HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPP_13005-Naknek Wind and Solar Feasibility REF13 applicationRenewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 3 of 31 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)
Naknek Electric Association, Inc.
Tax ID # 92-0027674
Date of last financial statement audit: 12/31/2019
Mailing Address: Physical Address:
PO Box 118 1 School Road
Naknek, AK 99633 Naknek, AK 99633
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-246-4261 service@naknekelectric.com
1.1 Applicant Point of Contact / Grants Manager
Name: Mark Huber Title: Finance Manager
Mailing Address:
8241 Berry Patch Drive
Anchorage, AK 99502
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-244-2779 mhuber@gci.net
1.1.1 Applicant Signatory Authority Contact Information
Name: Dianne King Title: General Manager
Mailing Address:
PO Box 118
Naknek, AK 99633
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-246-4261 diannek@naknekelectric.com
1.1.2 Applicant Alternate Points of Contact
Name Telephone: Fax: Email:
1.2 Applicant Minimum Requirements
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 4 of 31 7/20/2020
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 #_22_, 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 31 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.
Naknek Service Area Wind and Solar Power Feasibility and Conceptual 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 58.73059 Longitude -157.00734
Location noted is the Naknek powerplant. Cape Suwarof: 58.72848, -157-.05827 (solar PV system
and wind power site option). Landfill wind power site area: 58.74252, -156.87898. Other wind site
options will be considered with the aid of wind flow modeling.
2.2.2 Community benefiting – Name(s) of the community or communities that will be the
beneficiaries of the project.
Naknek, South Naknek, and King Salmon (intertied; diesel generator powerplant is in Naknek)
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
2.4 Project Description
Provide a brief, one-paragraph description of the proposed project.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 6 of 31 7/20/2020
Naknek Electric Association (NEA) proposes to assess, via a feasibility study and conceptual de-
sign process, the technical and economic practicality of constructing a wind farm and expanding its
solar PV capacity to create a medium-to-high penetration wind-solar-diesel hybrid power system to
meet its approximate mean 2 MW baseload power demand. NEA envisions that the much higher
additional summer demand of 10 to 13 MW for seafood processing activities would likely continue
to be met with diesel engine generators.
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.
Two wind resource assessment studies, both with 30-meter height met towers have been com-
pleted in Naknek: one near the community landfill (completed in 2006 with USDOE and AEA ane-
mometer loan program funding) and the other at Cape Suwarof (completed in 2009 at NEA ex-
pense). Additional work completed at Cape Suwarof in 2009, at NEA expense, were field avian and
geotechnical studies. Presently an NEA-owned, 80-kW capacity, solar PV system is operational on
Cape Suwarof.
The proposed feasibility project will begin with a review, reassessment, and reanalysis of the wind
resource data collected from 2004 to 2009. New wind resource data should not be necessary and
a new wind study with a met tower is not anticipated. Additional wind power site options will be
identified with use of wind flow modeling software. Solar PV system performance data from the ex-
isting 80-kW solar PV system located on Cape Suwarof will be reviewed.
NEA will plan to visit Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA) in Kotzebue to tour their power genera-
tion facilities as KEA’s successful wind-diesel system is an analogue of a possible wind-solar-die-
sel system in Naknek.
System modeling will include analysis of annual, monthly, and diurnal electric and thermal loads.
Power plant composition and diesel generator usage and efficiency will be assessed. Wind turbine
and solar PV array capacity options and performance will be estimated. An energy storage system
(consisting of batteries and/or flywheel) will be considered and modeled.
An energy balance and cost optimization model will be created (using Homer software) to assess
options to meet NEA’s renewable energy goals. Cost data will be input to the model to evaluate
and rank economic optimization of the options. A conceptual design report will be prepared to sum-
marize and communicate project results.
