillingham and 285 miles southwest of Anchorage.
The oldest continuously‐occupied Yup'ik Eskimo village on the
river. During the 1800s, the settlement was used in the spring and
summer as a fish camp and in the fall as a base for berry picking.
Many of the earliest homes in Ekwok were located in a low flat
area near the riverbank. After a severe flood in the early 1960s,
villagers relocated to the current location on higher ground.
Local government, education/health services, and financial
activities are the main employers. There are 3 commercial fishing
permits and 9 business licenses.
Natural Hazard Plan
Intertie with New Stuyahok; Road between Ekwok & New
Stuyahok; Alternative method fuel delivey due to low river level
Ekwok Community Comprehensive Plan
Ekwok Natives Limited
City of Ekwok clark25crystalclaire@yahoo.com
Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative ‐ AVEC Diesel No
Ekwok
Yes
No
State owned; gravel
No
Energy Profile: Ekwok
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)532,671 Avg. Load (kW)63
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)127
Unit 1 Perkins Fair/1,322 70
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)11
Unit 2 Perkins Fair/2,657 124
Total (kWh/yr)532,671 Diesel Used (gals/yr)46,990
Unit 3 John Deere Fair/7,173 220
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse Low
RPSU Distribution Medium Intertie
Operators No. of Operators
2
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.21 Fuel Cost $0.43
Residential 52 208,445 4,009 Residential Rate $0.68 Non‐fuel Cost $0.23
Community 5 39,258 7,852 Commercial Rate Total Cost $0.67
Commercial 22 220,515
10,023 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 31,466 Diesel (1 gal)$4.26 $6.75 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)
Wood (1 cord)$300 to $350
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 2 Delta; Vitus
City Heating Oil 20,000 Good By Air
City Gasoline 20,000 Good Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
None since AVEC started operation
1) VEEP 2) Street light retrofit 3) ANTHC Sanitation EE Audit
SWR School Dist.: Comp. bid (fixed) w/ W. Delta.
AVEC
6.2%
No
Outage History/Known Issues
Training/Certifications
APPO, BFO, PPO, Clerk
Good
Low
Potential
AVEC: Comp. bid (fixed) w/ Vitus Marine.
No
StatusProjects
Low
High
Pending
Low
None
Not Rated
Low
High 1&2) Complete 3) Funded
Low
Low
42%
8%
44%
6%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Ekwok
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
52 16 58% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
17.3% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Low N/A N/A N/A
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
City Office Bldg No
City Shop No
Clinic 2011 1,636 No
Clinic (Old)No
Country Time Store No
Ekwok K‐12 School 15,795 Yes
ENL Bldg.No
Fuel Tank Farm No
Green Chapel No
Maaluq Lodge No
R. Orthodox Church No
School Gen. Bldg. 1932 720 No
SRE Bldg (Heated) 1,200 Yes
Storage Bldg (Heated)No
Village Council No
William Nelson School 1979 9,644 No
0 6 0 3
29
8
16
6
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
0%0%
100%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Igiugig
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐155.8947 Latitude 59.3278
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
ig ee uh' gig ("like a throat that swallows water" ) None $0.00
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 11,306
Year
Notes
Energy Priorities and Projects Community Plans Year
2010
2012
2009
Energy Priorities and Projects Phone Fax
907‐533‐3211 907‐533‐3217
907‐278‐3602 907‐276‐3924
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 53 50 (64)Percent of Residents Employed 83%
Median Age 37 22 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 4 3.13 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)40%
Median Household Income N/A $14,423 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System Village Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3000'x75'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service? None
Notes
Email
Igiugig is located on the Alaska Peninsula on the south shore of
the Kvichak River, which flows from Iliamna Lake. It is 50 air miles
northeast of King Salmon and 48 miles southwest of Iliamna.
Kiatagmuit Eskimos originally lived on the north bank of the
Kvichak River in the village of Kaskanak and used Igiugig as a
summer fish camp. Today, about one‐third of residents can trace
their roots back to the Branch River village. A post office was
established in 1934 but was discontinued in 1954. Historically an
Eskimo village, the population is now primarily Alutiiq and depends
upon commercial fishing and a subsistence lifestyle. Sport fishing
attracts visitors during summer months.
Local government and construction are the main employers.
Thirteen business licenses. Four commercial fishing permits and
subsistence fishing sustain the community.
Pilot wind project, if proven will be expanded; Solar thermal for
homes; Hydrokinetic potential of Kvichak River; Energy efficiency
and conservation in village; new site for tank farm (eroding into
river); generator training; More solar for residences and
community buildings
Bristol Bay Regional Vision
Lake and Peninsula Borough Comp. Plan
Energy Plan
Natural Hazard Plan
Igiugig Village Corporation igiugig.vc@gmail.com
Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Igiugig Electric Utility Diesel No
Igiugig
Piped 16
Piped
Yes
No
State owned; gravel
Yes
Energy Profile: Igiugig
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)336,581 Avg. Load (kW)22
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)48
Unit 1 John Deere Good/3,263 67
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)11
Unit 2 John Deere Good/2,384 67
Total (kWh/yr)336,581 Diesel Used (gals/yr)29,439
Unit 3 John Deere Good/4,983 67
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse Low
RPSU Distribution Low
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
1
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.22 Fuel Cost $0.70
Residential 28 97,829 3,494 Residential Rate $0.81 Non‐fuel Cost $0.14
Community 12 69,551 5,796 Commercial Rate $0.91 Total Cost $0.84
Commercial 12 107,141
8,928 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 17,175 Diesel (1 gal)$6.57 $7.96 6‐13; 3‐15
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)
Wood (1 cord)$400
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 0
Village Heating Oil 73,800 By Air Year Round
Village Gasoline 22,400 Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
Residential Biomass Projects
L&P School Dist & Construction camp
Igiugig Electric Utility
13.3%
Yes; Pump House, Rec. Hall
Training/Certifications
APPO, BF Bus Train, BFO, PPO,
Utility Clerk
Good
Adding 2 generators to meet demand
Low
Low
Potential
6 ‐ 1.2 kW vertical axis wind turbines installed
Projects
Low
High
Status
3 functional
Low
Solar thermal on 3 buildings
Not Rated
Low
Medium
Pilot project, operating 2016Kvichak River ‐ 25 kW hydrokinetic system
OperationalDiesel Generator HR, expanding to water tank
FundedANTHC EE Audit
Comp. bid. All available vendors contacted for quotes.
Pending
Low
Operational
34%
24%
37%
6%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Igiugig
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
14 9 36% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
28.6% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Medium 4 star plus 1,209 92
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
2No plans to upgrade
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Aircraft Hanger & Council Office No
Airport/Tourism Facility 1998 Yes; Lights No
AKDF&G Bunkhouse No
Community Hall/EPA Office/Post Office/Store No
DOT&PF Storage Bldg No
Igiugig Boarding House B&B No
Kvichak Cabins B&B No
Lodge 1 No
Lodge 2 No
New Village Health Clinic 2011 1500 Yes; DOE No
Old Creek Lodge No
Old Village Health Clinic 1980 1100 No
Orthodox Church No
Power Plant No
School & Library No
School (New) 2008 9384 Yes
School Generator Bldg 1997 800 No
Sewage Lift Station No
Smokehouse No
Smokehouse & Fish Racks No
SRE Bldg 1,104 No
Storage Bldg 1994 1104 No
Teacher Housing No
Village Council Multipurpose Bldg 1970 2130 No
Washeteria/Pumphouse 1970 1400 No
003 4 7 6 5
11
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
71%
0%
29%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Iliamna
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐154.9061 Latitude 59.7547
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
ill ee am' nuh N/A
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
35.8° 7 11,130
Year
Notes No record
Energy Priorities and Projects Community Plans Year
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐571‐1246 907‐571‐1256
907‐842‐5257 907‐842‐5932
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 102 109 Percent of Residents Employed 68.99%
Median Age 32 29.9 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 3 2.79 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)58%
Median Household Income N/A $83,250 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System City Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 5086'x100'4800'x100' 2998'x400'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
Email
Iliamna is located on the northwest side of Iliamna Lake, 225
miles southwest of Anchorage. It is near the Lake Clark Park and
Preserve.
Prior to 1935, "Old Iliamna" was located near the mouth of the
Iliamna River, a traditional Athabascan village. Around 1935,
villagers moved to the present location, approximately 40 miles
from the old site. Iliamna's current size and character can be
attributed to the development of fishing and hunting lodges.
Iliamna has become a recreational and tourist attraction due to the
excellent fishing at Iliamna Lake. The population is mixed, with non‐
Natives, Tanaina Athabascans, and Alutiiq and Yup'ik Eskimos.
Local government, professional/business services, and
education/health services are main employers. Thirty‐two
business licenses and 15 fishing permits issued.
INNEC: Maintain year round capacity of Tazimina, increase river
intake; INNEC: Upgrade distribution infrastructure Newhalen to
Nondalton; Hook‐up additional electric boilers; bridge between
Iliamna & Nondalton; dock/barge landing; energy efficiency
measures in community buildings
Natural Hazard Plan
No
Village of Iliamna ivc@iliamnavc.org
Bristol Bay Native Assoc. Inc.
I‐N‐N Electric Cooperative Hydropower, diesel Yes, Iliamna‐Newhalen‐Nondalton
Iliamna
Hauled to disposal site
Septic plant not feasible due to bedrock. No
No
State owned; asphalt
Yes
Community land locked after October. Air access only.
Energy Profile: Iliamna
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)93,226 Avg. Load (kW)51
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)113
Unit 1 N/A Hydro (kWh/yr)4,006,061 Efficiency (kWh/gal)18
Unit 2 Total (kWh/yr)4,099,287 Diesel Used (gals/yr)5,123
Unit 3
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse
RPSU Distribution
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.33 Fuel Cost $0.01
Residential 215 810,980 3,772 Residential Rate $0.57 Non‐fuel Cost $0.22
Community 15 382,730 25,515 Commercial Rate None Total Cost $0.23
Commercial 105 2,017,376
19,213 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 543,936 Diesel (1 gal)$4.67 $6.42 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$151.43 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 1 IDC
IDC multiple
50,000 By Air Fall to Spring
Rain. K. Lodge 19,000 Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Gen. Store 11,855
Iliamna Lodge 10,900 Notes
Paul McDowell 7,000
Misc. Others 40,500
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
I‐N‐N Electric Coop, Inc
8.4%
Training/Certifications
PCE data includes Iliamna, Newhalen, & Nondalton.
High
Potential Status
Operational
Medium
Tazimina, 824 kW, Intertie
Projects
High
Pending
Low
Low
Low
None
Not Rated
High
High Complete
Electric boilers, 25kW‐residence, 35kW‐triplex
EECBG
Boilers operational/2 35kW
boilers for city building
22%
10%
54%
14%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Iliamna
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
25 29 40% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
N/A 3.7%
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Medium 3 star 1,061 150
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
None
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
10,000 G. Fuel Station No
2,000 G. Fuel Storage No
Air Taxi No
Airport Hotel Weathered Inn No
Baptist Church 4,000 No
BB Sports Fishing No
Clinic 1980 1,044 No
Council Office Bldg 1&2 3,600 No
Council Office Bldg 3 2,100 No
DOT Maint. & Fire Station No
Fisheries Research Instit.No
FlyFish AK Red Quill Lodge No
GC Sat. Dishes No
Gram's Café & B&B No
Iliaska Lodge No
INL Offices/Village Shop No
Maint. Shop 5,495 Yes
Post Office 3,500 No
Rainbow King Lodge No
Roadhouse B&B No
SRE/Office 5,495 Yes
Storage 1,920 Yes
Talarik Creek Lodge No
TelAK Tower No
Test Wells No
Trading Co. 5,000 No
Trading Co.No
Village Council & Comm. Bldg No
Warm Storage 480 No
0
14
2 3
13 14 15
4
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock 136%
0%
‐36%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: King Salmon
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐156.6614 Latitude 58.6883
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Bristol Bay Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Bed Tax (10% Bor.), Raw Fish (3% Bor.) N/A
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
35.2F 7 11,716
Year
10/6/2011
Notes Update required 10/6/2016
Community Plans Year
Local Contacts Phone Fax
King Salmon Tribe kstvc@starband.net 907‐246‐3553 907‐246‐3449
907‐278‐3602 907‐246‐6259
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 442 374 Percent of Residents Employed 65.4%
Median Age 38 46 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 33 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)27.81
Median Household Income N/A $90,313 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 2 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System USAF King Salmon Water Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 8,901'x150'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
Well 100,001‐500,000
gallons/dayPiped
No
No
Public; Asphalt/Gravel
Yes
Email
Naknek Electric Association Diesel Naknek, South Naknek
Between Naknek & town.
Bristol Bay Native Corporation
located on the north bank of the Naknek River on the Alaska
Peninsula. 15 miles upriver from Naknek and 284 miles southwest
of Anchorage.
Present‐day tribal members are descendants of a group that was
forced to relocate to King Salmon due to the eruption of Mount
Katmai, on the east coast of the peninsula. The Native population
is a mixture of Aleuts, Indians, and Eskimos. Although King Salmon
was not included in the 1972 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
(ANCSA), the King Salmon Tribe became a federally recognized
entity as of December 29, 2000.
Transportation hub for larger Bristol Bay area. 37 commercial
fishing permit holders. 105 active business licenses.
NEA: Investigate heat absorption for ice production in summer;
NEA: Stack heat recovery
Natural Hazard Plan
Yes
Energy Priorities and Projects
Energy Profile: King Salmon
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)20,231,754 Avg. Load (kW)416
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)924
Unit 1 N/A Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)16
Unit 2 Total (kWh/yr)20,231,754 Diesel Used (gals/yr)1,258,272
Unit 3
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse
RPSU Distribution
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.17 Fuel Cost $0.24
Residential 738 2,840,685 3,849 Residential Rate $0.59 Non‐fuel Cost $0.20
Community 40 1,234,998 30,875 Commercial Rate $0.59 Total Cost $0.44
Commercial 359 14,431,075
40,198 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 612,053 Diesel (1 gal)$3.61 $5.96 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)$5.70 4‐13
Propane (100#)$277.38 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge
By Air
Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status Notes
Generation & sales for Naknek, South Naknek, & King Salmon
Feeders fron NEA substation
Naknek Electric Association
5.5%
Training/Certifications
Low
Potential StatusProjects
Medium
Low
Pending
Low
Low
Low
Not Rated
Low
High
Fuel purchased from Worldwide in Naknek.
15%
6%
75%
3%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
18.5
19
19.5
20
20.5
21
21.5
22
22.5
23
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (GWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: King Salmon
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
161 164 43% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
6.2% 0.6%
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Medium 2‐star plus 1,688 140
Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
AC Comp. Store 1980 7,718 No
Airport Light Building No
Airport Terminal No
AK Fish & Game No
AK State Troopers No
ARFF/Maint. Bldg.1996 8,611 Yes
Becharof Refuge Admin. Building No
Borough Police Dept.1988 No
Bristol Bay Telephone No
Chain Storage Bldg.1973 No
Church No
Community Church & Parsonage No
District Central Office 1983 12,000 Yes
DOT & PF Building No
Electrical Storage Shed 1973 No
FAA Building No
Fitness Center No
Health Clinic 1994 1,098 No
King Salmon Public Safety (PS) Office Yes
Lake & Penn. Borough Admin. & School Dist. Bldg.No
Paug‐Vik Inc.No
Post Office No
Restaurants No
Sand Storage 1973 2,160 Yes
SAVEC Bldg No
School Storage Bldg.1984 1,400 No
United Pent. Church 1984 1,200 No
US Fish & Wildlife No
US Parks Service Housing No
US Parks Service Housing No
Village Council & Clinic No
Visitor Center No
White Storage Bldg. 1973 629 No
Yellow Storage 1973 No
0 5 28 6 31
121 119
15
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
16%0%
84%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Kokhanok
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐154.7551 Latitude 59.4416
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Qarr’unaq N/A
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
7 11,610
Year
Notes No record
Energy Priorities and Projects Community Plans Year
2004
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐282‐2202 907‐282‐2264
907‐278‐3602 907‐276‐3924
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 174 170 Percent of Residents Employed 72%
Median Age 30 27 Denali Commission Distressed Community Yes
Avg. Household Size 4 3.27 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)82%
Median Household Income N/A $18,906 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System Kokhanok Village Council Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3300'x75'
Dock/Port Barge Access? No Ferry Service? No
Notes
Email
Kokhanok is located on the south shore of Iliamna Lake, 22 miles
south of Iliamna and 88 miles northeast of King Salmon.
