HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPP_13007-City of Unalaska Wind Power FS-CDR-Design REF 13 Application - CopyRenewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 3 of 39 7/20/2020
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION
Please specify the legal grantee that will own, operate, and maintain the project upon completion.
Name (Name of utility, IPP, local government, or other government entity)
City of Unalaska Department of Public Utilities
Tax ID # 92-0036399
Date of last financial statement audit: November 2019 (annual audit)
Mailing Address: Physical Address:
P.O. Box 610 1035 E. Broadway Ave
Unalaska, AK 99685 Unalaska, AK 99685
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-581-1260
1.1 Applicant Point of Contact / Grants Manager
Name: Bob Cummings Title: City Engineer
Mailing Address:
Department of Public Works
1035 E. Broadway Ave.
P.O. Box 610
Unalaska, AK 99685
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-581-1260 907-581-2187 bcummings@ci.unalaska.ak.us
1.1.1 Applicant Signatory Authority Contact Information
Name: Dan Winters Title: Director of Public Utilities
Mailing Address:
1035 E. Broadway Ave.
P.O. Box 610
Unalaska, AK 99685
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-581-1260 907-581-2187 dwinters@ci.unalaska.ak.us
1.1.2 Applicant Alternate Points of Contact
Name Telephone: Fax: Email:
Tom Cohenour 907-581-1260 907-581-2187 tcohenour@ci.una-
laska.ak.us
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 4 of 39 7/20/2020
1.2 Applicant Minimum Requirements
Please check as appropriate. If applicants do not meet the minimum requirements, the application
will be rejected.
1.2.1 Applicant Type
☒ An electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS 42.05
CPCN #_106_, or
☐ An independent power producer in accordance with 3 AAC 107.695 (a) (1)
CPCN #______, or
☒ A local government, or
☐ A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities)
Additional minimum requirements
☒ 1.2.2 Attached to this application is formal approval and endorsement for the project by the
applicant’s board of directors, executive management, or other governing authority. If the ap-
plicant is a collaborative grouping, a formal approval from each participant’s governing au-
thority is necessary. (Indicate yes by checking the box)
☒ 1.2.3 As an applicant, we have administrative and financial management systems and follow
procurement standards that comply with the standards set forth in the grant agreement (Sec-
tion 3 of the RFA). (Indicate yes by checking the box)
☒ 1.2.4 If awarded the grant, we can comply with all terms and conditions of the award as iden-
tified in the Standard Grant Agreement template at www.akenergyauthority.org/what-we-
do/grants-loans/renewable-energy-fund-ref-grants/2020-ref-application (Any exceptions
should be clearly noted and submitted with the application.) (Indicate yes by checking the
box)
☒ 1.2.5 We intend to own and operate any project that may be constructed with grant funds for
the benefit of the general public. If no please describe the nature of the project and who will
be the primary beneficiaries. (Indicate yes by checking the box)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 5 of 39 7/20/2020
SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY
2.1 Project Title
Provide a 4 to 7 word title for your project. Type in the space below.
City of Unalaska Wind Power Feasibility and Final Design
2.2 Project Location
2.2.1 Location of Project – Latitude and longitude (preferred), street address, or commu-
nity name.
Latitude and longitude coordinates may be obtained from Google Maps by finding you project’s lo-
cation on the map and then right clicking with the mouse and selecting “What is here? The coordi-
nates will be displayed in the Google search window above the map in a format as follows:
61.195676.-149.898663. If you would like assistance obtaining this information, please contact
AEA’s Grants Manager Karin St. Clair by email at grants@akenergyauthority.org or by phone at
(907) 771-3081.
Latitude 53.8494 Longitude -166.5625
Lower Pyramid Valley area, near City water plant.
2.2.2 Community benefiting – Name(s) of the community or communities that will be the
beneficiaries of the project.
Unalaska
2.3 Project Type
Please check as appropriate.
2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type
☒ Wind ☐ Biomass or Biofuels (excluding heat-only)
☐ Hydro, Including Run of River ☐ Hydrokinetic
☐ Geothermal, Excluding Heat Pumps ☐ Transmission of Renewable Energy
☐ Solar Photovoltaic ☐ Storage of Renewable
☐ Other (Describe) ☐ Small Natural Gas
2.3.2 Proposed Grant Funded Phase(s) for this Request (Check all that apply)
Pre-Construction Construction
☐ Reconnaissance ☒ Final Design and Permitting
☒ Feasibility and Conceptual Design ☐ Construction
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 6 of 39 7/20/2020
2.4 Project Description
Provide a brief, one-paragraph description of the proposed project.
City of Unalaska (COU) proposes a two-phase project: feasibility/conceptual design to determine
best method to integrate wind power with the planned geothermal power project (to be operational
in 2024), followed by final design and permitting. COU initiated a self-funded wind study in 2017 to
identify prospective wind power sites and collect high quality wind data. Four met towers were in-
stalled (two 60-meter at two primary sites of interest, one 34-meter at an auxiliary site, and one 10-
meter at a reference site). As of Sept. 2020, the two 60-meter towers remain operational and a
wind resource report documenting the project is presently in draft form. COU anticipates installing 2
to 5 MW wind turbine capacity. Construction funding will be explored during the feasibility/concep-
tual phase. Options include bank financing or grant funding. Wind and geothermal power will ena-
ble COU to attain its near-term goal of achieving a 100% renewable energy-powered community
with its longer-term goal of becoming a world leader in operating a carbon-free economy.
2.5 Scope of Work
Provide a short narrative for the scope of work detailing the tasks to be performed under this fund-
ing request. This should include work paid for by grant funds and matching funds or performed as
in-kind match.
Building on the self-funded wind resource study initiated in 2017 (COU has expended $420,000 to
date, with an additional $75,000 allocated) that is in final stages of completion, COU will undertake
a detailed feasibility and conceptual design effort to determine the potential benefit and optimal ca-
pacity of wind power to complement the planned 30 MW geothermal project to meet the electrical
and thermal (via conversion of fuel oil heat to air-source heat pumps) power needs of the commu-
nity. COU anticipates that seafood processers and other commercial entities that presently self-
power will connect to the COU grid. Based on conclusions of the draft wind resource assessment
report, wind turbines would be installed in lower Pyramid Valley near the community water plant.
COU will compare three alternatives in the feasibility study:
1. Geothermal power with an energy storage system (ESS) (diesel generators in standby
or possibly low load to provide spinning reserve; diesels-off is preferred)
2. Geothermal with wind power and an ESS
3. No geothermal power; wind-diesel and an ESS.
During the feasibility and conceptual design phase of the project, COU will plan to visit Kodiak
Electric Association (KEA) in Kodiak to tour their power generation facilities as KEA’s hydro-wind-
ESS system is an analogue to a possible geothermal-wind-ESS system in Unalaska.
Following feasibility and conceptual design and a decision regarding project configuration, COU
will proceed with detailed design and permitting to install 2 to 5 MW capacity (presently anticipated;
2 MW minimum for a project, more than 5 MW possible) of wind power.
Final design and permitting will consist of, in brief:
Selection of turbine manufacturer and model (EWT and GE are primary candidates),
Turbine array layout (turbine number and landowner considerations),
Field geotechnical investigation (subsurface core borings to support foundation design),
Wind turbine foundation design (standard ballast pad or other TBD),
Civil works design (access roads, pads),
Electrical design (distribution upgrade and connection),
ESS (battery and/or flywheel energy storage as a control and integration element),
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 7 of 39 7/20/2020
Construction financing plan, and
Operations plan.
2.6 Previous REF Applications for the Project
See Section 1.15 of the RFA for the maximum per project cumulative grant award amount
Round
Submitted
Title of application Application
#, if known
Did you re-
ceive a
grant? Y/N
Amount of REF
grant awarded
($)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 8 of 39 7/20/2020
SECTION 3 – Project Management, Development, and Operation
3.1 Schedule and Milestones
Please fill out the schedule below (or attach a similar sheet) for the work covered by this funding
request. Be sure to identify key tasks and decision points, including go/no go decisions, in your
project along with estimated start and end dates for each of the milestones and tasks. Please
clearly identify the beginning and ending of all phases (I. Reconnaissance, II. Feasibility and Con-
ceptual Design, III. Final Design and Permitting, and IV. Construction) of your proposed project.
See the RFA, Sections 2.3-2.6 for the recommended milestones for each phase. Add additional
rows as needed.