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 7 of 31 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
1
Project scoping and
contractor solicita-
tion and selection
Board of Directors in-
put regarding RE
goals; delineate
scope of work by
contractor specialty,
identify and hire con-
tractors
8/1/21 8/30/21
Establish contracts with pro-
ject contractors; kickoff meet-
ing (internal deliverable)
2
Detailed resource
assessment
Review and re-ana-
lyze 2006 and 2009
wind resource as-
sessments; model al-
ternate sites; analyze
existing solar PV pro-
ject data; review geo-
thermal study infor-
mation
9/1/21 11/30/21
Brief report summarizing prior
wind studies and solar PV
project; wind modeling to
identify alternate locations be-
sides landfill and Cape Su-
warof (internal deliverable)
3
Identification of land
and regulatory is-
sues
Identify land owner-
ship, FAA, and other
site control re-
strictions for potential
wind turbine sites
9/1/21 10/31/21
Brief report with pros and
cons of landfill area, Cape
Suwarof, and alternate sites,
if any (internal deliverable)
4
Permitting and envi-
ronmental analysis
Review 2009 avian
study at Cape Su-
warof; FAA obstruc-
tion evaluation; wet-
lands analysis; model
turbine layout visual
impact
9/1/21 11/30/21
2009 ABR report (to AEA);
new FAA NCT and obstruc-
tion determinations for turbine
site options (internal delivera-
ble)
5
Detailed analysis of
current cost of en-
ergy and future mar-
ket
Analyze historical
seafood processor
load trends to predict
future growth/decline;
assess present and
predicted future die-
sel fuel prices; evalu-
ate economic benefit
of existing solar PV to
inform expansion op-
tion.
9/1/21 11/30/21
Brief initial report, findings to
be summarized in final report
(internal deliverable)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 8 of 31 7/20/2020
6
Assessment of alter-
natives
Compare wind and
solar options in con-
text of NEA capability
and community inter-
ests; preliminary en-
ergy balance and
systems modeling
101/21 1/31/22
Homer software modeling re-
port (internal deliverable)
7
Conceptual design
and costs estimate
Energy balance and
cost optimization
modeling of turbine
and solar PV capacity
and wind power site
location options
(Homer software)
11/1/21 2/28/22
Discussion of preferred alter-
natives internally and with
project consultants (internal
deliverable)
8
Detailed economic
and financial analy-
sis
Refinement of Homer
model with additional
analysis of potential
PCE implications
12/1/21 3/31/22
Cost modeling of options (in-
ternal deliverable)
9
Conceptual busi-
ness and operations
plan
Assessment of busi-
ness case for NEA
and plan for wind tur-
bine operations and
maintenance
1/1/22 4/30/22
Recommendations report (in-
ternal deliverable)
10
Final report and rec-
ommendations
Conceptual design
report to summarize
and present project
information, anal-
yses, and conclu-
sions
3/1/22 6/30/22
Conceptual Design Report (to
AEA)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 9 of 31 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 $103,500
Cash match to be provideda $11,500
In-kind match to be provideda $
Energy efficiency match providedb $
Total costs for project phase(s) covered in application (sum of
above)
$115,000
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.
NEA is strongly committed to this project, as evidence by its past expenditure of met tower instal-
lation, wind resource report, avian study, and geotechnical drilling at a potential wind power project
on Cape Suwarof in 2009. The Cape Suwarof wind power initiative was suspended following diffi-
culties with NEA’s geothermal project, but with that in the past, NEA’s management and Board of
Directors is keen to renew their interest in renewable energy that can benefit Naknek, South Nak-
nek, and King Salmon.
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 Mark Huber, NEA’s Finance Manager, who will serve as
grant manager. Should NEA elect to expand the scope of work beyond that detailed in this pro-
posal, NEA will self-fund all additional costs (requires approval of the Board of Directors).
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 (2004 through 2009 projects) [Actual] $unknown
Feasibility and Conceptual Design [Estimated] $115,000
Final Design and Permitting (assumed 7% of con-
struction cost)
[Estimated] $795,000
Construction (assumed 2,000 kW wind) [Estimated] $11,352,000
Total Project Costs (sum of above) Estimated $12,262,000
Metering/Tracking Equipment [not included in project
cost]
Estimated $
3.2.4 Funding Subsequent Phases
If subsequent phases are required beyond the phases being applied for in this application, 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)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 10 of 31 7/20/2020
Additional revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable energy subsidies or pro-
grams that might be available)
NEA would apply for federal or state grant funding to continue past the feasibility and conceptual
design phase of this project to final design and permitting and construction.