This fishing village was first listed in the U.S. Census in 1890 by A.B.
Schanz. The community was relocated to higher ground a few
years ago when the rising level of Iliamna Lake threatened several
community buildings. The village has a mixed Native population,
primarily Alutiiq and Yup'ik. Subsistence activities are the focal
point of the culture and lifestyle.
Local government, education/health services, and
professional/business services are main employers. Twelve
commercial fishing permits and eleven business licenses.
Re‐design & test wind system build up to medium or high
penetration; Expand GARN cordwood boiler system to heat
additional buildings; Add solar to buildings and residences; Power
lines need upgrading; need more homes
A Well Made basket: Kokhanok Com. Plan
Natural Hazard Plan
No
Kokhanok Village Council kokhanok_vc@yahoo.com
Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Kokhanok Village Council Diesel, Wind‐No
Kokhanok
Piped 52
Piped
Ageing pipes. 10‐15 house off system. Yes
No
State owned; gravel
No
Energy Profile: Kokhanok
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)406,000 Avg. Load (kW)43
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)31,928 Peak Load (kW)96
Unit 1 John Deere Good/14,993 60
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)10
Unit 2 John Deere Good/44,717 115
Total (kWh/yr)437,928 Diesel Used (gals/yr)39,466
Unit 3 John Deere Good/4,529 160
Unit 4 John Deere Good/4,137 117
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse Low New Gen., 2009 Complete
RPSU Distribution Med.
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
1
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.41 Fuel Cost $0.63
Residential 54 174,710 3,235 Residential Rate $0.90 Non‐fuel Cost $0.32
Community 9 52,497 5,833 Commercial Rate $0.90 Total Cost $0.95
Commercial 14 145,120
10,366 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 33,752 Diesel (1 gal)$6.63 $8.21 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$245.24 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)$400.00
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge
Village Diesel 120,000 Good By Air 2
Village Gasoline 75,000 Good Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
Good
Apx. 40 outs. last year, mostly due to wind integration issues.
Kokhanok Village Council
7.3%
Yes; School
Training/Certifications
OJT
Medium
Potential StatusProjects
None
High
High
Pending
Re‐designKokhanok High‐Pen. Wind Energy, 2 Turbines
OperationalGARN boiler heating 2 community buildings
Low
Low
Low
L&P School Dist. & Village Council
Not Rated
High
Medium
OperationalHR on diesel generator
Complete
Delivery by barge or plane in Aug. or Sept. Power purchase and
VEEP/BBHA Weatherization on 70% homes
43%
13%36%
8%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Kokhanok
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
48 17 92% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
18.8% 3.1%
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Medium 4 star 915 116
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Clinic 2007 2,583 No
Community Building 1950s 1,679 No
EPA Office 1957 759 No
Kokhanok School (2008) 1985 21,880 Yes
Old Clinic (VPSO housing/office and itinerant housing)No
Old Powerhouse (Electrical Storage)No
Old Pre‐School (Shop/Library/Itinerant Housing) 1984 1,449 No
Pump house 361 No
School Duplex 1 1,053 No
School Duplex 2 2,152 No
School Duplex 3 1,396 No
School Generator Building 1985 800 No
SRE Bldg.Yes
Store No
Village Council Office 1982 1,173 No
0004
20 26
18
6
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
83%
0%17%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Koliganek
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐157.2844 Latitude 59.7286
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Dillingham Census Area
School District Southwest Region School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Qalirneq None
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 11,306
Year
Notes Future Plan Development
Energy Priorities and Projects Community Plans Year
2005
A Community Development Plan is in the works (3/2015)
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐596‐3440 907‐596‐3462
907‐596‐3434 907‐596‐3462
907‐278‐3602 907‐276‐3924
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 182 209 Percent of Residents Employed 67.1%
Median Age 26 21.3 Denali Commission Distressed Community Yes
Avg. Household Size 4 3.8 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)95.7%
Median Household Income N/A $66,250 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?No Location
Water/Wastewater System New Koliganek Village Council Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3000'x75'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Seasonal Ferry Service?No
Notes
Email
Located on the left bank of the Nushagak River and lies 65 miles
northeast of Dillingham. The village hopes to get its own zip
code, although it currently shares one with Dillingham.
It is an Eskimo village first listed in the 1880 Census as "Kalignak."
The name is local, recorded by the U.S. Geological Survey in 1930.
Since that time, the village has relocated two times. The first
location is about 12 miles upriver from the current location.
Koliganek is a Yup'ik Eskimo village with Russian Orthodox
practices. Subsistence activities are an important part of the
lifestyle.
Local government, education/health services, and trade,
transportation/utilities are the main employers. There are 19
commercial fishing permits and 7 business licenses.
Natural Hazard Plan
No
Finalize wind project design; update water & sewer system;
determine alternative fuel delivery method due to lower river
level; more homes needed
Koliganek Comprehensive Plan
Koliganek Natives Limited
New Koliganek Village Council newkgkvc@hotmail.com
Bristol Bay Native Corporation
New Koliganek Village Council Diesel
Koliganek
Piped 50
Piped & Septic
Yes
No
State owned; gravel
No
Koliganek is upgrading to a new approx. 5,000' runway
Energy Profile: Koliganek
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)649,836 Avg. Load (kW)59
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)132
Unit 1 John Deere Fair/29,411 220
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)11
Unit 2 John Deere Poor/16,892 200
Total (kWh/yr)649,836 Diesel Used (gals/yr)60,032
Unit 3
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse In Progress
RPSU Distribution In Progress
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
1
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.14 Fuel Cost $0.48
Residential 69 253,035 3,667 Residential Rate $0.50 Non‐fuel Cost Not Reported
Community 10 81,151 8,115 Commercial Rate $0.50 Total Cost $0.48
Commercial 20 227,721
11,386 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 14,935 Diesel (1 gal)$4.51 $7.00 ‐13; 8‐14; 3‐1
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)$6.75 3‐15
Propane (100#)$275 3‐15
Wood (1 cord)N/A
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 2 Vitus Marin.
Village Council Heating Oil 140,000 By Air
Village Council Gasoline 35,000 Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
Done
Acceptable
5‐6 per year.
New Koliganek Village Council
11.2%
Yes; Garage, Office, Clinic, New School
Training/Certifications
OJT
Low
Potential StatusProjects
Medium
High
Pending
Draft CDR complete, commence
after powerhouse upgrades
New Koliganek Wind Diesel & Heat Recovery
Low
Low
Low
Togiak Native Ltd.
Not Rated
High
High
OperationalDiesel Generator HR
Funded
Barge delivery in May/June & Aug. Sept. Competitive bid (fixed
ANTHC EE Audit
44%
14%
39%
3%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Koliganek
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
58 23 62% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
29.3% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Medium N/A N/A N/A
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
10 Partial Some with LEDs, USDA funding expected
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Airport Maint. Bldg.1995 No
Assembly of God Church
AT&T Facility/Council House No
Aviation Storage 576 No
Child Welfare Office (Old Clinic) 1,280 No
Church Parsonage No
Church Warehouse No
City Maintenance Shop 770 No
Clinic 2008 2,500 No
Comm. Bldg.No
Comm. Center No
Generator Building 1981 618 No
Koliganek Clinic 2007 2,583 No
Koliganek K‐12 School 4,705 Yes
Koliganek School 1959 11,332 Yes No
Lift Station No
M&H Variety Store 1980 1,920 No
Old Armory No
Police Station/VPSO 580 No
Power Plant No
Pumphouse No
R. Orthodox Church No
School Power Plant No
Storage Building #3 1996 251 No
Village Council Building 1,600 No
Warehouse No
7
003
17
24 24
6
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
0%0%
100%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Levelock
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐156.8567 Latitude 59.115
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Liivlek N/A
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 N/A
Year
Notes
Energy Priorities and Projects Community Plans Year
2000
2005
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐287‐3030 907‐287‐3032
907‐287‐3040 907‐287‐3032
907‐278‐3602 907‐276‐3924
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 122 69 Percent of Residents Employed 69%
Median Age 28 32.5 Denali Commission Distressed Community Yes
Avg. Household Size 3 2.56 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)85%
Median Household Income N/A $40,000 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3284'x60'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
Email
Located on the west bank of the Kvichak River, 10 miles inland
from Kvichak Bay. It lies 40 miles north of Naknek and 278 air
miles southwest of Anchorage. It is located near the Alagnak
Wild and Scenic River Corridor.
Early Russian explorers reported the presence of Levelock, which
they called "Kvichak." The smallpox epidemic of 1837 killed more
than half of the residents of the Bristol Bay region and left entire
villages abandoned. A measles epidemic hit the region in 1900. The
worldwide influenza epidemic in 1918‐19 again devastated area
villages. Levelock is a mixed Alutiiq and Yup'ik village. Commercial
fishing and subsistence activities are the focus of the community.
Local government, trade, transportation/utilities, and
professional/business services. Six commercial fishing permits
and eight business licenses.
Continue wind study & if feasible, develop; Expand heat recovery
to community and tribal buildings; Expand distribution system to
reach all residents; Investigate heat absorption for flash freezing;
Need new dock, current is being affected by erosion; build more
homes
Levelock Strategic Plan
Levelock Watershed Comm Planning Project
Natural Hazard Plan
Levelock Village levelock@gci.net
Levelock Natives Limited
Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Levelock Electric Cooperative, Inc. Diesel No
Levelock
Individual wells
Individual septic
Village operates pump truck No
No
State owned; gravel
Yes
Energy Profile: Levelock
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)466,860 Avg. Load (kW)37
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)83
Unit 1 John Deere Good/17,125 100
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)12
Unit 2 John Deere Good/6,470 67
Total (kWh/yr)466,860 Diesel Used (gals/yr)40,000
Unit 3 John Deere Good/4,636 67
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse Low Upgraded 2008
RPSU Distribution Low
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
2, + 1 on‐call
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.27 Fuel Cost $0.49
Residential 33 129,555 3,926 Residential Rate $0.70 Non‐fuel Cost $0.37
Community 7 44,111 6,302 Commercial Rate $0.95 Total Cost $0.86
Commercial 24 165,798
6,908 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 38,691 Diesel (1 gal)$3.96 $6.20 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$191.67 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 1 Delta W./Vitus
Village Heating Oil 120,000 Good By Air
Village Gasoline 18,000 Good Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
Acceptable
8 outages due to generator controls, has since been remedied. No
Pre‐paid meters installed
Levelock Electrical
19.0%
Yes; School
Training/Certifications
PPO, Lineman
Medium
Potential StatusProjects
None
Low
Low
Pending
Met tower installed in 2014Levelock Wind Reconnaissance Study
Low
Low
Low
None
Not Rated
Medium
High
OperationalHR to school
Delivery by barge each July.
Installing LED street lights
34%
12%44%
10%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Levelock
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
33 27 33% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
24.2% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Low N/A N/A N/A
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
Utility 22 Yes, partial Some LEDs, more swapped as can be afforded.
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Airport Equip. Storage 2008 336 No
Andrews Provisions Store
AT&T Alascom No
Baptist Church 1,200 No
Clinic 2009 1,679 No
Generator Bldg 1996 1,200 No
Levelock K‐12 1985 22,942 Yes
LNL Office/Hotel No
LNL Storage No
LNL Storage 2 No
Old Portable Classroom (Kitchen) 1970 2,160 No
Orthodox Church No
Post Office No
Rainbow Hall Rec. Center 2002 3,280 No
SRE Bldg. #2 (Heated) 1,200 Yes
State of AK Storage Bldg. 2 No
Village Council Office 1982 No
Village Council Storage No
0
8 6 0
8
34
0 6
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
0%0%
100%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Manokotak
Incorporation 2nd Class City
Location
Longitude ‐159.0583 Latitude 58.9814
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Dillingham Census Area
School District Southwest Region School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Manuquutaq None
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
33.8° 7 11,306
Year
Notes Future Plan Development
Community Plans Year
2005
2002
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐289‐2067 907‐289‐1235
907‐289‐1027 907‐289‐1082
907‐278‐3602 907‐276‐3924
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 399 442 Percent of Residents Employed 68.1%
Median Age 22 26.4 Denali Commission Distressed Community Yes
Avg. Household Size 5 3.65 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)95.7%
Median Household Income N/A $32,344 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)70.1%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System City of Manokotak Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3300'x75'
Dock/Port Barge Access?No Ferry Service?No
Notes
Email
Located 25 miles southwest of Dillingham on the Igushik River. It
lies 347 miles southwest of Anchorage.
Manokotak is one of the newer villages in the Bristol Bay region. It
became a permanent settlement in 1946‐47 with the consolidation
of the villages of Igushik and Tuklung. People also migrated from
Kulukak, Togiak, and Aleknagik. Igushik is now used as a summer
fish camp by many of the residents of Manokotak. Trapping has
been an attractive lure to the area, although it has declined since
the 1960s. Manokotak is a Yup'ik Eskimo village with a fishing,
trapping, and subsistence lifestyle.
Local government, trade transportation/utilities, and
construction are the main employers. There are 91 fishing
permits and 11 business licenses.
Continue with wind power development; Install heat recovery
system; interest in intertie to Dillingham; road access to
Dillingham; water/sewer system in need of repairs
Manokotak Comprehensive Plan
Manokotak Comm Plan Jan 2001‐May 2002
Natural Hazard Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
Manokotak Village kmo_villagecouncil@yahoo.com
City of Manokotak
Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Manokotak Power Company Diesel
Manokotak
Piped 121 N/A
Piped
W/S almost done. Pipes near end of useful life Yes
No
State owned; gravel
No
Energy Profile: Manokotak
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)1,056,361 Avg. Load (kW)128
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)285
Unit 1 John Deere Fair/23,063 260
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)9
Unit 2 John Deere Fair/29,048 260
Total (kWh/yr)1,056,361 Diesel Used (gals/yr)113,206
Unit 3 John Deere Fair/7,617 190
Unit 4 John Deere Fair/5,005 120
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse Medium New CAT, 2014 Complete
RPSU Distribution Medium
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
3
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.27 Fuel Cost $0.36
Residential 148 557,363 3,766 Residential Rate $0.55 Non‐fuel Cost $0.03
Community 5 85,052 17,010 Commercial Rate $0.57 Total Cost $0.40
Commercial 40 662,927
16,573 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 55,118 Diesel (1 gal)$4.26 $6.78 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)$7.00
Propane (100#)
Wood (1 cord)N/A
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 2 Crowley/Delta
SWR Schools 20,000 By Air
Manok. Nat. Ltd. 170,000
Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Power Co.21,400
Church 2,700 Notes
Trading Co.1,459
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Good
Monthly out. for oil change. Outs. in summer from low oil/fuel.
Manokotak Power Company
Not Reported
Yes; Shops
Training/Certifications
APPO
Low
Potential StatusProjects
None
Medium
Low
Pending
Feasibility complete; Integration
with diesel system uncertain
Manokotak Wind & Heat Feasibility
Low
Low
Low
Togiak Native Ltd. & SW Regional School Dist.
Not Rated
Low
Medium 1) Complete 2) Funded1)VEEP/Streetlight Retrofit 2) ANTHC Sanitation EE Audit
Barge delivery in Spring & Fall. Comp. bid (fixed price). Fuel tanks
need fencing and need to be sandblasted/repainted.