Task
# Milestones Tasks
Start
Date
End
Date Deliverables
Feasibility and Conceptual Design
1
Project scoping
and contractor so-
licitation and se-
lection
Delineate scope of
work by contractor spe-
cialty, identify and hire
contractors
8/1/21 8/30/21
Establish contracts with pro-
ject contractors; kickoff meet-
ing (internal deliverable)
2
Detailed resource
assessment
Completion of wind re-
source study initiated in
Oct. 2017 10/1/17 12/31/20
Wind resource report (funded
by COU, in progress, draft
WRA completed (final
WRA/COU wind project Ph.
III report to AEA)
3
Identification of
land and regula-
tory issues
Research land use re-
strictions of non-COU
land; site area of pri-
mary interest is COU
land in Pyramid Valley
9/1/21 9/30/21
Review of turbine site op-
tions, COU or private in Pyra-
mid Valley (internal delivera-
ble)
4
Permitting and en-
vironmental analy-
sis
Review FAA and envi-
ronmental analyses;
model turbine layout
visual impact
9/1/21 9/30/21
FAA approval for 60 m met
tower and environmental re-
port completed for WRA pro-
ject (COU wind project Ph. II
report to AEA); submit 7460-1
for prospective wind turbine
locations/heights; revisit envi-
ronmental study of Pyramid
Valley
5
Detailed analysis
of current cost of
energy and future
market
Compare current power
system with existing
market to planned geo-
thermal power system
with enhanced load
market; latter with and
without addition of wind
power and ESS
9/1/21 10/31/21
Modification of cost modeling
prepared for geothermal
power project with inclusion
of wind power (internal deliv-
erable) and ESS
6
Assessment of al-
ternatives
Geothermal power de-
velopment in progress
with a signed PPA. Pri-
mary FS project task is
demonstrating optimal
wind power capacity to
complement geother-
mal with the planned
electric load increase
9/1/21 11/30/21
Homer software modeling re-
ports and additional analysis
(internal deliverable)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 9 of 39 7/20/2020
Task
# Milestones Tasks
Start
Date
End
Date Deliverables
(new electric customers
and conversion of ther-
mal loads from fuel oil
to electric power for air-
source heat pumps).
7
Conceptual design
and costs estimate
Energy balance and
cost optimization mod-
eling of turbine capacity
and site location op-
tions (Homer software)
11/1/21 1/31/22
Discussions of preferred al-
ternatives internally and with
project consultants (internal
deliverable)
8
Detailed economic
and financial anal-
ysis
Refinement of Homer
model with further anal-
ysis of PCE cost im-
pacts
12/1/21 1/31/22
Cost modeling, assuming with
and without construction of
geothermal powerplant (inter-
nal deliverable)
9
Conceptual busi-
ness and opera-
tions plan
Same analysis as Task
8 plus options for wind
turbine operations and
maintenance
1/1/22 2/28/22
Recommendations report (in-
ternal deliverable)
10
Final report and
recommendations
Conceptual design re-
port to summarize and
present project infor-
mation, analyses, and
conclusions
1/1/22 3/31/22
Conceptual Design Report
with COU decision to proceed
to design phase (to AEA)
Final Design and Permitting
1
Project scoping
and contractor so-
licitation and se-
lection
Delineate scope of en-
gineering design firm
and specialty contrac-
tors; solicit, evaluate,
select, and hire engi-
neering design firm and
contractors
4/1/22 4/30/22
Establish contracts with pro-
ject design team and contrac-
tors; kickoff meeting (internal
deliverable)
2
Permit applica-
tions
Submit final FAA 7460-
1 notifications for
planned wind turbine
construction locations
(follow-up to planning
work accomplished in
feasibility phase) and
receive determinations
5/1/22 6/30/22
Receipt of ASN determina-
tions (to AEA)
3
Final environmen-
tal assessment
and mitigation
plans
Re-evaluation of envi-
ronmental mitigation re-
quirements identified in
COU wind project
phase II report (Aug.
2018) and during feasi-
bility study
5/1/22 6/30/22
Updated environmental report
(internal deliverable; to AEA if
requested)
4
Resolution of land
use, right-of-way
issues
Assessment of pre-
ferred site options on
COU and/or OC land. If
non-COU land and/or
access is necessary,
5/1/22 6/30/22
Negotiated land use contract
with OC if needed (internal
deliverable, to AEA if re-
quested)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 10 of 39 7/20/2020
Task
# Milestones Tasks
Start
Date
End
Date Deliverables
land use agreements
will be negotiated.
5
Permitting, rights
of way, site control
No right of way and site
control requirements if
on COU land; see step
4 above
5/1/22 6/30/22
Same as step 4 above.
6
Final system de-
sign
Finalize wind turbine
manufacturer and
model selection; ge-
otechnical field borings
and report; foundation
design; civil works de-
sign; mechanical de-
sign (if required); elec-
trical connection design
with possible necessary
distribution upgrades;
will consider energy
storage system design
compatibility and up-
grades
7/1/22 11/30/22
Turbine manufacturer con-
tract or letter of intent; ge-
otechnical report; stamped
foundation design; stamped
civil drawings; stamped me-
chanical drawings; stamped
electrical drawings (internal
and to AEA)
7
Final cost estimate
and financing plan
Completion of contrac-
tor’s construction cost
estimate; COU evalua-
tion of project funding
options
10/1/22 11/30/22
Engineering design firm cost
estimate (internal deliverable,
to AEA if requested)
8
Updated economic
and financial anal-
yses
Assess cost impact to
retail and commercial
customers; decision on
construction financing
(if proceeding directly to
construction)
10/1/22 12/31/22
Economic and financial plan
report (internal deliverable)
9 Power sale agree-
ment in place
Project will be owned
by COU n/a n/a Self-owned; no power sale
agreement necessary
10
Final business and
operational plan
Manufacturer warranty
and support agree-
ments; internal planning
of employee assign-
ments and support
10/1/22 12/31/22
Agreements and plans (inter-
nal deliverable)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 11 of 39 7/20/2020
3.2 Budget
3.2.1 Funding Sources
Indicate the funding sources for the phase(s) of the project applied for in this funding request.
Grant funds requested in this application $1,143,900
Cash match to be provideda $127,100
In-kind match to be provideda $0
Energy efficiency match providedb $0
Total costs for project phase(s) covered in application (sum of
above)
$1,271,000
Describe your financial commitment to the project and the source(s) of match. Indicate whether
these matching funds are secured or pending future approvals. Describe the impact, if any, that
the timing of additional funds would have on the ability to proceed with the grant.
COU is strongly committed to this project, as demonstrated by the $495,000 allocated ($420,000
spent to date and $75,000 remaining for completion) for a wind resource assessment study to
demonstrate a developable wind resource in Unalaska. This, combined with the recently signed
power purchase agreement (PPA) with OCCP (a joint venture of Ounalashka Corporation and
Chena Power) for geothermal power, demonstrates COU’s commitment to 100% renewable en-
ergy to power Unalaska’s electrical and thermal power demands. Unalaska City Council will ap-
prove the 10% cash match for the proposed project (feasibility and conceptual design, and final
design and permitting).
a Attach documentation for proof (see Section 1.18 of the Request for Applications)
b See Section 8.2 of this application and Section 1.18 of the RFA for requirements for Energy Efficiency
Match.
3.2.2 Cost Overruns
Describe the plan to cover potential cost increases or shortfalls in funding.
Project costs will be closely monitored by Bob Cummings, City Engineer, who will serve as the
grant manager. Should the Department of Public Works/Department of Public Utilities elect to ex-
pand the scope of work beyond that detailed in this proposal, COU will self-fund all additional costs
(requires approval of city council).
3.2.3 Total Project Costs
Indicate the anticipated total cost by phase of the project (including all funding sources). Use actual
costs for completed phases. Indicate if the costs were actual or estimated.
Reconnaissance (including met tower installations
and WRA report; COU expense)
[Actual; 100%
COU expense al-
ready incurred/al-
located for com-
pletion]
$495,000
Feasibility and Conceptual Design (for remaining
elements not accomplished by COU’s phase II and
phase III wind study)
[Estimated] $139,000
Final Design and Permitting [Estimated] $1,132,000
Construction (assuming a 3 MW wind turbine ca-
pacity; feasibility and conceptual design may rec-
ommend alternate capacity)
[Estimated; Evalu-
ation Model
REF13 v2 spread-
sheet]
$14,100,000
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 12 of 39 7/20/2020
Total Project Costs (sum of above) Estimated $15,866,000
Metering/Tracking Equipment [not included in project
cost]
Estimated not estimated
3.2.4 Funding Subsequent Phases
If subsequent phases are required beyond the phases being applied for in this application, de-
scribe the anticipated sources of funding and the likelihood of receipt of those funds.