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 $5,175 $575 Cash $5,750
Detailed resource as-
sessment 11/30/2021 $0 $0 Cash $0
Identification of land and
regulatory issues 10/31/2021 $5,175 $575 Cash $5,750
Permitting and environ-
mental analysis 11/30/2021 $5,175 $575 Cash $5,750
Detailed analysis of cur-
rent cost of energy and
future market
11/30/2021 $10,350 $1,150 Cash $11,500
Assessment of alterna-
tives 1/31/2022 $5,175 $575 Cash $5,750
Conceptual design and
costs estimate 2/28/2022 $25,875 $2,875 Cash $28,750
Detailed economic and fi-
nancial analysis 3/31/2022 $20,700 $2,300 Cash $23,000
Conceptual business and
operations plan 4/30/2022 $5,175 $575 Cash $5,750
Final report and recom-
mendations 6/30/2022 $20,700 $2,300 Cash $23,000
TOTALS $103,500 $11,500 $115,000
Budget Categories:
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 11 of 31 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
Direct Labor & Benefits $5,175 $575 Cash $5,750
Travel & Per Diem $10,350 $1,150 Cash $11,500
Equipment $0 $0 Cash $0
Materials & Supplies $0 $0 Cash $0
Contractual Services $87,975 $9,775 Cash $97,750
Construction Services $0 $0 Cash $0
Other $0 $0 Cash $0
TOTALS $103,500 $11,500 $115,000
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 12 of 31 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.
This project was estimated by reference to similar feasibility and conceptual design projects funded
and/or recommended in REF Rounds 5 and 6 (Wales, Shishmaref, and Goodnews Bay), adjusting
for inflation, but discounting for the fact that NEA likely does not need new wind data.
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?
Mark Huber, as NEA’s grants manager, will communicate with AEA on a mutually agreed upon
schedule, presumably monthly or bi-monthly. He will be assisted by Douglas Vaught, P.E. of V3
Energy LLC, the project manager, as needed. Monthly tracking of scope, budget and schedule via
contractor progress reports and labor and expense submittals will ensure that progress is main-
tained, 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.
NEA management will be briefed on the terms and conditions of AEA’s REF Grant Program. NEA
will develop a project budget with only costs that are reasonable, ordinary, and necessary for the
project. Purchase orders will be used to authorize purchases and provide coding to correct ac-
counts. Project managers are held accountable for achieving project budgets and complying with
applicable grant terms.
NEA’s accounting group will be briefed on the terms and conditions of the REF grant program to
include the requirement that overhead or other unallowable costs are not included in a request for
reimbursement. NEA’s Chief Financial Officer (Mark Huber) will review all grant reports and re-
quest for reimbursements to ensure compliance with terms and conditions of the grant.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 13 of 31 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. will be NEA’s project manager for this effort. He is a registered professional
civil engineer (No. 10034) in the State of Alaska and is owner and principal engineer of Anchorage,
Alaska-based V3 Energy, LLC, has extensive experience in wind-diesel system/isolated grid mod-
eling and power system configuration design, wind flow modeling and turbine array design, wind
power site selection and permitting, and meteorological test tower installation. Douglas also spe-
cializes in the cold climate village development challenge, namely severe cold temperatures, at-
mospheric icing, permafrost soils, and the logistical demands of remote area work. Mr. Vaught has
35 years of engineering experience. Douglas will work closely with Mark Huber, NEA’s grant man-
ager and project accountant to ensure project scope, budget, and schedule are properly main-
tained.
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.
Mark Huber is the Chief Financial Officer at Naknek Electric Association, where he manages the
company’s accounting and finances. Prior to joining NEA, Mark spent thirty years in accounting,
finance, and executive management leadership roles at several midsize Alaska Native Corpora-
tions. Mark’s prior experience includes regulated electric utility accounting, finance, and operations.