41%
6%
49%
4%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Manokotak
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
95 18 76% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
17.9% 3.3%
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality High 3 star plus 916 109
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
City & MNL 23/HPS Yes 20 LEDs in city
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Airport Waiting Room 2008 960 No
BBNA Head Start No
BBNA Youth, TCSW, & Health Families No
Central Water/ Sewer Plant 1967/68 780 No
City‐KMD Pump Station No
GCI‐Earth Station No
Housing Water/ Sewer Plant 1987 780 No
Manokotak K‐12 2001 39,200 Yes No
Manokotak School Buildings 1985‐2003 41,740 No
Manokotak Village Clinic 2007 2,583 No
Manuquutag Trading Co. 1996 No
MNL Gas Pumphouse No
MNL Powerplant 2001 No
Moravian Church No
Moravian Church Parsonage No
Natives Ltd. Office No
Natives Ltd. Shop No
Natives Ltd. Shop 2 No
New Fire Hall No
Nushagak Telephone Earth Station No
Old Condemned School No
Old Head Start No
Old High School No
Old SWRS Maint. Bldg No
Other 2,600 No
Pumphouse 1 VEEP 2002 336 No
USPS No
Village Council Office No
VPSO/Police Station No
Water Tank Valve House VEEP 96 No
002
20
32
45
7
18
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
87%0%
13%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Naknek
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐157.0139 Latitude 58.7283
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Bristol Bay Borough
School District Bristol Bay Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
N/A Bed (10% Bor.), Raw Fish (3% Bor.) N/A
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 11,716
Year
Notes
Community Plans Year
Local Contacts Phone Fax
Naknek Native Village nnvcpresident@gmail.com 907‐246‐4210 907‐246‐3563
907‐246‐4277 907‐246‐4419
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 678 554 Percent of Residents Employed 64.3%
Median Age 35 38 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 33 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)30.33%
Median Household Income $88,125 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 2 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System BBBSD Naknek Water System Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 1,950'x50'1,836'x45' 1,700'x60'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
No
Public/Private; Gravel
Yes
Naknek Electric Association Diesel King Salmon, South Naknek
Between King Salmon & town.
Piped 219 50,001‐100,0000
gallons/day
Email
Paug‐Vik Incorporated, Limited
Located on north bank of the Naknek River, at the northeastern
end of Bristol Bay. It is 297 miles southwest of Anchorage.
This region was first settled over 6,000 years ago by Yup'ik Eskimos
and Athabascan Indians. In 1821, the original Eskimo village of
"Naugeik" was noted by Capt. Lt. Vasiliev. By 1880, the village was
called Kinuyak. It was later spelled Naknek by the Russian Navy.
The first salmon cannery opened on the Naknek River in 1890. By
1900, there were approximately 12 canneries in Bristol Bay.
Naknek has developed over the years as a major fishery center.
Subsistence community. Large fishing related economy. 100
commercial fishing permit holders. 116 current business licenses.
NEA: Investigate heat absorption for ice production in summer;
NEA: Stack heat recovery; Increase energy efficiency of school
buildings; more affordable housing; more weatherization in homes
Natural Hazard Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
Energy Profile: Naknek
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)20,231,754 Avg. Load (kW)1,317
Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)2,927
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)16
Total (kWh/yr)20,231,754 Diesel Used (gals/yr)1,258,272
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse
RPSU Distribution
Outage History/Known Issues Very reliable, very few outages
Operators No. of Operators
1 Foreman PPO
5 Operators
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.17 Fuel Cost $0.24
Residential 738 2,840,685 3,849 Residential Rate $0.59 Non‐fuel Cost $0.20
Community 40 1,234,998 30,875 Commercial Rate $0.59 Total Cost $0.44
Commercial 359 14,431,075
40,198 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 612,053 Diesel (1 gal)$3.61 $5.96 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)$5.70 4‐13
Propane (100#)$257.38 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)N/A
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge
Naknek Elec. 1,660,000 By Air
Borough 485,000 Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Trident Seafood 31,000
AK Gen. Seafood 24,200
Notes
SW AK Constr. 6,000
Others 11,700
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
NEA Stack Heat to Power Project; HR to school
Fish processors with tanks not included
Naknek Electric Association
5.5%
Yes, BBB School District, Pool, 8 residences
Training/Certifications
3 temp. laborers in summer
Generation & sales for Naknek, South Naknek, & King Salmon
Power Plant
10 stationary generators, 2 mobile generators
Working on system upgrade plan
Low
Potential StatusProjects
None
Medium
Low
Pending
NEA not pursuing currently
Not Rated
High
High In progressVEEP ‐ BBBSD
Investigating; Operational
Low
Low
Low
Site testsNEA Geothermal Project
15%
6%
75%
3%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
18.5
19
19.5
20
20.5
21
21.5
22
22.5
23
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (GWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Naknek
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
234 209 62% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
3.8% 7.3%
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality High 3‐star 1,571 141
Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
216 Partial Working on retrofits as bulbs go out
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
BBB Fire Station No
Boys & Girls Club No
Bristol Bay Borough Offices No
Camai Comm. Health Center No
Christian Learning Center No
Church (LDS)No
Church (Orthodox)No
Clinic 1994 1,098 No
Comm. Bible Camp No
Dept. Transportation No
District Office Bldg. 1988 2,912 Yes
DOT Bldgs.No
Equipment Warm Storage 2,240 Yes
Equipment Warm Storage (South)1,104 Yes
Family Fish Plant 579 No
Hilltop Church No
Historical Orthodox Church No
K‐12 School 1982 90,200 Yes
KAKM Radio Station No
Living Water Fellowship Church No
Martin Monson Library No
Museum No
Naknek Electric Ass.No
Other 15,636 No
Post Office No
Public Works Bldg.No
Seafood Processor Bldg.No
Sewer Bldg.No
Soul Hanson Church No
Swimming Pool No
Telephone Bldg.No
Village Council Office / Clinic No
Well House No
13 19 18 24
69
156 126
18
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
12%0%
88%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Newhalen
Incorporation 2nd Class City
Location
Longitude ‐154.8972 Latitude 59.72
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Nuuriileng ("land of prosperity or abundance") N/A
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 11,130
Year
Notes
Community Plans Year
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐571‐1410 907‐571‐1537
907‐571‐1226 907‐571‐1540
907‐278‐3602 907‐276‐3924
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 160 190
Percent of Residents Employed 79.4%
Median Age 21 22.8
Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 5 3.8
Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)82.2%
Median Household Income N/A $58,125
Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)68.7%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class Permitted? Location
Water/Wastewater System City of Newhalen Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 5086'x100'4800'x100' 2998'x400'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
Email
Newhalen is located on the north shore of Iliamna Lake, at the
mouth of Newhalen River, 5 miles south of Iliamna and 320 miles
southwest of Anchorage.
The 1890 census listed the Eskimo village of "Noghelingamiut,"
meaning "people of Noghelin," at this location, with 16 residents.
The present name is an Anglicized version of the original. The
village was established in the late 1800s due to the bountiful fish
and game in the immediate area. Newhalen includes Yup'ik
Eskimos, Alutiiqs, and Athabascans. Most practice a subsistence
and fishing lifestyle.
Local government, professional/business services, and trade,
transportation/utilities are main employers. There are 11
commercial fishing permits and 7 business licenses.
INNEC: Maintain year round capacity of Tazimina, increase river
intake; INNEC: Upgrade distribution infrastructure Newhalen to
Nondalton; Hook‐up additional electric boilers; New lift
station/replacement; Energy efficiency ‐ Remodel school and
renovate school gym
Natural Hazard Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
Newhalen Village newhalentribal@yahoo.com
City of Newhalen cityofnewhalen@yahoo.com
Bristol Bay Native Corporation
I‐N‐N Electric Cooperative Hydropower Yes, Iliamna‐Newhalen‐
Piped 31
Piped, septic systems
Ageing system & plant. Yes
No
State owned; asphalt
No
Energy Profile: Newhalen
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)93,226 Avg. Load (kW)161
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)358
Unit 1 Marathon New 350
Hydro (kWh/yr)4,006,061 Efficiency (kWh/ga 18
Unit 2 Skania New 350
Total (kWh/yr)4,099,287 Diesel Used (gals/y 5,123
Unit 3 Kato New 350
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse Low Complete
RPSU Distribution Med.
Outage History/Known Issues:
Operators No. of Operators
1
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.33 Fuel Cost $0.01
Residential 215 810,980 3,772 Residential Rate$0.57 Non‐fuel Cost $0.22
Community 15 382,730 25,515 Commercial Rat None Total Cost $0.23
Commercial 105 2,017,376
19,213 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 543,936 Diesel (1 gal)$4.67 $6.68 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$157.38 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge IDC
City Heating Oil 3,000 Good By Air
INN Diesel 70,000 New Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
Acceptable
PCE data includes Iliamna, Newhalen, & Nondalton.
I‐N‐N Electric Coop, Inc
8.4%
Yes; City Office Bldg. & Fire Hall
Training/Certifications
Hydro, BFO, PPO
High
Potential Status
Operational
Projects
Tazimina, 824 kW, Intertie
Medium
High
Pending
Low
Low
Low
L&P School Dist.
Not Rated
High
High
OperationalHydro Electric Boilers, 150 kW to school
CompleteEECBG
City tanks not EPA compliant. LPSD agreement w/ INNEC to
22%
10%
54%
14%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Newhalen
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
50 11 58% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
22.0% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Medium N/A N/A N/A
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
I‐N‐NEC 20/HPS Yes 2011
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
AK State Trooper Bldg.No
City Council No
Clinic 1990 754 No
General Store No
INNEC Office Building 2013 2,700 BEES certified No
INNEC PowerPlant 1981 3,500 No
New Clinic 1995 1,440 No
Newhalen House No
Newhalen K‐12 No
Newhalen Tribal Council 1,260 No
Orthodox Church 1,053 No
Public Safety/Fire Hall 1980‐1995 28,692 Yes Yes
Pumphouse No
Teacher Housing 1 No
Teacher Housing 2 1,768 No
Teen Center No
Water plant No
Newhalen Tribe secured grant for retrofit; INN
owns & maintains
2 0 4 3
11
20 18
4
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
62%
0%
38%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: New Stuyahok
Incorporation 2nd Class City
Location
Longitude ‐157.3119 Latitude 59.4528
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Dillingham Census Area
School District Southwest Region School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Cetuyaraq ("going downriver place") None
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 11,306
Year
7/4/1905
Notes Update due 2017
Community Plans Year
2012
2005
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐693‐3173 907‐693‐3179
907‐693‐3173
907‐693‐3171 907‐693‐3153
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 471 510 Percent of Residents Employed 63.0%
Median Age 25 22.6 Denali Commission Distressed Community Yes
Avg. Household Size 5 4.47 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)93.7%
Median Household Income N/A $38,750 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)80.4%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System City of New Stuyahok Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3282'x95'
Dock/Port Barge Access?No Ferry Service?No
Notes
Email
Located on the Nushagak River, about 12 miles upriver from
Ekwok and 52 miles northeast of Dillingham. The village has been
constructed at two elevations ‐‐ one 25 feet above river level and
one about 40 feet above river level.
The present location is the third site that villagers can remember.
The village moved downriver to the Mulchatna area from the "Old
Village" in 1918. During the 1920s and 30s, the village was engaged
in herding reindeer. By 1942, the herd had dwindled to nothing,
the village had been subjected to flooding, site was too far inland
to receive barge service. In 1942, the village moved downriver
again to its present location. Yup'ik Eskimo village with Russian
Orthodox influences. Residents live a fishing and subsistence
lifestyle.
Local government, trade, transportation/utilities, and
education/health services are main employers. There are 20
commercial fishing permits and 16 business licenses.
Natural Hazard Plan
Yes
Continue with wind feasibility project; complete heat recovery
project; Additional work on fuel storage and transport planned,
seeking funds; Water/Sewer lines need upgrading; more homes
needed
City of New Stuyahok Hazard Mitigation Plan
New Stuyahok Comprehensive Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
New Stuyahok Village newstutribe@hotmail.com
New Stuyahok Traditional Council
City of New Stuyahok cityofnewstuyahok@hotmail.com
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative ‐ AVEC Diesel
New Stuyahok
Piped 101
Piped
2 operators. Sewer lines in old sections need repla No
No
State owned; gravel
No
Energy Profile: New Stuyahok
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)1,378,601 Avg. Load (kW)162
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)377
Unit 1 Cummins Fair/18,654 499
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)14
Unit 2 Detroit Diesel Fair/26,264 363
Total (kWh/yr)1,378,601 Diesel Used (gals/yr)101,469
Unit 3 Caterpillar Fair/39,342 457
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse In Progress
RPSU Distribution In Progress
Outage History/Known Issues: No
Operators No. of Operators
3
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.20 Fuel Cost $0.34
Residential 103 564,968 5,485 Residential Rate $0.63 Non‐fuel Cost $0.23
Community 11 120,616 10,965 Commercial Rate Total Cost $0.57
Commercial 41 641,257
15,640 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 32,127 Diesel (1 gal)$4.26 $6.77 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$242.14 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)Not sold, residents collect their own
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 2‐3 Delta W./Vitus
City Heating Oil 140,000 By Air
Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
Acceptable
Low
Potential StatusProjects
None
Medium
High
Pending
AVEC
1.4%
Yes; AVEC Tool Shack, Bunk House
Training/Certifications
BFO, PPO
Site located, CDR on hold until
wind resource proven
New Stuyahok Wind Feasibility Analysis
Low
Low
Low
None
Not Rated
High
High
ConstructionNew Stuyahok Heat Recovery
1) Complete 2) Funded
Comp. bidding. Droughts potentially limit barge delivery.
1) VEEP 2) ANTHC Sanitation EE Audit
42%
9%
47%
2%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: New Stuyahok
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
97 16 60% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
57.7% 19.1%
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality High 2 star plus 845 164
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
AVEC 16 Yes
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
AVEC Power plant No
Boys & Girls Club No
Church 1960 4,500 No
City Dump No
City Equip. Shed No
City Office No
Clinic No
FRC/Clinic 2010 5,314 No
Headstart 1998 2,000 No
High School No
Orthodox Church No
Other Bldgs. 11,567 No
P‐Store 1991 4,000 No
Public Safety Building No
Public Store No
School Gym No
School K‐12 2009 49,738 No
School Shed No
School Shed No
School Storage Bldg No
SRE Building 1 (Heated)1,200 Yes
Sunday School No
TANF No
Tribal Bldg No
Tribal Council 1990 2,500 No
USPS No
VPSO Bldg No
Water Pump house No
5 (approx.) replaced, remaining as needed
001
16
34
42
19 16
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
72%
0%
28%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Nondalton
Incorporation 2nd Class City
Location
Longitude ‐154.8478 Latitude 59.9719
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Nundaltin None
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 11,130
Year
Notes Expired
Community Plans Year
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐294‐2235 907‐294‐2235
907‐294‐2257 907‐294‐2271
907‐278‐3602 907‐276‐3924
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 221 164 Percent of Residents Employed 66%
Median Age 29 28.8 Denali Commission Distressed Community Yes
Avg. Household Size 4 2.88 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)67%
Median Household Income N/A $26,042 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)85.3%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System City of Nondalton Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 2800'x75'
Dock/Port Barge Access? No Ferry Service? No
Notes
Email
Located on the west shore of Six Mile Lake, between Lake Clark
and Iliamna Lake, 190 miles southwest of Anchorage.
Nondalton is a Tanaina name first recorded in 1909 by the U.S.
Geological Survey. The village was originally located on the north
shore of Six Mile Lake, but in 1940 growing mudflats and wood
depletion in the surrounding area caused the village to move to its
present location on the west shore. It is a Tanaina Indian
(Athabascan and Iliamna) village with a fishing and subsistence
lifestyle.
Local government, education/health, and professional/ business
services are main employers. There is one commercial fishing
permit and twelve business licenses.
INNEC: Maintain year round capacity of Tazimina, increase river
intake; INNEC: Upgrade distribution infrastructure Newhalen to
Nondalton; Hook‐up additional electric boilers; continue with
biomass feasibility, seeking funds; Complete replacement of water
system
Natural Hazard Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
City of Nondalton nondaltoncity@hotmail.com
Nondalton Village nondaltontribe@yahoo.com
Bristol Bay Native Corporation
I‐N‐N Electric Cooperative Hydro, diesel Yes, Iliamna‐Newhalen‐
Nondalton
Piped 51
Piped
Yes
No
State owned; gravel
No
Energy Profile: Nondalton
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)93,226 Avg. Load (kW)59
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)132
Unit 1 N/A Hydro (kWh/yr)4,006,061 Efficiency (kWh/gal)18
Unit 2 Total (kWh/yr)4,099,287 Diesel Used (gals/yr)5,123
Unit 3
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse N/A
RPSU Distribution High
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.33 Fuel Cost $0.01
Residential 215 810,980 3,772 Residential Rate $0.57 Non‐fuel Cost $0.22
Community 15 382,730 25,515 Commercial Rate None Total Cost $0.23
Commercial 105 2,017,376
19,213 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 543,936 Diesel (1 gal)$4.67 $6.08 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$218.33 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge
City Heating Oil 3,000 Fair By Air
City Gasoline 1,000 Fair Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
PCE data includes Iliamna, Newhalen, & Nondalton.