State and/or federal grants
Loans, bonds, or other financing options
Additional incentives (i.e. tax credits)
Additional revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable energy subsidies or pro-
grams that might be available)
COU assumes AEA will solicit proposals for Round 14 of the Renewable Energy Fund in late sum-
mer or autumn 2022. At that time COU anticipates that the wind power project design will be in
later stages of completion with essential parameters in place and draft or possibly final cost esti-
mates in hand. COU anticipates that State of Alaska grant funding via REF14 may be possible for
a reasonable portion of project construction. Barring that option, COE anticipates standard bank
loan financing, bond sales, and/or a federal source of grant funding. Despite the geothermal power
project proceeding via a PPA model, COU anticipates that a wind power project in Unalaska will be
utility-owned and operated.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 13 of 39 7/20/2020
3.2.3 Budget Forms
Applications MUST include a separate worksheet for each project phase that was identified in Sec-
tion 2.3.2 of this application — I. Reconnaissance, II. Feasibility and Conceptual Design, III. Final
Design and Permitting, and IV. Construction. Please use the tables provided below to detail your
proposed project’s total budget. Be sure to use one table for each phase of your project, and delete
any unnecessary tables. The milestones and tasks should match those listed in 3.1 above.
If you have any question regarding how to prepare these tables or if you need assistance preparing
the application please feel free to contact AEA’s Grants Manager Karin St. Clair by email at
grants@akenergyauthority.org or by phone at (907) 771-3081.
Phase 2 — Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Milestone or Task
Antici-
pated
Comple-
tion Date
RE- Fund
Grantee
Matching
Source of
Matching
Funds:
TOTALS Grant
Funds
Funds Cash/In-
kind/Federal
Grants/Other
State
Grants/Other
Project scoping and con-
tractor solicitation 8/30/2021 $6,255 $695 Cash $6,950
Detailed resource as-
sessment 12/31/2020 $0 $0 Cash $0
Identification of land and
regulatory issues 9/30/2021 $6,255 $695 Cash $6,950
Permitting and environ-
mental analysis 9/30/2021 $6,255 $695 Cash $6,950
Detailed analysis of cur-
rent cost of energy and
future market
10/31/2021 $12,510 $1,390 Cash $13,900
Assessment of alterna-
tives 11/30/2021 $6,255 $695 Cash $6,950
Conceptual design and
costs estimate 1/31/2022 $31,275 $3,475 Cash $34,750
Detailed economic and fi-
nancial analysis 1/31/2022 $25,020 $2,780 Cash $27,800
Conceptual business and
operations plan 2/28/2022 $6,255 $695 Cash $6,950
Final report and recom-
mendations 3/31/2022 $25,020 $2,780 Cash $27,800
TOTALS $125,100 $13,900 $139,000
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $6,255 $695 Cash $6,950
Travel & Per Diem $12,510 $1,390 Cash $13,900
Equipment $0 $0 Cash $0
Materials & Supplies $0 $0 Cash $0
Contractual Services $106,335 $11,815 Cash $118,150
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 14 of 39 7/20/2020
Phase 2 — Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Milestone or Task
Antici-
pated
Comple-
tion Date
RE- Fund
Grantee
Matching
Source of
Matching
Funds:
TOTALS Grant
Funds
Funds Cash/In-
kind/Federal
Grants/Other
State
Grants/Other
Construction Services $0 $0 Cash $0
Other $0 $0 Cash $0
TOTALS $125,100 $13,900 $139,000
Phase 3 — Final Design and Permitting
Milestone or Task
Antici-
pated
Comple-
tion Date
RE- Fund
Grantee
Matching
Source of
Matching
Funds:
TOTALS Grant
Funds
Funds Cash/In-
kind/Federal
Grants/Other
State
Grants/Other
Project scoping and con-
tractor solicitation 4/30/2022 $10,188 $1,132 Cash $11,320
Permit applications 6/30/2022 $10,188 $1,132 Cash $11,320
Final environmental as-
sessment and mitigation
plans
6/30/2022 $30,564 $3,396 Cash $33,960
Resolution of land use,
right-of-way issues 6/30/2022 $20,376 $2,264 Cash $22,640
Permitting, rights of way,
site control 6/30/2022 $20,376 $2,264 Cash $22,640
Final system design 11/30/2022 $815,040 $90,560 Cash $905,600
Final cost estimate and fi-
nancing plan 11/30/2022 $50,940 $5,660 Cash $56,600
Updated economic and fi-
nancial analyses 12/31/2022 $30,564 $3,396 Cash $33,960
Power sale agreement in
place n/a $0 $0 Cash $0
Final business and opera-
tional plan 12/31/2022 $30,564 $3,396 Cash $33,960
TOTALS $1,018,800 $113,200 $1,132,000
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $50,940 $5,660 Cash $56,600
Travel & Per Diem $71,316 $7,924 Cash $79,240
Equipment $0 $0 Cash $0
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 15 of 39 7/20/2020
Phase 3 — Final Design and Permitting
Milestone or Task
Antici-
pated
Comple-
tion Date
RE- Fund
Grantee
Matching
Source of
Matching
Funds:
TOTALS Grant
Funds
Funds Cash/In-
kind/Federal
Grants/Other
State
Grants/Other
Materials & Supplies $0 $0 Cash $0
Contractual Services $896,544 $99,616 Cash $996,160
Construction Services $0 $0 Cash $0
Other $0 $0 Cash $0
TOTALS $1,018,800 $113,200 $1,132,000
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 16 of 39 7/20/2020
3.2.4 Cost Justification
Indicate the source(s) of the cost estimates used for the project budget, including costs for future
phases not included in this application.
The feasibility and conceptual design phase of the project was estimated by reference to similar
projects funded by prior rounds of the Renewable Energy Fund. The reference project was the
Mountain Village FS/CDR, awarded $123,500 in REF7. Noting that the proposed Unalaska project
shares similarities with the Mountain Village project, e.g., prior completion of wind resource studies,
a two percent annual cost escalation was added to derive Unalaska’s $139,000 REF13 grant fund-
ing request for feasibility and conceptual design.
For final design and permitting, a 3 MW capacity wind power project (fitting within the 2-to-5 MW
capacity projection) with a project construction cost of $14.1 million was estimated with AEA’s Eval-
uationModel R13 v2 Excel spreadsheet. This was calculated at $4,716 per kilowatt of installed ca-
pacity by interpolation of “wind cost per capacity estimates” between the 2,000- and 5,000-kW pro-
ject sizes in the Assumptions tab. Standard engineering industry guidelines state 5-to-8% design
cost-to-construction cost. Eight percent was chosen as COU’s anticipates a complex design pro-
cess that must consider the planned new geothermal powerplant, inclusion of an ESS for system
integration and control, expanded distribution system to include presently self-generating seafood
processors, and diesels-off operation to meet COU’s goal of 100% renewable energy. With that, a
$1.132M final design and permitting cost was estimated.
3.3 Project Communications
3.3.1 Project Progress Reporting
Describe how you plan to monitor the progress of the project and keep AEA informed of the status.
Who will be responsible for tracking the progress? What tools and methods will be used to track
progress?
Bob Cummings, as COU’s grants manager for this project, will communicate with AEA on a mutu-
ally agreed upon schedule, presumably monthly or bi-monthly. He will be assisted by Douglas
Vaught, P.E. of V3 Energy LLC, the project manager, as needed. Monthly tracking of scope,
budget and schedule via contractor progress reports and labor and expense submittals will ensure
that progress is maintained, and no project element goes awry.
3.3.2 Financial Reporting
Describe the controls that will be utilized to ensure that only costs that are reasonable, ordinary
and necessary will be allocated to this project. Also discuss the controls in place that will ensure
that no expenses for overhead, or any other unallowable costs will be requested for reimbursement
from the REF Grant Program.