In recent years, Mark has arranged financing and managed two $20 million-dollar generation ex-
pansion projects for electric utilities. Mark will be assisted by NEA administrative staff for this effort.
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.
NEA (Tasks 1 and 9 lead, Tasks 2-8,10 guidance)
V3 Energy LLC (Tasks 2-8, 10); completed the 2006 and 2009 wind studies for NEA and managed
the avian and geotechnical studies on Cape Suwarof; more recently has worked with NEA on re-
covered heat upgrade issues
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 14 of 31 7/20/2020
Electric Power Systems, Inc. (Tasks 6, 7, 10); NEA’s powerplant and distribution system design
and operations support firm
Solstice Alaska Consulting, Inc. (Task 3); has worked with V3 Energy LLC on scores of FS/CDR
projects; long experience in Alaska
Company 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
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.
4.2 Local Workforce
Describe how the project will use local labor or train a local labor workforce.
A wind power feasibility project normally requires installation of met tower(s) which typically in-
volves local labor hire for assistance. For Naknek though, the met tower studies are complete (note
that local labor hire was included in those past studies) and the proposed feasibility project is prin-
cipally a modeling exercise to demonstrate that the technical and economic potential of meeting
NEA’s mean annual 2 MW base load with wind and solar power. With that, local labor hire and
workforce training are not envisioned during feasibility, but should the project proceed into design
and construction, local labor would be needed for construction activities and powerplant personnel
would be trained and/or augmented to help manage the wind turbines and solar PV array.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 15 of 31 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.
A three-year wind study on Cape Suwarof with a 30-meter met tower was conducted between July
2006 and July 2009. A mean annual wind speed (not adjusted against a long-term airport data ref-
erence) of 6.73 m/s was measured and a mean WPD of 395 W/m2 was calculated (at 30 meters).
The site classifies as IEC 61400-1, 3rd edition Class IIIc and a high wind power class 4.
Immediately prior to the Cape Suwarof wind study, a two-year wind study at the community landfill,
located east of Naknek along the road to King Salmon, was conducted between July 2004 and July
2006. A slightly lower mean annual wind speed (also not adjusted against a long-term airport data
reference) of 6.24 m/s was measured.
NEA has collected data from its 80-kW solar project, but it was not closely analyzed to prepare this
proposal. Project reference material indicate that PV Watts software estimated 10 percent system
capacity factor and that during 2017 and 2018 energy production was approximately 8 percent ca-
pacity factor. At present, reasons for the mismatch are unknown but will be investigated during the
feasibility project.
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 renewable energy technology that NEA had explored in the past was geothermal power. Alt-
hough geothermal is an alternative to wind and solar power, the proposed feasibility and concep-
tual design addressed by this application will not include an analysis of it, other than a brief review
and reference in the final report. Other renewable energy alternatives such as in-stream hydro and
tidal power are not considered viable for Naknek.
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
NEA will submit FAA obstruction evaluation requests (Form 7460-1) to evaluate prospective wind
turbine height and site options. NEA will also review ABR’s 2009 Cape Suwarof avian report for ad-
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 16 of 31 7/20/2020
vice regarding USFWS consultation requirements, if any, and work with the environmental contrac-
tor to identify historical (SHPO oversight) and wetlands (USACE oversight) guidance and re-
strictions.
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.
For the 2004 and 2006 wind resource studies, met towers were installed in the most promising lo-
cations – near the community landfill and on Cape Suwarof – based on surveys and analytical
tools available the time. New global wind modeling software will be accessed and reviewed to in-
vestigate the possibility of other options, but the landfill area and Cape Suwarof possessed ad-
vantages in 2004 and 2006 remain true today and hence the two locations and the leading site
candidates for wind power development. The landfill area and Cape Suwarof are available for de-
velopment although the solar PV project on the cape may require re-location elsewhere on the
cape or to another site area entirely should a wind power project be constructed there.
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.