I‐N‐N Electric Coop, Inc
8.4%
Training/Certifications
High
Potential Status
Operational
Projects
Tazimina, 824 kW, Intertie
Medium
High
Pending
Low
Low
Low
L&P School Dist.
Not Rated
High
High
Operational Hydro Electric Boilers, 100kW
In ProgressANTHC Sanitation EE Upgrades/Training
LPSD fuel flown in at $0.50‐$1.00/gal. LPSD agreement w/ INNEC to
22%
10%
54%
14%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Nondalton
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
58 46 83% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
27.6% 7.2%
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Medium 2 star plus 949 129
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
I‐N‐NEC In progress
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Backup Gen. Shed for School No
Chedda & Cheds B&B No
City & Tribal Offices No
City Hall 2,200 No
Clinic 2007 2,683 No
Grocery Store & Coop/Post Office No
Nondalton Doll Factory No
Orthodox Church No
School K‐12 1979‐1985 21,744 Yes Yes
SRE Bldg 1 1993 1,104 Yes
SRE Bldg 2 (Heated) 1,200 Yes
Teacher Housing No
Village Comm. Center No
Water Plant 1973 900 No
Nondalton Tribe secured grant for retrofits; INN
owns and maintains
004
14
22 22
30
14
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
83%
0%
17%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Pedro Bay
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐154.7872 Latitude 59.7872
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District N/A
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
N/A N/A
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7
Year
Notes
Community Plans Year
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐850‐2225 907‐850‐2221
907‐277‐1500 907‐277‐1501
907‐278‐3602 907‐276‐3924
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 50 42 Percent of Residents Employed 63%
Median Age 35 40 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 3 2.21 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)68.2%
Median Household Income N/A $43,958 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?No Note
Water/Wastewater System Pedro Bay Village Council Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3002'x60'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
Email
Pedro Bay is located on the Alaska Peninsula, at the head of
Pedro Bay and the east end of Iliamna Lake, 176 air miles
southwest of Anchorage.
The Dena'ina have occupied this area historically. The Dena'ina
warred with Russian fur traders over trade practices in the early
1800s. The community was named for a man known as "Old
Pedro," who lived in this area in the early 1900s. Pedro Bay is a
village with a subsistence lifestyle.
Local government, natural resources/mining, and
education/health services are the main employers. There are 3
commercial fishing permits and 13 business licenses.
Continue design & permitting for Knutson Creek hydro; Expand use
of solar thermal devices; extension of airport runway to allow
larger fuel deliveries; more houses needed
Natural Hazard Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
Pedro Bay Village villagecouncil@pedrobay.com
Pedro Bay Corporation
Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Pedro Bay Village Council Diesel No
New landfill construct. 2015
Individual wells
Individual septic
Council operates pump truck No
No
State owned; gravel
Yes
Energy Profile: Pedro Bay
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)185,127 Avg. Load (kW)26
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)57
Unit 1 John Deere Fair/2,995 95
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)11
Unit 2 John Deere Fair/47,142 58
Total (kWh/yr)185,127 Diesel Used (gals/yr 17,247
Unit 3 John Deere Fair/32,662 58
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse Med.
RPSU Distribution Low
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
2
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.42 Fuel Cost $0.61
Residential 19 56,731 2,986 Residential Rate $0.91 Non‐fuel Cost $0.22
Community 5 20,440 4,088 Commercial Rate $0.91 Total Cost $0.83
Commercial 12 74,105
6,175 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 15,882 Diesel (1 gal)$5.91 $5.64 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$169.05 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 2
Village Heating Oil 56,000 Good By Air 3‐5 Everts Air Fuel
Village Gasoline 8,000 Good Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes: Longer runway would allow bigger plane, price break.
Acceptable
Pedro Bay Village Council
9.7%
Yes; Main Office Bldg., EMS
Training/Certifications
OJT
One outage in the last 2.5 years.
No
High
Potential Status
Design and permitting
Projects
Knutson Creek Hydroelectric Project
No private sellers
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
None
Not Rated
Low
Medium
OperationalHR System for community buildings
Barge delivery in Spring and Fall. Year round by air.
34%
12%44%
10%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Pedro Bay
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
10 22 80% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
40.0% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Low N/A N/A N/A
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
None
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Boat & Barge Landing/Storage No
Gen. Bldg. 1989 800 No
Greenhouse No
Library & Apts.Yes Yes No
Main Office Yes Yes No
Post Office No
Power Plant No
Russian Orthodox Church No
Russian Orthodox Church (Old)No
School 2002 7,520 No
School Gen. Bldg.No
SRE Bldg (Heated) 2002 1,320 Yes
Storage Shed/EMS building 2008 600 No
Village Council/Clinic/Comm. Center 1996 797 No
00
4
6 7
9
33
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
130%
0%
‐30%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Perryville
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐159.1456 Latitude 55.9128
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Perry‐q None
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
Year
Notes No record
Community Plans Year
2005
2015
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐853‐2203 907‐853‐2230
907‐853‐2300 907‐853‐2301
907‐842‐5257 907‐842‐5932
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 107 113 Percent of Residents Employed 62.5%
Median Age 27 27.8 Denali Commission Distressed Community Yes
Avg. Household Size 4 2.97 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)95.7%
Median Household Income N/A $22,344 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?No Location
Water/Wastewater System Native Village of Perryville Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3300'x75'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
No
State owned; gravel
No
Boat Ramp in 2014
Native Village of Perryville Wind turbine, Diesel
Perryville
Piped 38
Piped sewer, individual septic
Septic pumped and sludged for new WTP. Yes
Native Village of Perryville nvproads@hotmail.com
Oceanside Corporation
Bristol Bay Native Assoc. Inc.
Email
Located on the south coast of the Alaska Peninsula, 275 miles
southwest of Kodiak and 500 miles southwest of Anchorage.
The community was founded in 1912 as a refuge for Alutiiq people
driven away from their villages by the eruption of Mt. Katmai.
Many villagers from Douglas and Katmai survived the eruption
because they were out fishing at the time. The village was
originally called "Perry," but the "ville" was added to conform to
the post office name, established in 1930. The village maintains an
Alutiiq culture and a subsistence lifestyle. Commercial fishing
provides cash income.
Local government, education/health services, and information
are the main employers. There are 8 fishing permits and 8
business licenses.
Expand use of solar PV on community buildings; expand
use/options for ground source heat pumps; weatherization needed
in older homes, alternative energy source for swimming pool
Perryville Community Plan
Update to plan (Jaylon Kosbruk)
Natural Hazard Plan
No
Energy Priorities and Projects
Energy Profile: Perryville
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)473,200 Avg. Load (kW)95
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)37,804 Peak Load (kW)211
Unit 1 John Deere Fair/Unknown 175
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/ga 18
Unit 2 John Deere Fair/Unknown 170
Total (kWh/yr)511,004 Diesel Used (gals/y 26,929
Unit 3 John Deere Fair/Unknown 128
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse In Progress New Gen., 2016
RPSU Distribution In Progress
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
1
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.62 Fuel Cost $0.31
Residential 52 139,041 2,674 Residential Rate $0.95 Non‐fuel Cost $0.10
Community 6 83,274 13,879 Commercial Rate $0.95 Total Cost $0.41
Commercial 14 166,837
11,917 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 8,041 Diesel (1 gal)$4.55 $5.42 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)$5.72 3‐15
Propane (100#)$305 3‐15
Wood (1 cord)N/A
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 1 Crowley
Village Heating Oil 80,000 Fair By Air
Village Gasoline 15,000 Fair Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
Complete
Acceptable
Generator hours unknown. Outages once a month
Native Village of Perryville
22.3%
Yes; School
Training/Certifications
PPO, BF
No
Medium
Potential StatusProjects
Medium
Low
Pending
Operational10 Residential Turbines. 2.5‐2.9 kW each
OperationalOffice/Clinic Bldg., 3 kW PV panels
Low
Low
Medium
OperationalGeothermal/ Heat pumps, Office Bldg.
None.
Not Rated
High
Medium
OperationalDiesel Genset HR
CompleteVEEP, LPSD; Interior Lights ‐ Community Bldgs
Barge delivery in Spring & Fall. Dock would help with access.
35%
21%
42%
2%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Perryville
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
39 16 72% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
17.9% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Med.N/A N/A N/A
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
None
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
AT&T Alascom Sat. Dish ~1970s No
Cannery ‐ City Shops (5)
City Office Building
Clinic 2009 4,413 No
DOT Grader Bldg 2005 No
DOT State Buildings (2)
Fire Station No
GCI Sat. Dish ~1990s No
Gen. Bldg 1985 800 No
Old Power Plant
Perryville School (k‐12) 1983 16,904 Yes
Post Office ~2000s No
Power Plant No
PPNC Building
Pump Station/Water Treatment ~1970s No
R. Orthodox Church ~1920s No
School Tank Farm/Generator ~1990s No
State of AK Warehouse, Storage #1 2005 800 No
State of AK Warehouse, Storage #2 2005 No
Store 1960 No
Subsistence Bldg 1993 No
Teacher Housing ~1990s No
Teacher Housing 2 ~1990s No
Tsunami Shelter 1996 No
VC Office/Oceanside Corp. Bldg 2007 10,000 No
VPSO Office Building
12
0 1
8 10 4
20
6
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
85%
0%15%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Pilot Point
Incorporation 2nd Class City (inc. 1992)
Location
Longitude ‐157.5792 Latitude 57.5642
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
N/A Raw Fish (3% + 2% Bor.), Bed (6% Bor.) Guide ($3/p/d Bor.)$12,150
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 10,415
Year
Notes Expired
Community Plans Year
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐797‐2200 907‐797‐2211
907‐797‐2330 907‐797‐2332
907‐797‐2213 907‐797‐2258
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 100 68 Percent of Residents Employed 91.5%
Median Age 29 17 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 43 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)66.2%
Median Household Income N/A $31,563 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (201x)67.5%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3,280'x75'5,280'x125'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
No
Public/Private; Gravel/Dirt
Yes
Pilot Point Electrical Utility Diesel, Wind No
3 miles NE of town, from beach.
Well
Septic
No
Energy Priorities and Projects
Email
Pilot Point is located on the northern coast of the Alaska Peninsula,
on the east shore of Ugashik Bay. The community lies 84 air miles
south of King Salmon and 368 air miles southwest of Anchorage.
This mixed Aleut and Eskimo community developed around a fish
salting plant established by C.A. Johnson in 1889. At that time, it
was called "Pilot Station," after the river pilots stationed here to
guide boats upriver to a large cannery at Ugashik. A post office was
established in 1933, and the name was changed to Pilot Point at
that time. Pilot Point incorporated as a city in 1992.
Subsistence & commercial fishing community. 13 commercial
fishing permits. 7 current business licenses.
Natural Hazard Plan
Pilot Point Native Corporation
City of Pilot Point
Continue with wind project development; install meter boxes on
homes; set‐up back‐up energy source; more weatherization and
energy efficiency measures or replace dilapidated homes
Native Village of Pilot Point
Energy Profile: Pilot Point
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)413,589 Avg. Load (kW)42
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)93
Unit 1 John Deere Good/15,359 101
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)11
Unit 2 John Deere Good/12,410 67
Total (kWh/yr)413,589 Diesel Used (gals/yr)36,248
Unit 3 John Deere Good/255 99
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse Low In progress Complete
RPSU Distribution Med. In progress
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
2
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.16 Fuel Cost $0.41
Residential 47 145,904 3,104 Residential Rate $0.50 Non‐fuel Cost $0.13
Community 10 53,361 5,336 Commercial Rate Total Cost $0.53
Commercial 19 152,272
8,014 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 20,018 Diesel (1 gal)$4.31 $5.00 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$221.90 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 1 Crowley/De
City Heating Oil 145,000 Good By Air
City Gasoline 37,000 Good Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
None.
Not Rated
High
High
In developmentWind to Heat; expansion possible
CompleteEECBG
Barge delivery in mid‐late Summer. Competitive bid.
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
Low
Pending
Partially operational, CDR
submitted
Pilot Point Wind Power & Heat
Low
Potential StatusProjects
Good
Unbalanced legs causes system failure during auto switching.
Outages ‐ unbalanced load
Pilot Point Electric Utility
10.2%
Yes; School
Training/Certifications
PPO
39%
14%41%
5%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Pilot Point
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
24 10 42% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
23.5% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Medium 1‐star plus 1,477 160
Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
City 15/HPS Yes Replaced with LEDs
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Cannery Bldg./City Shops No
Church (Orthodox)No
City Bldg.No
City Hall No
City Office Bldg. 3,400 No
City Power Plant & Tank No
Clinic & Council Office 2010 2,540 No
Old Post Office No
Old Power Plant No
Pilot Point K‐12 1995 10,957 Yes
Post Office No
Power Plant No
PPNC Bldg.No
SRE Bldg 2 (Heated) 1,200 Yes
State Warehouse 1,600 No
Store No
Teacher Housing No
VPSO Housing No
VPSO Office No
Workshop/Storage/Powerhouse 1995 508 No
0 3
7
12 9
18 16
3
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
0%0%
100%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Port Alsworth
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐154.3128 Latitude 60.2025
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Port Alsworth Bed (6%), Raw Fish (2%), Guide ($3/p/d) N/A
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
36.1 F 7 11,206
Year
Notes
Community Plans Year
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐272‐3581 907‐278‐7030
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 104 190 Percent of Residents Employed 53.9%
Median Age 26 26 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 44 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)25%
Median Household Income N/A $56,250 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class N/A Permitted? Location
Water/Wastewater System None Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3,000'x100'4,200'x100'
Dock/Port Barge Access?No Ferry Service?No
Notes
No
Private; Gravel/Dirt
No
Private runway charges landing fees, potentially increases fuel delivery costs.
Individual wells
Individual septic
Email
Tanalian Inc.
Tanalian Electric Cooperative Diesel No
Originally a native village, a post office was established in 1950.
Port Alsworth's population is primarily non‐Native.
Energy Priorities and Projects
Add solar arrays to residences and public buildings; New heat
recovery system to serve newly built school and buildings; Public
barge and landing strip to lower cost of fuel delivery
Port Alsworth is on the east shore of Lake Clark at Hardenburg
Bay, 22 miles northeast of Nondalton. It lies in the Lake Clark
National Park and Preserve.
Local government and trade, transportation/utilities are the
largest employment industries. Three commercial fishing permit
holders, and 35 current business licenses.
Natural Hazard Plan
Energy Profile: Port Alsworth
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)802,350 Avg. Load (kW)66
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)146
Unit 1 John Deere Good 210
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)12
Unit 2 John Deere Good 150 Total (kWh/yr)802,350 Diesel Used (gals/yr)65,848
Unit 3 John Deere Good 190
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse In Progress
RPSU Distribution In Progress
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
2
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.18 Fuel Cost $0.45
Residential 75 287,955 3,839 Residential Rate $0.66 Non‐fuel Cost $0.16
Community 00 ‐ Commercial Rate $0.63 Total Cost $0.61
Commercial 59 444,522
7,534 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 17,831 Diesel (1 gal)$5.15 6‐13
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge
L&P Air 5,500 By Air Every 2 weeks 4,000 Everts Air Fue
L&P Schools 15,000 Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Lake Clark Air 8,000
AK Wild. Lodge 6,000 Notes
Misc. Others 10,300
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Acceptable
Outages rare.
Tanalian Electric Cooperative
6.5%
Yes; School
Training/Certifications
OJT
Low
Potential Status
Location prevents development
Projects
Tanalian Falls Hydro
None
Low
Low
Pending
Complete, Not FeasibleFeasibility Assessment
Low
Low
Low
LPSD purchases on metered basis from utility.
None.