COU Public Utilities, Public Works and City management will be briefed on the terms and condi-
tions of AEA’s REF Grant Program. COU will develop a project budget with only costs that are rea-
sonable, ordinary, and necessary for the project. Prior to purchase, each transaction will be re-
viewed to ensure it is necessary and reasonable. This review will be based on the terms set forth in
the grant agreement. Only costs that are subject to the above process will be allocated to the grant
and requested for reimbursement. The City of Unalaska does not record overhead expenses to
any of their grant programs. Purchase orders will be used to authorize purchases and provide cod-
ing to correct accounts.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 17 of 39 7/20/2020
Project managers are held accountable for achieving project budgets and complying with applica-
ble grant terms. COU’s accounting group will be briefed on the terms and conditions of the REF
grant to include the requirement that overhead or other unallowable costs are not included in a re-
quest for reimbursement. COU’s Public Works Accounting Manager will review all grant reports
and request for reimbursements to ensure compliance with terms and conditions of the grant.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 18 of 39 7/20/2020
SECTION 4 – QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
4.1 Project Team
Include resumes for known key personnel and contractors, including all functions below, as an at-
tachment to your application. In the electronic submittal, please submit resumes as separate PDFs
if the applicant would like those excluded from the web posting of this application.
4.1.1 Project Manager
Indicate who will be managing the project for the Grantee and include contact information. If the
applicant does not have a project manager indicate how you intend to solicit project management
support. If the applicant expects project management assistance from AEA or another government
entity, state that in this section.
Douglas Vaught, P.E., V3 Energy LLC, dvaught@v3energy.com. Owner and principal engineer of
Anchorage, Alaska area-based consulting engineering firm focused on renewable wind energy sys-
tems with emphasis on Alaska village power systems. Project work includes renewable energy pro-
ject development, wind turbine performance and layout optimization modeling, power system en-
ergy balance modeling, wind turbine site selection, meteorological test tower installation, wind re-
source data analysis, solar resource analysis, project economic analysis, feasibility studies, power
integration, and project management. Emphasis on the holistic integration of renewable energy to
supply electric, thermal and transportation power needs.
4.1.2 Project Accountant
Indicate who will be performing the accounting of this project for the grantee. If the applicant does
not have a project accountant indicate how you intend to solicit financial accounting support.
Lori Gregory, City of Unalaska Department of Public Works Office Manager, with support of COU
administrative personnel.
4.1.3 Expertise and Resources
Describe the project team including the applicant, partners, and contractors.
For each member of the project team, indicate:
the milestones/tasks in 3.1 they will be responsible for;
the knowledge, skills, and experience that will be used to successfully deliver the tasks;
how time and other resource conflicts will be managed to successfully complete the task.
If contractors have not been selected to complete the work, provide reviewers with sufficient detail
to understand the applicant’s capacity to successfully select contractors and manage complex con-
tracts.
Feasibility/Conceptual Design
City of Unalaska (Task 1 lead, Tasks 2-10 guidance)
V3 Energy LLC (Tasks 2-8, 10); note that in 2017 was awarded COU contract for Wind Power De-
velopment and Integration Assessment Project, Phase II and Phase III (COU’s project phase des-
ignations, not be confused with AEA’s project phase naming)
Solstice Alaska Consulting, Inc. (Task 3); team member under V3 Energy LLC for COU wind power
development project
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 19 of 39 7/20/2020
Electric Power Systems, Inc. (Tasks 6, 7, 10); COU’s lead powerplant design contractor, partici-
pated in Phase II of the wind power development project
Financial Engineering Co. (Tasks 5, 8, 9); developed PPA for the OCCP geothermal project; long
experience in Unalaska with financial modeling of power system
Design
City of Unalaska (Tasks 1, 4, 5 lead, all others guidance)
Electric Power Systems, Inc. (Task 6 and lead contractor)
V3 Energy LLC (Tasks 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)
Financial Engineering LLC (Tasks 7, 8, 10)
Geotechnical contractor TBD (Task 6)
Foundation design contractor TBD (Task 6)
Wind turbine manufacturer (EWT preferred at present) TBD (Tasks 5, 6, 7, 10)
ESS manufacturer TBD (Task 6)
Contractor (those not indicated as TBD) information
V3 Energy is a wind energy consulting engineering firm based in Eagle River, Alaska – in business
since 2003 – that focuses on renewable wind energy systems, with emphasis on Alaska village
power systems. Core strengths includes wind power project development, wind turbine perfor-
mance and layout optimization modeling, power system static modeling, wind turbine site selection,
meteorological test tower installation, wind resource data analysis including IEC 61400-1 criteria,
solar resource analysis, project economic analysis, feasibility studies, power integration, and pro-
ject management. Emphasis is on the holistic integration of renewable energy to supply electric,
thermal and transportation power needs.
Electric Power Systems, Inc. (EPS) is a full-service multidisciplinary consulting engineering firm
that has specialized in all aspect of electric power systems in Alaska since our 1996 founding in
Anchorage. Our staff includes electrical, mechanical, civil, and structural engineers; technicians,
and tradesmen; and specialized support staff focused on delivering comprehensive services to
electric power system owners. Our work includes everything from feasibility studies, to primary
power generation, to transmission and distribution systems, to ongoing maintenance and upgrades
of existing systems. EPS’ work in Alaska can be found from North Slope to the tip of the Panhan-
dle, throughout the Interior, and into the Aleutians. We believe that no other firm has delivered
more successful electrical infrastructure projects in Alaska. This experience includes multiple pro-
jects involving integration of renewal resources into the local islanded electrical grids.
SolsticeAK is an Anchorage- based, woman-owned small business, that will be responsible for as-
sessing potential environmental impacts and determining environmental and permitting needs for
project alternatives. SolsticeAK has been in business over nine years and has six employees,
providing services related to environmental planning, including National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) documentation and associated assessments, plus community and public involvement.
SolsticeAK has experience managing large and small NEPA documentation projects, which require
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 20 of 39 7/20/2020
alternatives development, impact analyses, public and agency involvement, and field survey and
reporting. In addition, SolsticeAK helps clients comply with federal and state environmental laws
including the Clean Water Act, National Historic Preservation Act and the Endangered Species Act.
Financial Engineering Company was formed as a sole proprietorship in 1995 to assist clients in de-
veloping and analyzing the data required for long-term decisions. These decisions can relate to
lending of capital funds, strategic plans, implementation of capital projects, fuel supply, and other
issues. Although most clients are within the electric utility industry, projects in other industries have
included ethanol production, commercial fishing, mining, natural gas, petroleum, and transporta-
tion.
4.2 Local Workforce
Describe how the project will use local labor or train a local labor workforce.
Given the high cost of travel to Unalaska, to the extent possible local labor is employed, but fishing
and seafood processing places high demand on labor resources, which is desirable but often
makes local hire goals challenging to meet. During the COU Wind Power Development and Inte-
gration Assessment Project, Phase III, local labor support was hired to assist with met tower instal-
lations and troubleshooting. For feasibility and conceptual design, and final design and permitting,
COU envisions fewer opportunities for local labor hire, though wind project construction would pro-
vide ample opportunity for local hire. Integral to a wind power operations plan, COU will train exist-
ing and/or new personnel as needed to operate and maintain the wind turbines.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 21 of 39 7/20/2020
SECTION 5 – TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
5.1 Resource Availability
5.1.1 Assessment of Proposed Energy Resource
Describe the potential extent/amount of the energy resource that is available, including average re-
source availability on an annual basis. For pre-construction applications, describe the resource to
the extent known. For design and permitting or construction projects, please provide feasibility doc-
uments, design documents, and permitting documents (if applicable) as attachments to this appli-
cation (See Section 11). Likelihood of the resource being available over the life of the project. See
the “Resource Assessment” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guid-
ance.
The draft City of Unalaska Wind Power Development and Integration Assessment Project Phase III
Report (wind resource assessment report) documents a mean wind speed of 7.1 m/s and mean
wind power density of 620 W/m2 (adjusted against long-term average measured at the airport) at
the 60-meter level of the Pyramid met tower. Wind flow modeling with WAsP software indicates
stronger wind resource potential in nearby terrain. Preliminary IEC 61400-1, 3rd edition classifica-
tion is Class IIB wind site. This indicates acceptable extreme wind probability and moderate turbu-
lence. Wind shear is extremely low with a calculated power law exponent (α) value of 0.079.
5.1.2 Alternatives to Proposed Energy Resource
Describe the pros and cons of your proposed energy resource vs. other alternatives that may be
available for the market to be served by your project.