Not Rated
High
High
OperationalHRt to School, duplex, teacher's house
38%
0%59%
2%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Port Alsworth
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
65 32 38% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
N/A N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Medium N/A N/A N/A
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
None
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
AK Ventures No
B&B No
B&B 2 No
Bible Camp & Church No
Community Center/Post Office
Fuel Storage No
Fuel Storage 2 No
NPS Bldg 5,788 No
Old Church No
Old Harden Burs Cabin Site No
Park Service Fuel Storage No
Park Service Sewage Lagoon No
Port Alsworth Improvement Bldg./Fire Dept.No
Tanalian Electric Coop No
Tanalian School 1983 8,172 Yes
Tanalian School (new)
Teacher Housing No
The Farm B&B/Lodge No
USPS 200 No
0 6 0 7
28
7
39
10
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
5%0%
95%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Port Heiden
Incorporation 2nd Class (inc. 1972)
Location
Longitude Latitude
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Lake and Peninsula Borough
School District Lake and Peninsula Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
N/A Bed Tax (6% Bor.), Raw Fish (2% Bor.), Guide ($3/p/d Bor.)N/A
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
36F 7 10,415
Year
Notes
Community Plans Year
Local Contacts Phone Fax
cityofpth@hotmail.com 907‐837‐2209 907‐837‐2248
annie_christensen@hotmail.com 907‐837‐2296 907‐837‐2297
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 119 102 Percent of Residents Employed 84.6%
Median Age 34 18 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 33 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)83.3%
Median Household Income N/A $60,313 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)47.3%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 5,000'x100'4,00'x100'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
No
Public; Gravel
Yes
Port Heiden Utilities Diesel No
2.5 E of town.
Well
Septic
No
L&PSD
Native Village of Port Heiden
City of Port Heiden
Port Heiden is 424 miles southwest of Anchorage, at the mouth of
the Meshik River, on the north side of the Alaska Peninsula. It lies
near the Aniakchak National Preserve and Monument.
The old village of Meshik was located at the current site of Port
Heiden. A school was established in the early 1950s, which
attracted people from surrounding villages. Port Heiden
incorporated as a city in 1972. The community relocated inland,
because storm waves had eroded much of the old town site and
threatened to destroy community buildings. Port Heiden is a
traditional Alutiiq community, with a commercial fishing and
subsistence lifestyle.
Subsistence and commercial fishing community. 11 commercial
fishing permits. 12 business licenses.
Continue with wind project design; Address tank farm erosion,
solution needed urgently; Interest in hydro, re‐do feasibility study;
Interest in drilling test sites for geothermal project
Natural Hazard Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
Email
Energy Profile: Port Heiden
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)517,800 Avg. Load (kW)75
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)167
Unit 1 John Deere Poor/Unknown 179
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)10
Unit 2 John Deere Good/6,143 190
Total (kWh/yr)517,800 Diesel Used (gals/yr)54,330
Unit 3
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse In Progress
RPSU Distribution Medium
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.25 Fuel Cost $0.42
Residential 52 180,145 3,464 Residential Rate $0.75 Non‐fuel Cost $0.13
Community 5 57,486 11,497 Commercial Rate Total Cost $0.55
Commercial 19 299,850
15,782 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 36,304 Diesel (1 gal)$4.23 $5.80 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$151.43 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 2
City Heating Oil 64,000 Good By Air
City Gasoline 44,000 Good Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
Not Rated
High
High
HR to fire dept., VPSO office
Complete
Barge delivery in Spring & Fall.
EECBG
Low
Low
Pending
300 kW high penetration wind system
On Hold pending RPSU upgrade
conceptual design (2015)
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
Potential StatusProjects
Good
Single engine dependent. Engine on unit 1 torn down for overhaul.
Port Heiden Utilities
Not Reported
Yes; Fire Dept., VPSO
Training/Certifications
BF Book, BF Mgr., BFO, PPO,
Clerk
31%
10%52%
6%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Port Heiden
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
25 24 60% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
N/A 4.8%
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Med.4‐star 1,169 98
Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Airport ARFF Bldg. 1993 3,200 Yes
City & Village Council Bldg.No
City Shop No
Clinic 2000 2,099 No
GCI Bldg.No
Gift Store No
Grocery Store & Post Office No
Hardware Store No
Meshik K‐12 1996 16,340 Yes
New Church (Orthodox)No
Power Plant No
St. Agafia Church No
Storage 1981 336 No
00447
34
8 5
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
80%
0%20%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: South Naknek
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude -156.9981 Latitude 58.7156
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Bristol Bay Borough
School District Bristol Bay Borough School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
N/A Bed (10% Bor.), Raw Fish (3% Bor.) N/A
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
42.1F 7 11,772
Year
2011
Notes Update required 10/6/2016
Community Plans Year
Local Contacts Phone Fax
South Naknek Village lorianne_n@hotmail.com 907‐246‐8614 907‐631‐0949
907‐274‐2433 907‐274‐8694
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 137 79 Percent of Residents Employed 52.1%
Median Age 36 18 Denali Commission Distressed Community No
Avg. Household Size 33 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)83.3%
Median Household Income N/A $65,250 Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)No
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?Yes Location
Water/Wastewater System Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 2,264'x60'3,314'x60'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
No
Public; Gravel/Dirt
Yes
Well
Septic
Yes
Email
Naknek Electric Association Diesel Naknek, King Salmon
~1 mile W. of town
Alaska Peninsula Corporation
South Naknek is located on the south bank of the Naknek River on
the Alaska Peninsula, 297 miles southwest of Anchorage. It lies just
west of the Katmai National Park and Preserve.
South Naknek was settled permanently after the turn of the
century as a result of salmon cannery development. South Naknek
is a traditional Sugpiaq/Alutiiq village whose residents are
descendants of people displaced by the Katmai and Novarupta
volcanic eruptions of 1912.
Subsistence fishing village. 23 commercial fishing permits. 7
business licenses.
NEA: Investigate heat absorption for ice production in summer;
NEA: Stack heat recovery; weatherization and energy efficiency;
investigate wind power
Natural Hazard Plan
Yes
Energy Priorities and Projects
Energy Profile: South Naknek
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)20,231,754 Avg. Load (kW)485
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)1,078
Unit 1 N/A Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)16
Unit 2 Total (kWh/yr)20,231,754 Diesel Used (gals/yr)1,258,272
Unit 3
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse
RPSU Distribution
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.17 Fuel Cost $0.24
Residential 738 2,840,685 3,849 Residential Rate $0.59 Non‐fuel Cost $0.20
Community 40 1,234,998 30,875 Commercial Rate $0.59 Total Cost $0.44
Commercial 359 14,431,075
40,198 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 612,053 Diesel (1 gal)$3.61 $5.96 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge
Kodiak Ventures 150,100 By Air
BB Schools 24,000
Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
Trident Seafood 78,000
Peter Pan Seafood 15,000 Notes
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Not Rated
Low
High
Investigating; OperationalNEA Stack Heat to Power Project; HR to school
Complete in 2011ANTHC Audits‐clinic, sanitation, com & trbl bldgs
Low
Low
Low
Site testsNEA Geothermal Project
Medium
Low
Low
NEA not pursuing currently
Low
Potential StatusProjects
Feeders from NEA substation
Generation & sales for Naknek, South Naknek, & King Salmon
Naknek Electric Association
5.5%
Training/Certifications
15%
6%
75%
3%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
18.5
19
19.5
20
20.5
21
21.5
22
22.5
23
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (GWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: South Naknek
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
29 106 66% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
N/A 2.6%
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality High 3‐star 1,161 134
Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Apt. Complex No
Bar No
Borough Apts.No
Borough Shop No
Church (Lutheran)No
Church (Orthodox)No
Clinic / Tribal Bldg. / Comm. Center 1995 3,020 Yes No
Elementary School 1980 6,960 No
Fire Station No
Fish Proc. Plant No
Kodiak Adventures Processing Plant No
Landfill No
Naknek Electric Assoc. / Telephone Coop. Shop No
Northland LLC Barge Services No
Old Hanger No
Old Trident Seafoods Processing Plant No
State DOT & PF Garage No
Telephone Coop.No
Tribal Office Bldg.No
Tribal Storage Garage No
Trident Seafoods Proc. Plant No
US Post Office No
Water & Sewer Shop No
Youth Center No
7 4
17
7
28 30 36
6
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
48%
0%
52%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Community Profile: Togiak
Incorporation 2nd Class City
Location
Longitude ‐160.3764 Latitude 59.0619
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Dillingham Census Area
School District Southwest Region School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Tuyuryaq Sales (2%) 138,016$
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 11,306
Year
2010
Notes Updated required 2/16/2015
Community Plans Year
2006
2009
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐493‐5520 907‐493‐5554
907‐493‐5003 907‐493‐5005
907‐493‐5820 907‐493‐5067
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 809 880 Percent of Residents Employed 49.7%
Median Age 24 24.5 Denali Commission Distressed Community Yes
Avg. Household Size 4 3.54 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)80.9%
Median Household Income N/A 47,232.00$ Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)69.5%
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?No Location
Water/Wastewater System City of Togiak Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 410'x59'
Dock/Port Barge Access?Yes Ferry Service?No
Notes
Email
Located at the head of Togiak Bay, 67 miles west of Dillingham. It
lies in Togiak National Wildlife Refuge and is the gateway to
Walrus Island Game Sanctuary.
In 1880 "Old Togiak" or "Togiagamute" was located across the bay
and had a population of 276. Many residents of the Yukon‐
Kuskokwim region migrated south to the Togiak area after the
devastating influenza epidemic in 1918‐19. Togiak was flooded in
1964, and many fish racks and stores of gas, fuel oil, and stove oil
were destroyed. Three or four households left Togiak after the
flood and developed the village of Twin Hills upriver. Togiak is a
traditional Yup'ik Eskimo village with a fishing and subsistence
lifestyle
Local government, trade transportation/utilities, and
education/health services are main employers. There are 126 fish
permits issued and 23 business licenses.
Heat recovery project under construction; small hydro project;
Interest in intertie to Twin Hills; Tank farm upgrade urgently
needed due to erosion on site; Upgrade to water and sewer lines
Togiak Comprehensive Plan
City of Togiak, AK Multi‐Hazard Mitigation
Natural Hazard Plan
Yes
Energy Priorities and Projects
Togiak Natives Limited
Traditional Village of Togiak tuyuryaq14@gmail.com
City of Togiak city.of.togiak‐alaska@hotmail.com
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative ‐ AVEC Diesel
Togiak
Piped 213 N/A
Piped
5 miles of lines need replacement. City has design,
but no funding.
Yes
No
State owned; gravel
Yes
Energy Profile: Togiak
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)2,997,095 Avg. Load (kW)348
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)596
Unit 1 Cummins Fair/28,931 499
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/gal)13
Unit 2 Caterpillar Fair/27,865 350 Total (kWh/yr)2,997,095 Diesel Used (gals/yr)228,112
Unit 3 Cummins Fair/36,041 824
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse In Progress
RPSU Distribution In Progress Tieline
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
9
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.20 Fuel Cost $0.35
Residential 228 1,289,757 5,657 Residential Rate $0.63 Non‐fuel Cost $0.23
Community 20 282,630 14,132 Commercial Rate Total Cost $0.58
Commercial 68 1,275,523
18,758 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 39,731 Diesel (1 gal)$4.45 $6.42 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)
Wood (1 cord)N/A
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 2+
City stove oil; gas 45,000 By Air
AVEC 135,700
Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
SWR Schools 59,400
Village Council 1,000 Notes
AK Comm. Co. 2,000
Misc. Other 6,600
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Excellent
Two outages due to fishing plant going online.
AVEC
3.7%
Yes; AVEC Tool Shack, Bunk House
Training/Certifications
BFO, Itin BFO
Low
Potential StatusProjects
None
Medium
Low
Pending
Low
Low
Low
None
Not Rated
High
High
ConstructionTogiak Waste Heat Recovery Project
Both CompleteEECBG; VEEP
Delta,
Crowley,
Vitus
45%
10%
44%
1%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Togiak
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
173 68 66% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
39.9% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Medium N/A N/A N/A
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
AVEC Burnouts replaced with LEDs.
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
AC Store No
Assembly Of God Church No
AVEC Elec. Plant No
AVEC Tank Farm No
BBHA rentals No
Beacon Tower No
Boys & Girls Club 3,046 No
City Duplex 1,169 No
City Garage No
City Maint. Bldg No
City Office 1,682 No
City Old School 17,061 No
City Police & Fire Station No
City Quarters No
City Shop 1,200 No
City Water & Sewer Bldg No
Clinic 1,000 No
Coupchiak Bldg 1 No
Coupchiak Bldg 2 No
Double Wide Trailer No
Family Resource Center 6,548 No
GCI Station No
Moravian Church No
New School 2004 70,205 No
New School Gym No
Police & Fire Bldg 2,287 No
Senior Center/Clinic No
Senior Housing No
Seventh Day Ad. Church No
SWRSD housing No
TNL Garage No
TNL Office No
Togiak Head Start No
7 2 14 25
80
61
34 18
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
12%0%
88%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Energy Profile: Togiak
Non‐residential Building Inventory (continued)
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Togiak Water Tank No
Trading Store No
USPS No
UUI Station No
Yellow Bldg No
Community Profile: Twin Hills
Incorporation Unincorporated
Location
Longitude ‐160.275 Latitude 59.0792
ANCSA Region Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Borough/CA Dillingham Census Area
School District Southwest Region School District
AEA Region Bristol Bay
Alaska Native Name (definition)Taxes Type (rate) Per‐Capita Revenue
Ingricuar None
Historical Setting / Cultural Resources Economy
Climate Avg. Temp. Climate Zone Heating Deg. Days
N/A 7 N/A
Year
Notes
Community Plans Year
2005
Local Contacts Phone Fax
907‐525‐4821 907‐525‐4822
907‐525‐4327 907‐525‐4820
907‐278‐3602 907‐276‐3924
Demographics 2000 2010 2013
Population 69 74 (80)Percent of Residents Employed 63.6%
Median Age 39 41.5 Denali Commission Distressed Community Yes
Avg. Household Size 3 2.55 Percent Alaska Native/American Indian (2010)94.7%
Median Household Income N/A 29,000.00$ Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Percent (2014)N/A
Electric Utility Generation Sources Interties PCE?
Yes
Landfill Class 3 Permitted?No Location
Water/Wastewater System Twin Hills Village Council Homes Served System Volume
Water
Sewer Energy Audit?
Notes
Access
Road
Air Access Runway 3000'x60'
Dock/Port Barge Access?No Ferry Service?No
Notes
Email
Twin Hills is located near the mouth of the Twin Hills River, a
tributary of the Togiak River, 386 miles southwest of Anchorage.
The village was established in 1965 by families who moved from
Togiak to avoid the recurrent flooding there. Some residents
migrated from Quinhagak on Kuskokwim Bay. The people have
strong cultural ties to the Yukon‐Kuskokwim region, because many
of their ancestors migrated to Togiak following the 1918‐19
influenza epidemic. Twin Hills is a traditional Yup'ik Eskimo village
with a fishing and subsistence lifestyle.
Local government, education/health services, and manufacturing
are the main employers. There are 8 fishing permit holders and 3
business licenses.
Install heat recovery system; New low‐mainetence generators
needed; Add solar arrays to homes and community buildings;
Alternative method for fuel delivery due to lower river level;
Upkeep of road pads built on tundra and moss; need more homes
and community buildings
Twin Hills Comprehensive Plan
Natural Hazard Plan
Energy Priorities and Projects
Twin Hills Village william15@starband.net
Twin Hills Native Corporation
Bristol Bay Native Corporation
Twin Hills Village Diesel
Twin Hills
Piped 29 N/A
Piped, gravity sewer
Broken pipes in need of replacement. Yes
No
State owned; gravel
No
Energy Profile: Twin Hills
Diesel Power System Power Production
Utility Diesel (kWh/yr)143,605 Avg. Load (kW)18
Engine Make/Model Condition/Hrs Gen Capacity Wind (kWh/yr)0 Peak Load (kW)41
Unit 1 John Deere Fair/Unknown 128
Hydro (kWh/yr)0 Efficiency (kWh/g 5
Unit 2 John Deere Fair/1,488 92
Total (kWh/yr)143,605 Diesel Used (gals/29,180
Unit 3
Unit 4
Line Loss
Heat Recovery?
Upgrades Priority Projects Status
RPSU Powerhouse In Progress
RPSU Distribution In Progress
Outage History/Known Issues
Operators No. of Operators
2
Maintenance Planning (RPSU)Electric Rates ($/kWh) Cost per kWh Sold ($/kWh)
Electric Sales No. of Customers kWh/year kWh/Customer Rate with PCE $0.64 Fuel Cost $0.48
Residential 29 103,044 3,553 Residential Rate $1.00 Non‐fuel Cost $0.07
Community 6 37,701 6,284 Commercial Rate $1.00 Total Cost $0.54
Commercial 9 115,388
12,821 Fuel Prices ($)Utility/Wholesale Retail Month/Year
Utility Use 20,042 Diesel (1 gal)$4.60 $8.00 6‐13; 8‐14
Other Fuel? (1 gal)
Gasoline (1 gal)
Propane (100#)$252.14 8‐14
Wood (1 cord)
Pellets
Discounts?