A joint venture between Ounalashka Corp. and Chena Power (OCCP) has initiated a project to
construct a 30 MW geothermal power plant on the slopes of Makushin Volcano to supply electrical
power to the City of Unalaska. Wind power will complement geothermal power and will enable
COU to attain its near-term goal of achieving a 100% renewable energy-powered community with
its longer-term goal of becoming a world leader in operating a carbon-free economy. Given the
sensitivity of electrical power reliability for seafood processors, an ESS is planned as an integral
system component and will enable diesels-off operation.
With or without geothermal power, wind power, when combined with an ESS, improves system reli-
ability and redundancy, and increases COU’s prospect of achieving its goal of 100% renewable en-
ergy generation.
While construction of a 30 MW geothermal power plant will be a base assumption for wind power
feasibility and design, pitfalls are possible. There is of course a small but not insignificant chance
that geothermal power in Unalaska does not become reality. Should that possibility occur, contin-
ued progress on wind power development is critically important to COU to maintain momentum to-
ward meeting the community’s renewable energy goals.
5.1.3 Permits
Provide the following information as it may relate to permitting and how you intend to address out-
standing permit issues. See the “Environmental and Permitting Risks” section of the appropriate
Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance.
List of applicable permits
Anticipated permitting timeline
Identify and describe potential barriers including potential permit timing issues, public opposi-
tion that may result in difficulty obtaining permits, and other permitting barriers
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 22 of 39 7/20/2020
FAA Obstruction Notification, Form 7460-1 (anticipate approval based on swift approval of a 60-
meter met tower in Pyramid Valley with no lighting requirement). Other permits, as required, will be
identified in the feasibility and conceptual design process.
5.2 Project Site
Describe the availability of the site and its suitability for the proposed energy system. Identify po-
tential land ownership issues, including whether site owners have agreed to the project or how you
intend to approach land ownership and access issues. See the “Site control” section of the appro-
priate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance.
Pyramid Valley near Captain’s Bay was presumed the optimal site for wind power in Unalaska and
as such was considered the primary site of interest in COU’s Wind Power Development and Inte-
gration Assessment Project, which is presently nearing completion of the wind resource assess-
ment (WRA) portion of Phase III (note that this phase number is COU’s designation and should not
be confused with the REF13 phase classifications). The WRA demonstrated that the Pyramid Val-
ley wind resource is developable with an IEC 61400-1, 3rd ed. Class IIB classification.
Within Pyramid Valley, COU owns a 200 ft. wide strip of land where the 60-meter met tower is lo-
cated and which is also a potential wind turbine site. Ounalashka Corp. owns the adjacent land and
has been a cooperative partner in COU’s wind study by permitting the installation of three met tow-
ers on their land in other locations in Unalaska and has given COU the right to enter their land to
access the Pyramid met tower.
5.3 Project Technical & Environmental Risk
5.3.1 Technical Risk
Describe potential technical risks and how you would address them.
Which tasks are expected to be most challenging?
How will the project team reduce the risk of these tasks?
What internal controls will be put in place to limit and deal with technical risks?
See the “Common Planning Risks” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional
guidance.
At present, the wind resource on COU property in Pyramid Valley is well understood with 23
months data collected. Given terrain complexity, wind resource estimation at other site options in
the valley require modeling, an accepted industry practice. The focus of feasibility/conceptual de-
sign study will be energy balance and economic optimization modeling of wind power on COU
property – likely 2 to 5 MW capacity range – with and without assumption of geothermal power.
The primary assumption though will be 30 MW geothermal capacity, inclusion of self-generating
seafood processing plants on the Unalaska grid, and conversion of a large share of dispersed ther-
mal loads from fuel oil to air-source heat pumps. An anticipated challenge of this feasibility project
will be to accurately estimate and model the conversion of Unalaska’s energy generation system
from diesel generators and fuel oil heat to geothermal/wind power and heat pumps. For energy
consumption, a challenge will be accurately estimating the magnitude and temporal aspect of con-
necting presently self-generating processing plants onto the Unalaska grid. To reduce the risk of
inaccurate modeling, COU and its project consultants will work closely with OCCP and self-gener-
ating processors to coordinate planning.
5.3.2 Environmental Risk
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 23 of 39 7/20/2020
Explain whether the following environmental and land use issues apply, and if so which project
team members will be involved and how the issues will be addressed. See the “Environmental and
Permitting Risks” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance.
Threatened or endangered species
Habitat issues
Wetlands and other protected areas
Archaeological and historical resources
Land development constraints
Telecommunications interference
Aviation considerations
Visual, aesthetics impacts
Identify and describe other potential barriers
An environmental analysis completed by Solstice Alaska Consulting, Inc. and included in Appendix
A of City of Unalaska Wind Power Development and Integration Assessment Project, Phase II Re-
port demonstrates relatively low environmental risks for wind power development in lower Pyramid
Valley. COU anticipates that the FAA obstruction evaluation process presents the most substantial
risk to project planning, but distance to the Dutch Harbor airport, location of established approach
and departure patterns, and FAA approval of a 60-meter met tower at the project site with no ob-
struction lighting requirement enhances confidence that FAA will not object to eventual construc-
tion of wind turbines in the lower Pyramid Valley.
5.4 Technical Feasibility of Proposed Energy System
In this section you will describe and give details of the existing and proposed systems. The infor-
mation for existing system will be used as the baseline the proposal is compared to and also used
to make sure that proposed system can be integrated.
Only complete sections applicable to your proposal. If your proposal only generates electricity, you
can remove the sections for thermal (heat) generation.
5.4.1 Basic Operation of Existing Energy System
Describe the basic operation of the existing energy system including: description of control system;
spinning reserve needs and variability in generation (any high loads brought on quickly); and cur-
rent voltage, frequency, and outage issues across system. See the “Understanding the Existing
System” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance.
The following text copied from Unalaska Wind Power Development and Integration Assessment
Project Phase II Report (the text provided by EPS, Inc.):
The City of Unalaska uses high efficiency diesel generators for power generation. These genera-
tors are two each of identical 5.2 MW Wartsila and 4.4 MW Caterpillar units. Wartsila and Caterpil-
lar generators provide good response to power quality (frequency and voltage) requirements but a
limitation of the Caterpillar units is that they are sensitive to prolonged operation below 50% load,
which City of Unalaska tries to avoid because of maintenance and environmental concerns.
Industrial customers are more sensitive to voltage and frequency fluctuations than residential and
commercial loads. This is especially relevant during periods of high load demand when large in-
dustrial machinery and control equipment are in use. To maintain acceptable frequency and volt-
age control for these key loads and to maintain minimum spinning reserve, the City parallels (load-
shares) two or more generators.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 24 of 39 7/20/2020
To protect and prioritize power supply to key industrial customers, the City employs a progressive
load shedding program to reduce the risk of a system-wide outage. With this program, residential
and low sensitivity loads are shed first, and industrial and more sensitive loads are shed last. Load
shedding is automatically initiated when system under-frequency occurs due to a fault or other
problem.
Unlike most rural Alaskan systems where power quality standards are less rigorous, the Unalaska
system maintains frequency within +/- 0.15-0.20 Hz during normal operation. This provides a suffi-
cient spread between nominal and trip frequencies to ensure adequate system control without
shedding lower-priority customers too often.
Excellent power quality, i.e., very stable voltage and frequency, arguably is more important to in-
dustrial users than residential and commercials customers. Seafood processors, with a need to
maintain cold rooms to preserve expensive product, are sensitive to potential disruption and may
self-generate and not be willing to connect to the City power system, often though with generation
equipment less efficient and less reliable than the City of Unalaska generators. Ultimately this is
undesirable for both self-generating processors and the DPUA. The City of Unalaska loses reve-
nue and self-generating seafood processors must task staff with non-profit making work and incur
higher expenses than if tied to the DPUA system.
5.4.2.1 Existing Power Generation Units
Include for each unit include: resource/fuel, make/model, design capacity (kW), minimum
operational load (kW), RPM, electronic/mechanical fuel injection, make/model of genset
controllers, hours on genset
Unit 1: Unit 10: Wartsila 12V32 – 5.2 MW
Unit 2: Unit 11: Wartsila 12V32 – 5.2 MW
Unit 3: Unit 12: Caterpillar C280-16 –4.4 MW
Unit 4: Unit 10: Caterpillar C280-16 –4.4 MW
Unit 5: Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) generators –3 units –50 kW each
Unit 6:
5.4.2.2 Existing Distribution System
Describe the basic elements of the distribution system. Include the capacity of the step-up trans-
former at the powerhouse, the distribution voltage(s) across the community, any transmission volt-
ages, and other elements that will be affected by the proposed project.