Alternative Energy
Hydroelectric
Wind Diesel
Biomass
Solar
Geothermal
Oil and Gas
Coal
Emerging Tech
Heat Recovery
Energy Efficiency
Bulk Fuel Purchasing Deliveries/Year Gallons/Delivery Vendor(s)
Tank Owner Fuel Type(s) Capacity Age/Condition By Barge 1 Delta West.
Village Heating Oil 52,000 Good By Air
Village Gasoline 6,000 Good Cooperative Purchasing Agreements
School Heating Oil 20,000
Unknown None.
Bulk Fuel Upgrade Priority Project Status
Notes
Acceptable
1‐2 outs/year from old power lines. 1 from snapped cond. line.
Twin Hills Village Council
Not Reported
No
Training/Certifications
Basic PPO
Low
Potential StatusProjects
None
Low
Low
Pending
Low
Low
Low
Not Rated
Low
High 1) Complete 2) Complete 2015
Barge delivery in late Aug. or Sept. Comp. bid (fixed price)
1)ANTHC Water EE Audit 2)Upgrades & Training
37%
14%
42%
7%
Residential Community Commercial Utility Use
Electric Sales by Customer Type
(kWh/year)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Electric Generation (MWh)Diesel Hydro Wind
Energy Profile: Twin Hills
Housing Units Occupied Vacant % Owner‐Occup.Regional Housing Authority Weatherization Service Provider
20 21 55% Bristol Bay HA Bristol Bay HA
Housing Need Overcrowded 1‐star Energy Use Average Home Average Avg. EUI
5.0% N/A
Energy Rating Square Feet (kBTU/sf)
Data Quality Low N/A N/A N/A
Street Lighting Owner Number/Type Retrofitted? Year Notes
9 No Half operational. No upgrade plans.
Non‐residential Building Inventory
Building Name or Location Year Built Square Feet Audited? Retrofits Done? In ARIS?
Airport & State Storage Bldg 2000 1,104 No
Church 2005 No
Clinic 2008 1,604 No
Community Hall 1970 560 No
Native Corp.No
Propane Farm (shed)No
School Fuel Storage No
School Generator No
SRE Bldg 1,104 Yes
Tank Farm No
Twin Hills K‐12 1976 6,499 Yes Yes
UUI No
Village Council Offices 2002 2,400 No
Village Garage 1977 768 No
Village Generator Building 1984 384 No
Water Storage Tank No
Water Treatment Plant No
0005
25
8
1 2
Earlier 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000‐11
Age of Housing Stock
0%0%
100%
Retrofitted BEES Certified Untouched
Energy Efficient Housing Stock
Appendix A
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | A-1
A | C OMMUNITY AND U TILITY I NTERVIEWS
Community and utility interviews were conducted over the phone from January to March 2015.
Interviews were conducted by BBNA, SWAMC, and Information Insights staff.
Community Interviewed Utility Interviewed
Aleknagik Kay Andrews, City Administrator Nushagak Electric
Cooperative
Mike Megli, CEO &
Michael Favors, Telecom
Ops Manager, Nushagak
Electric Cooperative
Chignik Becky Boettcher, City Clerk
Chignik Lagoon Delissa McCormick, Tribal
Administrator & Michelle Anderson,
Grants Manager
Chignik Lake Shirley Kalmakoff, Tribal
Administrator
Clark's Point
Dillingham Alice Ruby, Mayor
Egegik Don Strand, City Administrator
Ekwok Crystal Clark, City Administrator
Igiugig AlexAnna Salmon, President and
Administrator, Village Council
Iliamna Martha Anelon & Gerold Anelon,
Tribal Administrator
INN Electric Coop, Inc George Hornberger,
General Manager, INNEC
King Salmon
Kokhanok Peducia Andrew, Tribal Administrator
& Elijah Eknaty
Koliganek Herman Nelson, Sr. , President, New
Koliganek Village Council
Levelock Alexander Tallekpalek, President,
Levelock Village Council
Manokotak Michael Alakayuk, Manokotak Power
Co
Naknek
Lucy Goode, General Manager, Paug-
Vik Inc. Ltd.
Naknek Electric
Association
Donna Vukich, General
Manager, NEA
New Stuyahok William (Chuck) Peterson, City
Administrator
Newhalen Greg Anelon, City Administrator
Nondalton
Pedro Bay Keith Jenson, President, Pedro Bay
Village
Perryville Gerald Kosbruk, President, Native
Village of Perryville
Appendix A
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | A-2
Pilot Point Steven Kramer, Mayor
Port Alsworth Mark Lang , Co-op Manager, Tanalian
Electric Coop
Port Heiden
South Naknek
Togiak Darryl Thompson, City Administrator
Twin Hills William Ilutsik, Vice President, Twin
Hills Village Council
Appendix A
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | A-1
A | C OMMUNITY AND U TILITY I NTERVIEWS
Community and utility interviews were conducted over the phone from January to March 2015.
Interviews were conducted by BBNA, SWAMC, and Information Insights staff.
Community Interviewed Utility Interviewed
Aleknagik Kay Andrews, City Administrator Nushagak Electric
Cooperative
Mike Megli, CEO &
Michael Favors, Telecom
Ops Manager, Nushagak
Electric Cooperative
Chignik Becky Boettcher, City Clerk
Chignik Lagoon Delissa McCormick, Tribal
Administrator & Michelle Anderson,
Grants Manager
Chignik Lake Shirley Kalmakoff, Tribal
Administrator
Clark's Point
Dillingham Alice Ruby, Mayor
Egegik Don Strand, City Administrator
Ekwok Crystal Clark, City Administrator
Igiugig AlexAnna Salmon, President and
Administrator, Village Council
Iliamna Martha Anelon & Gerold Anelon,
Tribal Administrator
INN Electric Coop, Inc George Hornberger,
General Manager, INNEC
King Salmon
Kokhanok Peducia Andrew, Tribal Administrator
& Elijah Eknaty
Koliganek Herman Nelson, Sr. , President, New
Koliganek Village Council
Levelock Alexander Tallekpalek, President,
Levelock Village Council
Manokotak Michael Alakayuk, Manokotak Power
Co
Naknek
Lucy Goode, General Manager, Paug-
Vik Inc. Ltd.
Naknek Electric
Association
Donna Vukich, General
Manager, NEA
New Stuyahok William (Chuck) Peterson, City
Administrator
Newhalen Greg Anelon, City Administrator
Nondalton
Pedro Bay Keith Jenson, President, Pedro Bay
Village
Perryville Gerald Kosbruk, President, Native
Village of Perryville
Appendix A
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | A-2
Pilot Point Steven Kramer, Mayor
Port Alsworth Mark Lang , Co-op Manager, Tanalian
Electric Coop
Port Heiden
South Naknek
Togiak Darryl Thompson, City Administrator
Twin Hills William Ilutsik, Vice President, Twin
Hills Village Council
Appendix B
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | B-1
B | E NERGY M EETING P ARTICIPANTS
Iliamna Subregional Meeting | March 23, 2015
Natalia Marttila Nondalton Tribal
Will Evanoff Nondalton Tribal
Peducia Andrew Kokhanok Village Council
Elijah Eknaty Kokhanok Village Council
Nathan Hill Lake & Pen Borough
Larry J. Hill Iliamna Village Council
George Hornberger INN Electric Cooperative
Greg Anelon City of Newhalen
Ben Foss Pedro Bay
Jon Burrows Port Alsworth
Shannon J. Nanalook Self
Senafont Shugak Jr. Pedro Bay Council
Chignik Lagoon Subregional Meeting | March 24, 2015
John Christensen Jr. Port Heiden
Frank Simpson Port Heiden Utilities
Steve Kramer City of Pilot Point
Becky Boettcher City of Chignik
Debbie Carlson Chignik Bay Tribal Council
Clinton Boskofsky Chignik Lake Village Council
Terrence Kosbruk Native Village of Perryville
Austin Shangin Native Village of Perryville
Willard Lind Jr. Chignik Lake
Don Bumpus Chignik Lagoon
Michelle L. Anderson Chignik Lagoon Village Council
Delissa McCormick Chignik Lagoon Village Council
Clem Grunert Chignik Lagoon Village Council President
King Salmon Subregional Meeting | March 25, 2015
David Hostetter Igiugig
Betsy Hostetter Igiugig
James Kallenberg Levelock Village Council
Henry Olsen Egegik
Don Strand City of Egegik
Roland Briggs Ugashik
Appendix B
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | B-2
William Weatherby WM Manufactory
Eddie Clark Naknek
Dale Peters Naknek Electric Association
Becky Savo Bristol Bay Borough
Suzanne Lamson Naknek Electric Association
Thomas Deck Naknek Electric Association
Alexander Tallekpalek Levelock Village Council
Adelheid Herrmann SAVEC
Laura Zimin Bristol Bay Borough/SAVEC
Paul Hansen Naknek Native Village
Stephen Jones Naknek Electric Association
Dillingham Subregional Meeting | March 26, 2015
Jennie Apokedak New Koliganek Village Council - IGAP
Gwen Larson BBNA - Community Development
Kenny Jensen Ekwok Village Council
Diane Folsom Ekuk Village Council
Bruse Ilutsik Aleknagik Traditional Council
Allen Ilutsik Aleknagik Traditional Council
Roy Hiratsuka Ekuk Village Council
Rose Loera City of Dillingham
Billy Maines Curyung Tribal Council
Betty Gardiner Clark's Point Village Council
Arthur Sharp Twin Hills Native Corp
Joseph Wassily Clark's Point Village Council
Mariano Floresta Clark's Point Village Council
Dennis Andrew New Stuyahok Limited
Peter Christopher Sr. New Stuyahok Traditional Council
Luki Akelkok Sr. Ekwok
Melvin P. Andrew City of Manokotak
Kenneth Nukwak Sr. Manokotak Natives Ltd.
Joseph Kazimirowicz City of Ekwok
Moses Toyukak Sr. City of Manokotak
Peter Lockuk Sr. Togiak Traditional Council
Mark Scotford Bristol Bay Area Health Corporation
Julianne Baltar Bristol Bay Native Association
Jody Saiz City of Dillingham
Eric Hanssen ANTHC
Brice Eningowuk City of Togiak
Tom Marsik UAF Bristol Bay Campus
Tina Tinker Aleknagik Traditional Council
Appendix B
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | B-3
Delores Larson New Koliganek Village Council
Kay Andrews City of Aleknagik
Alice Ruby City of Dillingham
Melody Nibeck DCRA
Energy Summit Representatives | Dillingham, May 4, 2015
Amber McDonough Siemens
Annie Fritze BBNA
Arthur Sharp Twin Hills Native Corp.
Becky Savo Bristol Bay Borough
Bill Hill BBSD/Paug-Vik Inc. Ltd.
Brenda Kerr BBNA/Dept. of Transportation
Cameron Poindexter BBNC
Chris Napoli BBEDC
Clinton Boskofsky Chignik Lake
Connie Fredenberg Marsh Creek
Diane Folsom Ekuk Village Council
Elijah Eknaty Kokhanok Village Council
Emil Larson BBHA
Eric Hanssen ANTHC
Francisca Demoski BBNC
Fred (Ted) Angasan South Naknek
Greg Anelon City of Newhalen
Greg Calvert BBAHC
Gusty Akelhok BBNA
James Kallenberg Levelock Village Council
Jaylon Kosbruk Perryville
Jed Drolet AEA
Jennie Apokedak New Koliganek Village Council - IGAP
John Christensen Jr. Port Heiden
John Wanamaker BBDF/Alaska Venture Partners, LLC
Joseph Wassily Clark's Pt. Village Council
Josh Craft AEA
Lucy Goode Paug-Vik Inc., Ltd.
Mark Scotford BBAHC
Mischa Ellanna BBNC
Moses Toyukak Sr. City of Manokotak
Nick Smeaton BBHA
Nikki Shanigan City of Pilot Point
Pete Andrew Nush. Electric Coop.
Peter Angasan Sr. King Salmon Tribal
Appendix B
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | B-4
Peter Christopher Sr. New Stuyahok Traditional Council
Peter Lockuk Sr. Togiak Traditional Council
Rebecca Garrett AEA
Rose Loera City of Dillingham
Senafont Shugak Jr. Pedro Bay Council
Steven Gilbert AVEC
Tim McDermott Lake and Pen School District
Tom Marsik UAF Bristol Bay campus
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | C-1
C | B RISTOL B AY I NDUSTRY S URVEY
Contact Information
Please verify the following information:
*First Name:
*Last Name:
*Email Address:
Work Phone:
All fields with an asterisk (*) are required.
1. Name of company:
2. Location of facilities in Bristol Bay region:
3. What is your current annual energy use?
Electricity (kWh/year):
Fuel/Heating Oil (gallons/year):
Other (gallons/year):
4. If your company's energy demand is seasonal, in what month(s) is your demand for energy highest?
5. What rate does your business pay for electricity?
$/ kWh
6. Please enter the most recent date on which this rate was charged (month and year).
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | C-2
7. What price does your business pay for fuel? Please enter prices for any of the fuels your business purchases.
Diesel ($/gallon):
Heating Oil ($/gallon):
Propane ($/100 lb tank):
Gasoline ($/gallon):
8. Please enter the most recent dates on which this price was paid.
*9. To increase the quality of our load projections, would you be willing to share the last 2 years of electricity
and/or fuel purchase data with our data analysts? (Your data will be kept strictly confidential.)(*Required)
Select one.
Yes (Answer question number 9.1.)
No (Go to question number 10.)
Maybe (Answer question number 9.1.)
9a. Who should we contact to request your data?
Name:
Phone or email:
Notes:
10. Does your company self-generate any electricity?
Select one.
Yes (Answer question number 10.1.)
No (Go to question number 11.)
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | C-3
10a. Please check all that apply.
Select all that apply.
Diesel generator
Solar P/V
Wind turbine
Waste-to-energy
Other:
11. Does your company have plans to self-generate electricity in the next 5 years? Explain.
12. What does your company use for space heating? (check all that apply):
Select all that apply.
Fuel Oil
Electricity
Natural Gas
Propane
Wood
Coal
Biodiesel (fish oil, other)
Other:
13. How many buildings does your company currently heat?
Number:
Total Square Footage:
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | C-4
14. Have any of your company's buildings had a professional energy audit in the past 10 years?
Select one.
Yes (Answer question number 14.1.)
No (Go to question number 15.)
14a. Please enter information on the audited facility(s).
What is the name and address?:
What energy efficiency and conservation measures were implemented following the audit?:
15. Has your company conducted audits on overall energy use (machinery/process flow/energy conversion)?
Select one.
Yes
No
16. Have energy efficiency and conservation measures been implemented in any of your facilities - whether
audited or not?
Select one.
Yes (Answer question number 16.1.)
No (Go to question number 18.)
16a. Check all energy efficiency retrofits that apply:
Select all that apply.
All implemented measures reported in Question 10
Conservation measures / changes in energy behaviors (e.g. manually setting back thermostats, turning off
computers)
Installed energy efficient indoor lighting
Installed energy efficient outdoor lighting
Installed energy efficient refrigeration or other appliances
Tightened up building envelope (e.g. insulation, roof, windows)
Installed building sensors or programmable controls (e.g. occupancy sensors or programmable
thermostats)
Machinery/Equipment upgrades
Other:
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | C-5
17. Would you be interested in receiving a confidential energy audit if it were free and sponsored by a
government entity?
Select one.
Yes
No
18. Looking ahead 5 years, how do you think your company's electricity use will change?
Select one.
Increase significantly
Increase modestly
Stay the same
Decrease modestly
Decrease significantly
19. Looking ahead 5 years, how do you think your company's energy use for heating will change?
Select one.
Increase significantly
Increase modestly
Stay the same
Decrease modestly
Decrease significantly
20. What do you think will drive these changes in energy use? (check all that apply):
Select all that apply.
Changes in size of business operations
Changes in technology
Energy efficiency or conservation measures
Other:
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | C-6
21. List any energy projects or priorities your business has for reducing or stabilizing the cost of energy for
heating, electricity or transportation.
22. Which of the following energy goals would help your business the most?
Select one.