COU has 35 kV sub-transmission and 12 kV distribution. The City’s 35 kV system was originally
installed in 1983 and 1984 as part of a series of smaller projects. Most of the line is original 4/0
Aluminum conductors. It is limited in capacity due to cable size and 200-amp terminations in
switches and junction boxes. The entire distribution system consists of 12 kV and 35 kV buried ca-
bles in PVC conduit. The 35 kV system consists of a looped backbone, 200-amp pad-mounted
5.4.2 Existing Energy Generation Infrastructure and Production
In the following tables, only fill in areas below applicable to your project. You can remove extra ta-
bles. If you have the data below in other formats, you can attach them to the application (see Sec-
tion 11).
Is there operational heat recovery? (Y/N) If yes estimated
annual displaced heating fuel (gallons)
No.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 25 of 39 7/20/2020
junction cabinets every 500 to 1,000 feet, pad-mounted 4-way switches, and pad-mounted trans-
formers throughout. The 35 kV is sourced from the new powerhouse on Amaknak Island and
serves nearby large industrial loads, including seafood processing, shipping, and harbor facilities. It
is also used to provide power to the town substation, located on Unalaska Island across the street
from the new Town Hall building. There are two main 35 kV backbone extensions that connect the
Amaknak Island distribution system to the Unalaska Island distribution system (one is a 1,200-foot
submarine cable channel crossing and the other is a town bridge crossing).
5.4.2.3 Existing Thermal Generation Units (if applicable to your project)
Genera-
tion unit
Resource/
Fuel type
Design ca-
pacity
(MMBtu/hr)
Make Model Average
annual
efficiency
Year In-
stalled
Hours
5.4.2.5 Annual Electricity Production and Fuel Consumption (Existing System – 2019)
Use most recent year. Replace the section (Type 1), (Type 2), and (Type 3) with generation
sources
Month
Genera-
tion DHPH
(kWh)
Genera-
tion
UVPM
(kWh)
Genera-
tion ORC
(kWh)
Fuel Con-
sumption
DHPH
(gal)
Fuel Con-
sumption
UVPM
[gal]
Peak
Load
(kW)
Mini-
mum
Load
(kW)
January 3,999,421 0 (442)256,177 0 9,035 0
February 5,098,608 0 (27)316,031 0 10,221 5,309
March 6,098,608 34,800 (21,060)387,688 3,089 11,872 2,996
April 4,311,052 13,200 (50,669)277,297 1,507 10,622 3,815
May 3,487,501 141,600 (44,784)225,966 8,846 7,225 2,928
June 3,487,545 164,100 (40,353)221,218 11,577 8,608 0
July 5,841,592 228,000 (55,271)363,940 15,933 11,583 2,811
August 6,491,215 173,100 (51,162)432,320 11,972 12,489 0
Sept. 4,807,095 18,900 (50,706)306,702 1,139 9,575 2,585
October 3,755,000 173,100 (38,738)243,502 11,055 7,846 0
November 3,384,358 199,500 (21,699)217,320 17,471 6,678 0
December 3,511,679 735,000 (880)229,792 6,746 6,822 2,707
Total 54,273,674 1,881,300 (375,791)3,477,953 89,335
DHPH – Dutch Harbor Powerhouse
OVPM – Unalaska Valley Power Module
“0” reading in minimum load means outage occurred
5.4.2.4 O&M and replacement costs for ex-
isting units
Power Generation Thermal Generation
i. Annual O&M cost for labor
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor
iii. Replacement schedule and cost for ex-
isting units
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 26 of 39 7/20/2020
5.4.2.6 Annual Heating Fuel Consumption (Existing System)
Use most recent year. Include only if your project affects the recovered heat off the diesel
genset or will include electric heat loads. Only include heat loads affected by the project.
Month Diesel
(Gallons)
Electricity Propane
(Gallons)
Coal
(Tons)
Wood
(Cords,
green tons,
dry tons)
Other
January
February * To be analyzed in the feasibility and conceptual design phase*
March
April
May
June
July
August
Septem-
ber
October
November
December
Total
5.4.3 Future Trends
Describe the anticipated energy demand in the community, or whatever will be affected by the pro-
ject, over the life of the project. Explain how the forecast was developed and provide year by year
forecasts. As appropriate, include expected changes to energy demand, peak load, seasonal varia-
tions, etc. that will affect the project.
A joint venture between Ounalashka Corporation and Chena Power (called OCCP) is developing a
30 MW capacity geothermal power project on the east flank of nearby Makushin Volcano and will
supply electrical power to COU via undersea cable. A PPA between OCCP and COU has been
signed with an anticipated system online date of May 2024. To achieve agreed-upon sales, COU
anticipates that self-generating seafood processors will switch to grid connection (some distribution
expansion and upgrade are required to achieve this objective). The increased electrical sales com-
bined with conversion of fuel oil heat to electrically powered air-source heat pumps and new indus-
try will likely increase electrical demand beyond the capacity of the geothermal plant. OCCP also
has plans to attract new customers to Unalaska and projects that demand will quickly outpace sup-
ply from their planned geothermal facility.
COU has a near-term goal of a 100% renewable energy-powered community with a longer-term
goal of becoming a world leader in operating a carbon-free economy. Inclusion of wind power with
geothermal power and diesels-off capability with an ESS is integral to these plans.
5.4.4 Proposed System Design
Provide the following information for the proposed renewable energy system:
A description of renewable energy technology specific to project location
The total proposed capacity and a description of how the capacity was determined
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 27 of 39 7/20/2020
Integration plan, including upgrades needed to existing system(s) to integrate renewable en-
ergy system: Include a description of the controls, storage, secondary loads, distribution up-
grades that will be included in the project
Civil infrastructure that will be completed as part of the project—buildings, roads, etc.
Include what backup and/or supplemental system will be in place
See the “Proposed System Design” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional
guidance.
The envisioned geothermal-wind system design depends on successful construction and operation
by May 2024 of a 30 MW geothermal powerplant on the east flank of Makushin Volcano near Una-
laska. With an anticipated 100+% increase in electric load demand and with conversion of fuel oil
heat to electrically-powered ground source heat pumps, it is anticipated that 2 to 5 MW of wind
power capacity, or even more, may be needed to complement geothermal power such that Una-
laska can operate 100% renewable energy generation.
The intent then is to transition COU’s diesel power plant to standby mode, making it available to
provide power in event of excess load demand or geothermal power system outage. As additional
system architecture, COU envisions the needs for an ESS to provide spinning reserve for the sen-
sitive seafood processor facilities, provide reactive power for a large industrial electric crane at the
Dutch Harbor port, and to mitigate possible rapid ramp rates from wind turbines. ESS critical in en-
abling diesels-off capability.
Several transmission upgrades are planned as part of the geothermal project to enable connection
of several self-powering seafood processors to connect to the grid. For the wind power project, a
lightly used, high capacity underground distribution line routes near the project site in Pyramid Val-
ley. Wind turbines would connect to it, with a possible voltage upgrade to achieve higher wind ca-
pacity potential.
5.4.4.1 Proposed Power Generation Units
Unit
type
Re-
source/
Fuel
type
Design ca-
pacity
(MW)
Make Model Ex-
pected
capacity
factor
Ex-
pected
life
(years)
Expected
Availability
1 Geother-
mal
30
2 Wind 2 to 5 (an-
ticipated)
3 Diesel 19
4 ORC 0.15
5.4.4.2 Proposed Thermal Generation Units (if applicable)
Generation
unit
Re-
source/
Fuel type
Design ca-
pacity
(MMBtu/hr)
Make Model Expected Av-
erage annual
efficiency
Expected
life
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 28 of 39 7/20/2020
5.4.5 Basic Operation of Proposed Energy System
To the best extent possible, describe how the proposed energy system will operate: When will
the system operate, how will the system integrate with the existing system, how will the
control systems be used, etc.
When and how will the backup system(s) be expected to be used
See the “Proposed System Design” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional
guidance.
To be explored during the feasibility and conceptual design phase of this proposed project.
5.4.3.1 Expected Capacity
Factor
~30% (wind power)
5.4.5.2 Annual Electricity Production and Fuel Consumption (Proposed System)
Month Genera-
tion
(Pro-
posed
System)
(kWh)
Genera-
tion
(Type 2)
(kWh)
Genera-
tion
(Type 3)
(kWh)
Fuel Con-
sumption
(Diesel-
Gallons)
Fuel Con-
sumption
[Other]
Second-
ary load
(kWh)
Stor-
age
(kWh)
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
Septem-
ber
October
November
December
Total
5.4.5.3 Annual Heating Fuel Consumption (Proposed System)
Month Diesel
(Gallons)
Electricity Propane
(Gallons)
Coal
(Tons)
Wood
(Cords,
green tons,
dry tons)
Other
January
February
March
April
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 29 of 39 7/20/2020
5.4.5.3 Annual Heating Fuel Consumption (Proposed System)
Month Diesel
(Gallons)
Electricity Propane
(Gallons)
Coal
(Tons)
Wood
(Cords,
green tons,
dry tons)
Other
May
June
July
August
Septem-
ber
October
November
December
Total
5.4.6 Proposed System Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs
O&M costs can be estimated in two ways for the standard application. Most proposed renewable
energy projects will fall under Option 1 because the new resource will not allow for diesel genera-
tion to be turned off. Some projects may allow for diesel generation to be turned off for periods of
time; these projects should choose Option 2 for estimating O&M.
Option 1: Diesel generation ON
For projects that do not result in shutting down
diesel generation there is assumed to be no im-
pact on the base case O&M. Please indicate the
estimated annual O&M cost associated with the
proposed renewable project.
$
Option 2: Diesel generation OFF
For projects that will result in shutting down die-
sel generation please estimate:
1. Annual non-fuel savings of shutting off
diesel generation
2. Estimated hours that diesel generation
will be off per year.
3. Annual O&M costs associated with the
proposed renewable project.
1. $
2. Hours diesel OFF/year:
3. $
5.4.7 Fuel Costs
Estimate annual cost for all applicable fuel(s) needed to run the proposed system (Year 1 of opera-
tion)
Diesel
(Gallons)
Electricity Propane
(Gallons)
Coal
(Tons)
Wood
Other
Unit cost
($)
Annual
Units
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 30 of 39 7/20/2020
Diesel
(Gallons)
Electricity Propane
(Gallons)
Coal
(Tons)
Wood
Other
Total An-
nual cost
($)
5.5 Performance and O&M Reporting
For construction projects only
5.5.1 Metering Equipment
Please provide a short narrative, and cost estimate, identifying the metering equipment that will be
used to comply with the operations reporting requirement identified in Section 3.15 of the Request
for Applications.
N/A for this application.
5.5.2 O&M reporting
Please provide a short narrative about the methods that will be used to gather and store reliable
operations and maintenance data, including costs, to comply with the operations reporting require-
ment identified in Section 3.15 of the Request for Applications
N/A for this application.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 31 of 39 7/20/2020
SECTION 6 – ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY AND BENEFITS
6.1 Economic Feasibility
6.1.1 Economic Benefit
*Calculation based on a 3 MW wind pro-
ject in a wind-diesel system (no geother-
mal consideration)
Annual Lifetime
Anticipated Diesel Fuel Displaced for Power
Generation (gallons)
525,600 10,512,000
Anticipated Fuel Displaced for Heat (gal-
lons)
00
Total Fuel displaced (gallons) 525,600 10,512,000
Anticipated Diesel Fuel Displaced for Power
Generation ($)
$1,337,000
Year 1 (2023)
$21,320,000
(20-year cumulative, 3%
discount rate)
Anticipated Fuel Displaced for Heat ($) n/a n/a
Anticipated Power Generation O&M Cost
Savings
$132,800 $1,862,000
Anticipated Thermal Generation O&M Cost
Savings
Total Other costs savings (taxes, insurance,
etc.)
Total Fuel, O&M, and Other Cost Savings $1,469,500
Year 1 (2023)
$23,182,000
(20-year cumulative, 3%
discount rate)
6.1.2 Economic Benefit
Explain the economic benefits of your project. Include direct cost savings and other economic ben-
efits, and how the people of Alaska will benefit from the project. Note that additional revenue
sources (such as tax credits or green tags) to pay for operations and/or financing, will not be in-
cluded as economic benefits of the project.
Where appropriate, describe the anticipated energy cost in the community, or whatever will be af-
fected by the project, over the life of the project. Explain how the forecast was developed and pro-
vide year-by-year forecasts
The economic model used by AEA is available at www.akenergyauthority.org/What-We-Do/Grants-
Loans/Renewable-Energy-Fund-REF-Grants/2020-REF-Application. This economic model may be
used by applicants but is not required. The final benefit/cost ratio used will be derived from the
AEA model to ensure a level playing field for all applicants. If used, please submit the model with
the application.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 32 of 39 7/20/2020
An Unalaska wind power project, as described in this proposal, can be constructed with or without
the geothermal project, but system design and the attendant benefits would be quite different. Pre-
suming the geothermal projects proceeds apace, the grid-served electric load demand would more
than double as self-generating seafood processors are connected, and fuel oil-served thermal
loads are converted to air-source heat pumps. It is envisioned that use of an ESS to provide spin-
ning reserve in event of power supply disruption (avoidance of which is critically important to sea-
food processors to protect their sensitive chiller plants) will enable diesels-off capability to be
achieved.
6.1.3 Economic Risks
Discuss potential issues that could make the project uneconomic to operate and how the project
team will address the issues. Factors may include:
Low prices for diesel and/or heating oil
Other projects developed in community
Reductions in expected energy demand: Is there a risk of an insufficient market for energy pro-
duced over the life of the project.
Deferred and/or inadequate facility maintenance
Other factors
Should the geothermal plant prove infeasible or not constructed, the planned geothermal-wind sys-
tem architecture would transition to wind-diesel with different economic risks to consider. A no-geo-
thermal option will be explored in the feasibility and conceptual design phase of this project, but the
guiding assumption is that OCCP will succeed and geothermal power will be available in Unalaska
by May 2024. Should the geothermal plant not be built, the wind project will have progressed to-
ward construction and wind power will become the primary source of renewable energy for the
community.
6.1.4 Public Benefit for Projects with Direct Private Sector Sales
For projects that include direct sales of power to private sector businesses (sawmills, cruise ships,
mines, etc.), please provide a brief description of the direct and indirect public benefits derived
from the project as well as the private sector benefits and complete the table below. See Section
1.6 in the Request for Applications for more information.
N/A for this application.
Renewable energy resource availability (kWh per month)
Estimated direct sales to private sector businesses (kWh)
Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use at private sector businesses ($)
Estimated sales for use by the Alaskan public (kWh)
Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use by the Alaskan public ($)
6.2 Other Public Benefit
Describe the non-economic public benefits to Alaskans over the lifetime of the project. For the pur-
pose of evaluating this criterion, public benefits are those benefits that would be considered unique
to a given project and not generic to any renewable resource. For example, decreased greenhouse
gas emission, stable pricing of fuel source, won’t be considered under this category.
Some examples of other public benefits include:
The project will result in developing infrastructure (roads, trails, pipes, power lines, etc.) that can
be used for other purposes
The project will result in a direct long-term increase in jobs (operating, supplying fuel, etc.)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 33 of 39 7/20/2020
The project will solve other problems for the community (waste disposal, food security, etc.)
The project will generate useful information that could be used by the public in other parts of the
state
The project will promote or sustain long-term commercial economic development for the com-
munity
COU’s near-term vision is a 100% renewable energy-powered community with a longer-term goal
of becoming a world leader in operating a carbon-free economy. COU anticipates that lower cost,
clean energy will become an economic driver to cement its place as the largest fishing port in North
America and lead to exciting, new economic opportunities.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 34 of 39 7/20/2020
SECTION 7 – SUSTAINABILITY
Describe your plan for operating the completed project so that it will be sustainable throughout its
economic life.
At a minimum for construction projects, a business and operations plan should be attached and the
applicant should describe how it will be implemented. See Section 11.
7.1.1 Operation and Maintenance
Demonstrate the capacity to provide for the long-term operation and maintenance of the proposed
project for its expected life
Provide examples of success with similar or related long-term operations
Describe the key personnel that will be available for operating and maintaining the infrastruc-
ture.
Describe the training plan for existing and future employees to become proficient at operating
and maintaining the proposed system.
Describe the systems that will be used to track necessary supplies
Describe the system will be used to ensure that scheduled maintenance is performed
N/A for this application.
7.1.2 Financial Sustainability
Describe the process used (or propose to use) to account for operational and capital costs.