Reducing the cost of electricity
Reducing the cost of space heating
Reducing the cost of transportation
Stabilizing the overall cost of energy
Stabilizing the supply of energy
Other:
23. Have you seen the Draft Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan?
Select one.
Yes (Answer question number 23.2.)
No (Answer question number 23.1.)
Please take a look at http://bristolbayenergy.org/documents/.
Thank you for reviewing the report.
Appendix D
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | D-1
D | A UDIENCE P OLLING R ESULTS
Table 27: May 4 Energy Summit audience polling results
Demographics
Who are you representing today?
Community
Tribal
Organization
Regional
Organization State Organization Business Utility
34% 31% 11% 11% 9% 3%
Who supplies your electricity?
Community
Utility
Nushagak
Electric Coop.
Naknek Electric
Assoc. AVEC INNEC
39% 26% 16% 16% 3%
Did you attend a subregional meeting?
No Dillingham Iliamna Chignik Lagoon King Salmon
57% 23% 9% 6% 6%
Regional Priorities
For the following strategies, when should work start – immediately, medium-term (2 to 5 years), long-
term (5+ years), or is it not a priority at all?
Improve existing power infrastructure and systems
Immediate
Medium-
term Long-term Not a priority
56% 25% 19% 0%
Address rural utility issues through regional and subregional coordination
Immediate
Medium-
term Long-term Not a priority
61% 27% 9% 3%
Investigate and develop renewable energy generation opportunities
Immediate
Medium-
term Long-term Not a priority
79% 21% 0% 0%
Monitor emerging technologies
Immediate
Medium-
term Long-term Not a priority
47% 26% 21% 6%
Appendix D
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | D-2
Initiate additional energy efficiency projects for homes, businesses, and public facilities
Immediate
Medium-
term Long-term Not a priority
85% 12% 3% 0%
As a region, we should prioritize energy efficiency initiatives at which level…
Homes Businesses
Public/Community
Buildings Public Infrastructure
41% 9% 36% 14%
Implement transportation projects to improve access
Immediate
Medium-
term Long-term Not a priority
64% 18% 12% 6%
Support for Energy Priorities
In what ways would you support an energy project that benefits your community?
Staff Time Financial Support Both Neither
38% 3% 59% 0%
Interest in Energy Working Groups
Are you interested in participating in an energy working group?
Yes No Not Sure
55% 12% 33%
Table 28: December 2013 Village Leadership Workshop
Demographics
Who is in the room today?
Lakes
Subregion
Kvichak Bay
Subregion
Nushagak
Bay
Subregion
Nushagak River
Subregion
Peninsula
Subregion
Togiak Bay
Subregion
6 16 18 5 22 15
What is the main hat you are wearing today?
Village Corp
BB Regional
Org.
Tribal
Gov’t City/Municipal Gov’t Other
51% 21% 16% 1% 10%
Appendix D
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | D-3
Energy Priorities & Concerns
What do you think has the greatest potential to lower your energy costs?
Wind
Energy
Efficie
ncy Biomass Geothm’l Solar Natr’l Gas
Diesel
Eff. Hydro
Trans.
Lines
20% 14% 14% 12% 12% 11% 6% 5% 5%
Thinking about household energy costs, what is the biggest burden on your family’s finances?
Electricity Space Heating Transportation
37% 35% 28%
Do you think your community would be interested in participating in a regional or subregional bulk fuel
purchasing group to try to save costs on heating oil and other bulk fuels?
Yes No Don’t know
85% 8% 7%
What do you think the biggest barrier is to more participation in residential EE&C programs in your
community?
Hard to find auditors Lack of info
Lack of
interest Other
41% 43% 2% 14%
Would you be in favor of coordinating the development of Wind Projects in the region to increase
financing options?
Every community
should develop own
projects
Bundle projects within region
to attract investors
Bundle projects with other
regions if needed to attract
more investors
Other / No
opinion
41% 43% 15% 2%
If the result is cheaper power in your community, how comfortable would you be with someone else
owning the power and selling it to the local utility?
Very Comfortable Comfortable Neutral Uncomfortable Very Uncomfortable
23% 16% 16% 26% 18%
Would you be interested in new subregional interties?
Yes - If it would
stabilize energy rates
Yes - Only if it would reduce
energy rates No
Don’t Know/ No
opinion
16% 70% 8% 6%
Appendix D
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | D-4
What is the biggest barrier other than financing to advancing energy projects in your community?
Leadership/champion Technical know how Administrative capacity
36% 38% 25%
What is most important to your community in terms of energy planning?
Saving money
Saving
energy
More reliable
energy
More price
stability
Community
sustainability
19% 2% 21% 19% 40%
Should our Regional Energy Plan include goals for energy efficiency?
Yes No Don’t know
97% 0% 3%
Should strategies to encourage local food production be included as part of an energy plan?
Yes No Don’t know
68% 23% 8%
While previous road and transmission studies have not been encouraging, should we pursue updated
technical and feasibility studies as part of a regional energy plan?
Yes No Don’t know
84% 9% 6%
Who is the best group to continue the momentum for energy planning in Bristol Bay?
New group of energy stakeholders (including small and large utilities,
industrial users, and local/tribal energy champion)
Bristol Bay Partnership
or other existing
regional group
Other/No
opinion
36% 58% 6%
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | E-1
E | A NALYSIS OF R ESOURCE P OTENTIAL
The data in the following tables has been compiled from multiple sources including the Alaska
Energy Data Gateway (4), the Renewable Energy Atlas of Alaska (19), the Alaska Energy
Efficiency Map (15), the Division of Geological & Geophysical Services report, Summary of
Fossil Fuel and Geothermal Resource Potential in the Bristol Bay region (20), NREL’s PVWatts
(21), personal communication with Alaska Energy Authority program managers for Biomass
Energy, Heat Recovery, Hydroelectric Power, and Wind Energy, and data shared by the region’s
electric utilities.
Note that each table estimates the savings potential from new, community- or utility-scale energy
projects. The analysis does not reflect the value of infrastructure or programs already in place . It
does not look at opportunity from residential projects; it does look at potential for building scale
projects for biomass, energy efficiency, and solar.
The rating criteria for individual resources of biomass, heat recovery, hydroelectric, and wind
were developed in collaboration with AEA program managers. See Table 37: Criteria used in
resource potential analysis
for an explanation of the criteria used in the analysis.
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | E-2
Table 29: Wood biomass resource potential 20-Year Average Diesel Fuel Price ($) Potential Productive Forest Project in Operation Rough B/C Ratio Existing Study (R,F) or Development (D,C) Certainty Aleknagik 4.16 L M N 1.10 R M
Chignik 4.22 L L N 0.00 L
Chignik Lagoon 5.12 L L N 0.00 L
Chignik Lake 5.12 L L N 0.00 L
Clark's Point 4.16 H L N 0.00 R M
Dillingham 4.16 M M N 1.10 L
Egegik 5.26 L L N 0.00 L
Ekwok 5.43 H M N 1.64 L
Igiugig 6.88 H L N 0.00 R M
Iliamna 5.51 H M N 1.67 R M
King Salmon 4.22 L L N 0.00 L
Kokhanok 6.39 H M Y 2.05 C M
Koliganek 5.97 H M N 1.87 L
Levelock 6.43 L L N 0.00 L
Manokotak 3.52 L L N 0.00 L
Naknek 4.22 L L N 0.00 L
New Stuyahok 4.97 H M N 1.44 R M
Newhalen 5.51 H M N 1.67 R M
Nondalton 5.51 H M N 1.67 R M
Pedro Bay 6.45 H M N 2.07 R M
Perryville 5.97 L L N 0.00 L
Pilot Point 5.76 L L N 0.00 L
Port Alsworth 6.38 L M N 2.04 R M
Port Heiden 5.38 L L N 0.00 L
South Naknek 4.22 L L N 0.00 L
Togiak 4.69 L L N 0.00 L
Twin Hills 6.26 L L N 0.00 L
See D-1 for data sources and notes.
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | E-3
Table 30: Geothermal resource potential Potential Identified Resource within 20 miles (Y,N) Identified Significant Resoucece within 20 miles (Y,N) No resource identified w/I 20 miles Certainty Aleknagik L N N N L
Chignik L N N N L
Chignik Lagoon L N N N L
Chignik Lake L N N N L
Clark's Point L N N N L
Dillingham L N N N L
Egegik L N N N L
Ekwok L N N N L
Igiugig L N N N L
Iliamna L N N N L
King Salmon L N N N L
Kokhanok L N N N L
Koliganek L N N N L
Levelock L N N N L
Manokotak L N N N L
Naknek L N N N L
New Stuyahok L N N N L
Newhalen L N N N L
Nondalton L N N N L
Pedro Bay L N N N L
Perryville L N N N L
Pilot Point L N N N L
Port Alsworth L N N N L
Port Heiden L N N N L
South Naknek L N N N L
Togiak L N N N L
Twin Hills L N N N L
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | E-4
Table 31: Hydropower resource potential Potential Projects in Operation Hydro Resource Identified in Pathway Existing Study (R,F) or Development (D,C) Viable Hydro based on Visual Assessment Certainty Aleknagik L Y F M H
Chignik H Y Y D H H
Chignik Lagoon H Y C M H
Chignik Lake M Y M M
Clark's Point L N L M
Dillingham L Y F L H
Egegik L N L M
Ekwok L Y L M
Igiugig L Y L M
Iliamna H Y Y R L H
King Salmon L Y L M
Kokhanok M Y M M
Koliganek L Y L M
Levelock L N L M
Manokotak L Y L M
Naknek L N L M
New Stuyahok L Y L M
Newhalen H Y Y L H
Nondalton H Y Y M H
Pedro Bay M Y F M H
Perryville M Y M M
Pilot Point L N L M
Port Alsworth M Y R M M
Port Heiden M Y M M
South Naknek L N L M
Togiak L Y L M
Twin Hills L Y L M
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | E-5
Table 32: Wind energy resource potential Wind Potential Wind-Resource Wind Developability Site Accessible Permittability Site Availability Load Certainty Aleknagik M H M N Y Y Y M
Chignik L H L N Y X Y H
Chignik Lagoon L L L Y Y Y X H
Chignik Lake L L L Y Y Y X M
Clark's Point L M L Y Y Y X M
Dillingham M M H Y Y Y Y H
Egegik L M L Y Y Y X M
Ekwok L L L N Y N X M
Igiugig L L L Y Y Y X H
Iliamna M L H Y Y Y Y L
King Salmon M M H Y Y Y Y H
Kokhanok H H H H H
Koliganek M M H Y Y Y Y H
Levelock L L L Y Y Y X L
Manokotak M M H Y Y Y Y H
Naknek M M H Y Y Y Y H
New Stuyahok M M M Y Y Y Y H
Newhalen M M H Y Y Y Y L
Nondalton M L L N Y N Y M
Pedro Bay L M L Y Y Y X L
Perryville M H M Y Y Y X H
Pilot Point M M M Y Y Y X H
Port Alsworth L L L Y Y Y X H
Port Heiden L M L Y Y Y X H
South Naknek M M H Y Y Y Y H
Togiak M M M Y Y N Y H
Twin Hills L L L Y Y Y X M
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | E-6
Table 33: Coal resource potential Potential Identified Deposits Quality/High subsurface volume Long Distance to Load Project Planned or in Development Certainty Aleknagik L N N N N L
Chignik M Y Y Y N L
Chignik Lagoon M Y Y Y N L
Chignik Lake M Y Y Y N L
Clark's Point L N N N N L
Dillingham L N N N N L
Egegik M Y Y Y N L
Ekwok L N N N N L
Igiugig L N N N N L
Iliamna L N N N N L
King Salmon L N N N N L
Kokhanok L N N N N L
Koliganek L N N N N L
Levelock L N N N N L
Manokotak L N N N N L
Naknek L N N N N L
New Stuyahok L N N N N L
Newhalen L N N N N L
Nondalton L N N N N L
Pedro Bay L N N N N L
Perryville M Y Y Y N L
Pilot Point M Y Y Y N L
Port Alsworth L N N N N L
Port Heiden M Y Y Y N L
South Naknek L N N N N L
Togiak L N N N N L
Twin Hills L N N N N L
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | E-7
Table 34: Oil and gas resource potential Potential Source Rock, Traps and Reservoirs Present Wells Drilled & Resource Identified Certainty Aleknagik L N N L
Chignik L N N L
Chignik Lagoon L N N L
Chignik Lake L N N L
Clark's Point L N N L
Dillingham L N N L
Egegik L N N L
Ekwok L N N L
Igiugig L N N L
Iliamna L N N L
King Salmon L N N L
Kokhanok L N N L
Koliganek L N N L
Levelock L N N L
Manokotak L N N L
Naknek L N N L
New Stuyahok L N N L
Newhalen L N N L
Nondalton L N N L
Pedro Bay L N N L
Perryville L N N L
Pilot Point L N N L
Port Alsworth L N N L
Port Heiden L Y N L
South Naknek L N N L
Togiak L N N L
Twin Hills L N N L
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | E-8
Table 35: Heat recovery (HR) resource potential Potential HR Equipment at Powerhouse HR In Operation Recoverable Heat Available Thermal Loads Nearby Certainty Aleknagik L N N N H
Chignik L Y Y N N L
Chignik Lagoon L Y Y N M
Chignik Lake H Y Y Y M
Clark's Point L N N N L
Dillingham H Y Y Y M
Egegik L Y Y N H
Ekwok L N N N M
Igiugig L Y Y N M
Iliamna H Y Y N M
King Salmon L N N N H
Kokhanok H Y Y N M
Koliganek H Y Y Y M
Levelock M N N Y L
Manokotak L Y N N L
Naknek H Y Y Y H
New Stuyahok L Y N Y H
Newhalen H Y Y N M
Nondalton H Y Y N M
Pedro Bay L Y Y N H
Perryville H Y Y Y M
Pilot Point H Y Y Y M
Port Alsworth H Y N Y H
Port Heiden H Y N Y H
South Naknek L N N N H
Togiak L Y Y Y H
Twin Hills L Y Y N M
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | E-9
Table 36: Energy Efficiency savings potential
Potential Residential Potential % Homes w/o HER & WX Commercial & Public Potential Water/Sewer System Audit Conducted School Audit Conducted Street Lights EE Program - VEEP or ECBG or Multiple AHFC Commercial Certainty Aleknagik H H 88% H N Y N EECBG H
Chignik H H 98% H N Y N EECBG/VEEP H
Chignik Lagoon H H 100% H N N Y N H
Chignik Lake H H 68% H N Y N VEUEM H
Clark's Point H H 100% H N N Y EECBG H
Dillingham H H 82% H N Y N EECBG H
Egegik H H 100% H Y Y N VEEP/LPSD H
Ekwok H H 100% H Y Y N VEEP H
Igiugig M L 29% H Y N N N H
Iliamna H L 0% H N N N N H
King Salmon H H 84% H N N N N H
Kokhanok M L 17% H N N N VEEP H
Koliganek H H 100% H Y Y P EECBG (BBNA) H
Levelock H H 100% H N N P EECBG H
Manokotak M L 12% M Y Y Y VEEP H
Naknek H H 88% H N N N VEEP (BBB) H
New Stuyahok M L 28% H N N P VEEP H
Newhalen H M 38% H N Y Y EECBG H
Nondalton M L 17% H Y Y P EECBG (BBNA) H
Pedro Bay M L 0% H N N N VEEP H
Perryville M L 15% H N Y N VEEP H
Pilot Point H H 100% H N N Y EECBG H
Port Alsworth H H 95% H N Y N N H
Port Heiden H L 20% H N N Y EECBG H
South Naknek H M 52% H Y N N EECBG/VEEP H
Togiak H H 88% H N Y N EECBG/VEEP H
Twin Hills H H 100% H Y Y N EECBG (BBNA) H
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | E-10
Table 37: Criteria used in resource potential analysis
Resource Potential Certainty
Resource What it Includes Low Medium High Low Medium High
Alternative Power Generation
Coal Resource development*
and power generation
Local, quality
resource absent.
Quality resource
identified; further
study needed
High quality, local
resource identified;
project in development
No information
documented.
Based on
documented opinion
of credible source or
recon level study.
Based on
feasibility or
higher level study.
Geothermal Resource development
and power generation
No documented
resource within 20
miles.
Significant resource
within 20 miles.
Significant resource
within economic
distance.
" " "
Hydro Resource development
and power generation
No hydro resource
present or, if present,
economic viability is
nil to highly unlikely
based on visual
inspection.
Economic viability is
unlikely to possible
based on visual
inspection.
Hydro project is present
or under construction.
Or, economic viability is
possible to highly likely
based on visual
inspection.
No information
documented.
Based on
documented opinion
of credible source or
recon level study,
including hydro
database.
Based on
feasibility or
higher level study.
Hydrokinetic Resource development
and power generation Not Rated (See notes on emerging technologies following table.)
Oil & Natural Gas Resource development
and power generation
No source rock, traps
or reservoirs present.
Source rock, traps or
reservoirs present.
Needs investigation.
Wells drilled and
economic resource
identified.
" " "
Solar Photovoltaic Economic criteria are more important than resource data. Projects should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. See
notes on solar technologies following table.
Wind Resource development
and power generation
Wind resource or
developability
low***.
"
Project in operation, or
wind resource and
developability high***.
" Based on recon level
study.
Resource based
on 12+ months
onsite resource
assessment,
hourly load data,
feasibility or
higher level study.
Other Nuclear, emerging energy
technology Low (See notes on emerging technologies following table.)
Heat
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | E-11
Resource Potential Certainty
Resource What it Includes Low Medium High Low Medium High
Biomass Resource development
and heat generation
Low productivity of
nearby forest. And, if
study is available, B/C
ratio less than 1.0.
Medium or higher
productivity of
nearby forest; and,
B/C ratio between
1.0 and 1.5, based
on either rough
analysis**** or
existing study.
Medium or higher
productivity of nearby
forest; and B/C ratio
greater than 1.5, based
on either rough
analysis**** or existing
study.
No information
documented.
Based on
documented opinion
of credible source or
recon level study.
Based on
feasibility or
higher level study
.
Heat Pumps Ground, sea water, and air
source heat pumps
Economic criteria are more important than resource data. Projects should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. See notes following
table on heat pumps in communities with diesel electric generation.
Diesel Heat Recovery CHP from diesel, other
Thermal loads remote
from powerhouse,
minimal recoverable
heat remains.
<--->
HR equipment installed
at powerhouse, thermal
loads nearby, much
recoverable heat
remains.
No information
documented.
Based on
documented opinion
of credible source or
recon level study
(e.g. power system
inventory).
Based on
feasibility or
higher level study
(e.g. RPSU CDR).
End User
Efficiency - Based on
residential &
public/commercial
ratings^
Residential
> 30% of homes have
NOT received recent
EE upgrades
30 - 59% of homes
have NOT received
recent EE upgrades.
< 60% of homes have
NOT received recent EE
upgrades
Little to no
information
available on
buildings or
recent EE
upgrades.^^
Little to no
information
available on
buildings or
recent EE
upgrades.
Public &
Commercial See Note ^^
Completed all:
Water/Sewer
system audit, school
audit, streetlight
replacements,
EECBG, AHFC
Commercial or VEEP
Completed 3 to 0 of the
infrastructure
audits/upgrades/program
s
Little to no
information
available on
buildings or
recent EE
upgrades.^^^
Little to no
information
available on
buildings or
recent EE
upgrades.
Notes
* Resource development: Activities that include energy resource assessment, infrastructure development, transportation, fuel storage and handling.
**Visual assessment by AEA hydro PM indication L=None to Highly Unlikely, M=Unlikely to Maybe, H=Maybe to Highly Likely
*** Wind potential
defined by two factors:
1. Wind resource: L=class 2 or lower, M=class 3-4, H=class 5 or higher.
2. Developability, Indicated by four factors (Y=yes, N=likely no, X=fundamental problem that indicates low wind potential)
a. Access in place: is there a road, power transmission, or other suitable access to a viable wind site?
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | E-12
Resource Potential Certainty
Resource What it Includes Low Medium High Low Medium High
b. Permitability: Can habitat, FAA, or other factors be resolved without significant difficulty?
c. Site availability: Is there suitable land that is available for siting wind turbines?
d. Load: Is there sufficient load such that wind can be integrated economically with the existing diesel system (X: less than 50 kW average load)?
**** Rough analysis of
biomass project
benefit/cost estimated
based on these
assumptions:
1. Fuel price estimated as simple 20-year average of ISER projections of power-sector fuel price plus an adder of $0.50 per gallon for heating fuel
(ftp://www.aidea.org/REFund/Round%208/Documents/EvaluationModel.xlsm)
2. Fuelwood with an energy content of 20 MMBtu/cord and price of $250/cord
3. Wood and oil combustion efficiency equal
4. Installed cost of system estimated at $35/gallons per year of displaced fuel
5. O&M cost of 1% installed cost
Energy Efficiency Rating^ The rating is conservative in giving a high potential for communities with any high rating whether in residential or public/commercial. Medium ratings are used
for communities with two mediums or a low and a high. No community is rated as low for overall energy efficiency potential.
Energy Efficiency Low^^ Low is not used as a resource potential for public and commercial building energy efficiency because even if all programs and audits are completed there is
substantial work left to be done on implementing retrofits. Where information on audits especially for public and commercial buildings is sufficient, information
on whether retrofits have been implemented is often lacking. To reflect that these criteria are not the full story of energy efficiency in commercial and public
infrastructure, this the low potential rating is not used.
Energy Efficiency
Certainty^^^
The assumption is audits and streetlights that have been completed are recorded by AHFC and EE programs are recorded in multiple locations - REAP, AK Energy
Efficiency, and AEA. Therefore, these ratings are based on collected data and have a high level of certainty.
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement | E-13
Notes on Specific Technologies
SOLAR P/V AND THERMAL
In Alaska, the sun's energy is abundant in the summer when daylight hours are long. Owners and
residents of off-grid lodges, fish camps, and remote cabins may find solar photovoltaic or solar
thermal systems to be viable options. However, long, dark winters with six or more months of
snow cover in most of the state make the economics of solar energy challenging. This is
particularly true when the economics of solar energy are compared to those of energy efficiency
and conservation, which can provide similar fuel-saving benefits at a fraction of the cost of solar
energy.
The Alaska Energy Authority has funded the construction of one solar photovoltaic and one
solar thermal project through the Renewable Energy Fund in recent years. Each of these projects
was designed and constructed properly and is operating as anticipated. The Kaltag solar
photovoltaic project cost $126,000 and saved $2,600 in energy costs in FY2014. The McKinley
Village solar thermal project cost more than $190,000 and saved approximately $7,000 in
FY2014. Once operations and maintenance costs are factored in, neither of these projects is likely
to pay for itself over its expected life.
The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has developed a valuable tool for ana lyzing
solar photovoltaic performance and economics. It is called PVWatt’s Calculator and is available
at http://pvwatts.nrel.gov. Alaskans interested in learning about the potential for solar
photovoltaic development can use PVWatt’s as a preliminary anal ysis tool to analyze solar
potential at their site. NREL also has a tool for analyzing solar thermal projects call ed System
Advisor Model (SAM) and is available at https://sam.nrel.gov. Alaska residents can request
assistance from the Alaska Energy Authority (David Lockard at 907-771-3062) in performing
either solar P/V or solar thermal analysis.
HEAT PUMPS IN COMMUNITIES WITH DIESEL ELECTRICAL GENERATION
Given the high installation costs and efficiency limitations of current technology, heat pumps do
not appear economically competitive with fuel oil heaters in rural communities that rely on diesel
for electrical generation.
Heat pumps use a working fluid in a refrigeration cycle to move heat from a lower temperature
source to a higher temperature load, consuming electricity in the process. Heat sources can
include the ground (via glycol filled loops in vertical boreholes or horizontal trenches), air,
ground water, lakes, and seawater. Heat pump performance is expressed as a ratio of thermal
energy delivered to electrical energy consumed which is referred to as the Coefficient of
Performance (COP).
Unit oil fuel heaters typical of rural Alaska operate at approximately 90% efficiency. Diesel
genset conversion efficiencies typical of rural Alaska communities are in the range of 30-35% (in
other words, 30-35% of the energy available in diesel fuel is converted to electricity). Based on
these assumptions, a heat pump would need to operate with a minimum average COP greater
than 2.5 in order to supply the same amount of heat from electricity generated from 1 gallon of
diesel fuel as would be supplied by burning 1 gallon of diesel fuel. While this level of
performance may be attainable in many areas of the state, the cost of inst allation—which Cold
Climate Housing Research Center has estimated to range from $25,000 to $35,000 for ground
Appendix E
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement | E-14
source heat pump systems—almost certainly precludes the economic viability of heat pumps in
communities reliant on diesel generation. Additional factors to take into account:
Powerhouse heat recovery adds significant additional value to each gallon of diesel
consumed for electricity generation.
Transmission losses reduce the amount of electrical energy actually available per gallon of
diesel.
Maintenance requiring specially trained technicians and equipment further increase
operational costs.
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
River and marine hydrokinetics, including tidal and wave power, are emerging technologies with
no commercial projects currently in operation in the United States. Considerable resources are
being invested in advancement of the technologies at the state and federal level although at this
point they are considered pre-commercial.
Appendix F
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | F-1
F | R EFERENCES
1. U.S. Department of Energy. Energy.Gov. Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs.
[Online] July 2015. http://energy.gov/indianenergy/resources/start-program.
2. Alaska Energy Authority. Power Cost Equalization Program Statistical Data by
Community, Reporting Period: July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014. 2015.
3. Information Insights. Bristol Bay Bulk Fuel Purchasing: Potential and Interest in a
Cooperative Buying Program. Fairbanks, Alaska : s.n., 2012.
4. Institute of Social and Economic Research. Alaska Energy Data Gateway. [prod.] Office of
Science, Basic Energy Sciences (BES), under EPSCoR Award # DE-SC0004903 (database and
web application development), and by Alaska Energy Authority (Renewable Energy Fund data
management and reporting) U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Anchorage, Alaska : s.n., 2015.
5. Scott, Antony. Screening Level Assessment of LNG for Alaska: SW and SE Alaskan Coastal
PCE Communities. Fairbanks : Alaska Center for Energy and Power, 2014.
6. ADOLWD. Research and Analysis, Population Estimates. State of Alaska- Department of
Labor and Workforce Development. [Online] 2015.
http://www.labor.alaska.gov/research/pop/popest.htm.
7. —. Alaska Population Projections: 20112-2042. [ed.] Alaska Department of Labor and
Workforce Development. April 2014.
8. Alaska Energy Authority. Renewable Energy Fund: Status Report and Round VIII
Recommendations. 2015.
9. Input. Phase II Outreach. Interviews & Energy Meetings. January to May 2015.
10. Wiltse, N., Madden, D., Valentine, B., Stevens, V. 2013 Alaska Housing Assessment. s.l. :
Cold Climate Housing Research Center, 2014. Prepared for Alaska Housing Finance
Corporation.
11. Ord, Jimmy. Alaska Housing Finance Corporation. Personal communication. January 2015.
12. Shiflea, Pat. Executive Director, Alaska Community Development Corporation. Personal
communication. February 17, 2015.
13. Waterman, Scott. Alaska Housing Finance Corporation. Personal communication. May 27,
2014.
14. Ord, Jimmy. Alaska Housing Finance Corporation. April 9, 2013.
15. Alaska Energy Authority. Alaska Energy Efficiency Map. March 26, 2013.
16. Energy Audits. Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium. [Online] [Cited: 12 12, 2012.]
http://www.anthctoday.org/dehe/cbee/energyaudits.html.
17. Dixon, Gavin, et al. Energy Use and Solutions in Rural Alaskan Sanitation Systems.
Anchorage, Alaska : Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium Division of Environmental Health
and Engineering, 2013.
18. Dixon, Gavin. ANTHC, Water System Audits. Personal Communication. December 2014.
19. Geographic Information Network of Alaska. Renewable Energy Atlas of Alaska. Alaska
Energy Data Inventory. [Online] 2013. [Cited: February 28, 2015.]
http://www.akenergyinventory.org/atlas.
Appendix F
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | F-2
20. Decker, P.L., et al. Fossil fuel and geothermal energy sources for local use in Alaska. s.l. :
Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys, 2012. pp. 123-136. Vol. Special Report
66L.
21. NREL. PVWatts Calculator. [Online] July 2015. http://pvwatts.nrel.gov/version_5.php.
Appendix G
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | G-1
G | Data Sources
Table 38: Data sources for community profiles
Note: See page 6 for a list of acronyms.
Source Date Source Date
Alaska Native Name UAF 2014 Location DCRA 2015
Historical Setting DCRA 2015 Climate Avg. Temp ACRC; weatherbase.com 2015
Cultural Resources DCRA 2015 Climate Zone CCHRC 2014
Energy Priorities Input 2015 HDD CCHRC 2014
Contacts City DCRA; Input 2015 Taxes Alaska Taxable 2013
Tribal DCRA; Input 2015 Economy DCRA 2015
Village Corp DCRA; Input 2015 Natural Hazards Plan DMVA 2014
Community Plans DCRA 2015
Demographics Demographics (cont.)
2000 Population DCRA 2000 HH Income DCRA 2010
Median Age DCRA 2000 % Employed DCRA 2015
HH Size DCRA 2000 LMI%HUD 2014
% Native DCRA 2000 Distressed Denali Commission 2013
2010 Population DCRA 2010
Median Age DCRA 2010
HH Size DCRA 2010
% Native DCRA 2010
Landfill Class DCRA 2015 Landfill Location DCRA 2015
Permitted DCRA 2015 Condition/Life DCRA 2015
W/W System Water DCRA; Input 2015 W/W Sys.Audited?ANTHC; Input 2015
Sewer DCRA; Input 2015 Homes Served Input 2015
Condition DCRA; Input 2015 Gallons
Road Access DCRA 2015 Electric Utility DCRA 2015
Air Access Owner DCRA 2015 Gen. Sources AEDG 2015
Runway (lxw)FAA 2015 Interties DCRA 2015
Dock/Port Facilities PCE DCRA 2015
Ferry Service DCRA 2015
Barge Access DCRA 2015 Notes Phase II Input 2015
Appendix G
Bristol Bay Regional Energy Plan Phase II: Stakeholder Engagement and Public Input | G-2
Table 39: Data sources for energy profiles
Note: See page 6 for a list of acronyms.
Field Source Date Source Date
Utility Name DCRA 2015 Power Production
Power House Diesel PCE, Utilities 2014
Engine Make
RPSU; Utilities; Input 2012;
2014; 2015 Wind
PCE, Utilities
2014
Line Loss PCE 2014 Hydro PCE, Utilities 2014
Heat Recovery RPSU 2012 Avg Load Alaska Energy Pathway; Utilities 2010; 2014
Upgrades RPSU; Utilities; AEA 2012; 2014 Peak Load Alaska Energy Pathway; Utilities 2010; 2014
Outages/Issues RPSU 2012 Diesel Eff.PCE; Utilities 2014
Operators Diesel Use PCE; Utilities 2014
Number
AEA Training Database;
Input
2014; 2015
5-yr Trend AEDG 2014
Training/Certs AEA Training Database 2014
Maint. Planning RPSU 2012 Electric Rates Residential PCE 2014
Commercial PCE 2014
Electric Sales Customers PCE 2014 Cost per kWh All PCE 2014
kWh sold PCE 2014
Fuel Prices Utility AEDG; Input 2014; 2015
Resources All See Appendix E 2015 Retail AEDG; Input 2014; 2015
Discounts AEDG; Input 2014; 2015
Bulk Fuel Tanks DCRA; ADEC-WEAR; Input 2014; 2015 Other sources
Purchasing Input 2015
Coop Purchase Input 2015 Regional Housing Authority AHFC 2014
Other Wx Service Provider AHFC 2014
Energy Use
Housing Units Occupied CCHRC 2014 Avg Star Rating CCHRC 2014
Vacant CCHRC 2014 Avg Sq Feet CCHRC 2014
Avg. EUI CCHRC 2014
Housing Need Overcrowded CCHRC 2014 EE Housing Stock
Owners/Occup CCHRC 2014 Retrofitted CCHRC, AHFC 2014
Data Quality 1-star CCHRC 2014 Retrofitted Regional Housing Auth.2014
Retrofitted Wx Service Provider 2014
Housing Age By Decade CCHRC 2014 BEES Certified CCHRC, AHFC 2014
Non-residential Bldg Inventory Lighting All
Ak EE Maps; VEEP reports; Input 2015ARIS (2014), DCRA maps (2008), AK EE
Maps (2015); Energy audits (variable)