Describe how rates are determined (or will be determined). What process is required to set
rates?
Describe how you ensure that revenue is collected.
If you will not be selling energy, explain how you will ensure that the completed project will be
financially sustainable for its useful life.
N/A for this application.
7.1.2.1 Revenue Sources
Briefly explain what if any effect your project will have on electrical rates in the proposed benefit
area over the life of the project. If there is expected to be multiple rates for electricity, such as a
separate rate for intermittent heat, explain what the rates will be and how they will be determined
Collect sufficient revenue to cover operational and capital costs
What is the expected cost-based rate (as consistent with RFA requirements)
If you expect to have multiple rate classes, such as excess electricity for heat, explain what
those rates are expected to be and how those rates account for the costs of delivering the
energy (see AEA’s white paper on excess electricity for heat)..
Annual customer revenue sufficient to cover costs
Additional incentives (i.e. tax credits)
Additional revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable energy subsidies or pro-
grams that might be available)
N/A for this application.
7.1.2.2 Power Purchase/Sale
The power purchase/sale information should include the following:
Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 35 of 39 7/20/2020
Potential power purchase/sales price - at a minimum indicate a price range (consistent with the
Section 3.16 of the RFA)
Identify the potential power buyer(s)/customer(s) and anticipated power purchase/sales price
range. Indicate the proposed rate of return from the grant-funded project. Include letters of support
or power purchase agreement from identified customers.
N/A for this application.
SECTION 8 – PROJECT READINESS
8.1 Project Preparation
Describe what you have done to prepare for this award and how quickly you intend to proceed with
work once your grant is approved.
Specifically address your progress towards or readiness to begin, at a minimum, the following:
The phase(s) that must be completed prior to beginning the phase(s) proposed in this application
The phase(s) proposed in this application
Obtaining all necessary permits
Securing land access and use for the project
Procuring all necessary equipment and materials
Refer to the RFA and/or the pre-requisite checklists for the required activities and deliverables for
each project phase. Please describe below and attach any required documentation.
City of Unalaska (COU) initiated a self-funded wind study in 2017 to identify prospective wind
power sites and collect high quality wind data. Four met towers were installed (two 60-meter on two
primary sites of interest, one 34-meter on an auxiliary site, and one 10-meter on a reference site).
As of Sept. 2020, the two 60-meter towers remain operational and a wind resource report docu-
menting the project is presently in draft form. With that, the reconnaissance phase as defined by
AEA is complete as is the resource measurement portion of feasibility and conceptual design. COU
allocated $495,000 for this project, of which $75,000 remains.
8.2 Demand- or Supply-Side Efficiency Upgrades
If you have invested in energy efficiency projects that will have a positive impact on the proposed
project, and have chosen to not include them in the economic analysis, applicants should provide
as much documentation as possible including:
1. Explain how it will improve the success of the RE project
2. Energy efficiency pre and post audit reports, or other appropriate analysis,
3. Invoices for work completed,
4. Photos of the work performed, and/or
5. Any other available verification such as scopes of work, technical drawings, and payroll for
work completed internally.
N/A for this application; will be researched during the feasibility and conceptual design phase of the
project.
SECTION 9 – LOCAL SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION
Describe local support and opposition, known or anticipated, for the project. Include letters, res-
olutions, or other documentation of local support from the community that would benefit from
this project. Provide letters of support, memorandum of understandings, cooperative agreements
between the applicant, the utility, local government and project partners. The documentation of
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 36 of 39 7/20/2020
support must be dated within one year of the RFA date of July 20, 2020. Please note that letters of
support from legislators will not count toward this criterion.
N/A for this application; construction is not proposed.
SECTION 10 – COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER AWARDS
Identify other grants that may have been previously awarded to the Applicant by AEA for this or
any other project. Describe the degree you have been able to meet the requirements of previous
grants including project deadlines, reporting, and information requests.
N/A for this application.
SECTION 11 – LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR PRIOR PHASES
In the space below, please provide a list of additional documents attached to support completion of
prior phases.
City of Unalaska Wind Power Development and Integration Assessment Project, Phase II Report,
V3 Energy LLC, August 2018
City of Unalaska Wind Power Development and Integration Assessment Project, Phase III Report
(wind resource assessment), V3 Energy LLC, pending (to be forwarded by Nov. 30, 2020).
SECTION 12 – LIST OF ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION
In the space below, please provide a list of additional information submitted for consideration.
None.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application-Standard Form
II SECTION 13 -AUTHORIZED SIGNERS FORM
Community/Grantee Name: City of Unalaska Department of Public Utilities
Regular Election is held: \Date:
I Authorized Grant Signer(s):
Printed Name Title Term
Bob Cummings City Engineer ~I}-
I authorize the above person(s) to sign Grant Documents:
ALASKA
ENERGY
AUTHORITY
Signature -OL----
Must be authorized b the hi hest rankin or anization/communit /munici
Printed Name Title Term
Dan Winters Director of Public Utilities
I Grantee Contact Information:
Mailing Address: PO Box 610, Unalaska, AK 99685
Phone Number: 907-581-1260
Fax Number: 907-581-2187
Email Address: dwinters@ci. unalaska. ak. us
Federal Tax ID #: 92-0036399
Please submit an updated form whenever there is a change to the above information.
AEA 21010 Page 37 of39 7/20/2020
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application-Standard Form
SECTION 14-ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION
ALASKA
ENERGY
AUTHORITY
SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WITH YOUR APPLICATION:
A. Contact information and resumes of Applicant's Project Manager, Project Accountant(s),
key staff, partners, consultants, and suppliers per application form Section 3.1, 3.4 and
3.6.
Applicants are asked to provide resumes submitted with applications in separate electronic
documents if the individuals do not want their resumes posted to the project web site.
B. Letters or resolutions demonstrating local support per application form Section 9.
C. For projects involving heat: Most recent invoice demonstrating the cost of heating fuel
for the building(s) impacted by the project.
D. Governing Body Resolution or other formal action taken by the applicant's governing
body or management per RFA Section 1.4 that:
• Commits the organization to provide the matching resources for project at the match
amounts indicated in the application.
• Authorizes the individual who signs the application has the authority to commit the
organization to the obligations under the grant.
• Provides as point of contact to represent the applicant for purposes of this applica-
tion.
• Certifies the applicant is in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local, laws
including existing credit and federal tax obligations.
E. An electronic version of the entire application on CD or other electronic media, per RFA
Section 1. 7.
F. CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certifies that this application for a renewable energy grant is truthful
and correct, and that the applicant is in compliance with, and will continue to comply
with, all federal and state laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations and
that they can indeed commit the entity to these obligations.
Print Name Da~nters
I I
Signature ~~ .)./'----..... v
Title Director of Public Works
Date September 28, 2020
AEA 21010 Page 38 of39 7/20/2020
City of Unalaska
43 Raven Way
PO Box 610
Unalaska, AK 99685
September 25, 2020
Alaska Energy Authority
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application
813 West Northern Light Blvd.
Anchorage, AK 99503
Dear AEA,
The City of Unalaska is committed to seeking out reliable and cost effective alternate energy sources.
This is demonstrated by City Council recently entering into a Power Purchase Agreement for geothermal
power. This is further demonstrated in the City Council’s approval of the Conceptual Design phase and
data collection efforts of a Wind Power Development Project. A final report addressing these findings is
currently being finalized. The proposed Renewable Energy Fund Round 13 project, “City of Unalaska
Wind Power Feasibility and Final Design” would be the next phase of the overarching project.
Dan Winters, City of Unalaska’s Director of Public Utilities, is authorized to spend $13,900 in cash as
matching funds for the feasibility and conceptual design portion of the project. These funds are
currently available. Unalaska’s City Council must, of course, review the findings and recommendations of
the Conceptual Design Report (CDR) before final approval of $113,200 in cash as matching funds for the
final design and permitting portion of the project. Authorization for the expenditure of City funds as
match for the final design and permitting, therefore, is pending City Council review of the CDR and
approval of the next project phase.
The City of Unalaska is in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws including all existing
credit and federal tax obligations.
The City of Unalaska looks forward to briefings on the CDR and the wind power grant project. Wind
power, along with a planned geothermal project, will enable Unalaska to meet its underlying goal of
supporting renewable energy sources and reducing our dependence on fossil fuels.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have concerns, questions, or would like more information.
Thank you.
Respectfully,
Erin Reinders, City Manager