A common problem in a wind-solar-diesel feasibility project is vague and/or inaccurate electric and
thermal load information, which results in a compromised modeling exercise. Although more than
10 years old, Naknek’s wind data is robust at five years’ worth and well documented.
Very importantly, EPS installed automatic logging equipment in the Naknek powerplant approxi-
mately one year ago to track engine performance and overall electric load demand, which is enor-
mously advantageous for modeling. Similar logging equipment does not exist for the thermal loads
connected to the diesel engine recovered heat/district heat system; hence those will be estimated
by EPS.
Cost information can be difficult to obtain, but EPS has extensive cost estimating experience with
rural Alaska projects, which will strongly improve the accuracy of the cost modeling efforts.
5.3.2 Environmental Risk
Explain whether the following environmental and land use issues apply, and if so which project
team members will be involved and how the issues will be addressed. See the “Environmental and
Permitting Risks” section of the appropriate Best Practice Checklist for additional guidance.
Threatened or endangered species
Habitat issues
Wetlands and other protected areas
Archaeological and historical resources
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 17 of 31 7/20/2020
Land development constraints
Telecommunications interference
Aviation considerations
Visual, aesthetics impacts
Identify and describe other potential barriers
An objective of the feasibility and conceptual design study will be to fully explore the pros and cons
of the two (presumed at present) wind power site options with respect to most likely turbine model
options, focusing on issues such as hub height, number of turbines, visual impact to residents, etc.
With respect to wildlife, Cape Suwarof and the landfill are quite different, despite their proximity.
The cape, given its ocean proximity, is more popular with avian species than the landfill (except for
gulls), and as one might expect in southwestern Alaska, the landfill is more popular with brown
bears. The pros and cons of these differences and others will be assessed during feasibility and
conceptual design study.
Other considerations such as wetlands impact, telecommunications, etc. will be addressed during
the study and documented in the final report.
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.
Operation of the existing system will be explored during the proposed feasibility and conceptual de-
sign project, with an assessment of changes expected from medium-to-high penetration wind and
solar power, including impact to recovered heat.
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: Cat 3512, 865 kW, 1200 rpm, 1991, old powerplant, heat recovery
Unit 2: Cat 3512, 865 kW, 1200 rpm, 1992, old powerplant, heat recovery
Unit 3: Cat 3512, 865 kW, 1200 rpm, 1993, old powerplant, heat recovery
Unit 4: Cat 3516b, 1322 kW, 1200 rpm, 1999, old powerplant, heat recovery
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).
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 18 of 31 7/20/2020
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 8: White Superior 40SX16, 1000 kW, 1800 rpm, 1978, old powerplant, heat recovery
Unit 9: Cat 3516b, 1135 kW, 1200 rpm, 1988, old powerplant, heat recovery
Unit 10: Cat 3516b, 1135 kW, 1200 rpm, 1988, old powerplant, heat recovery
Unit 11: Cat 3512b, 1360 kW, 1800 rpm, 2013, seasonal, mobile, no heat recovery
Unit 12: Cummins QST30-G5, 2000 kW, 1800 rpm, 2015, seasonal, mobile, no heat recovery
Unit 13: Cat C280-12, 3300 kW, 1800 rpm, 2018, new powerplant, no heat recovery
Unit 14: Cat C280-12, 3300 kW, 1800 rpm, 2018, new powerplant, no heat recovery
Unit 13a: Cat XQ1500, 1500 kW, 1800 rpm, 2016, seasonal, mobile, no heat recovery
Unit 14a: Cat XQ2000, 2000 kW, 1800 rpm, 2016, seasonal, mobile, no heat recovery
Unit 15a: Cummins QST30-G5, 2000 kW, 1800 rpm, 2017, seasonal, mobile, no heat recovery
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.
Naknek’s electrical distribution system will be assessed during the proposed feasibility and concep-
tual design project. The focus will be to understand the impact of installing significant wind power
capacity at the landfill area or at Cape Suwarof (or another location), with documentation of re-
quired upgrades and/or mitigation.
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
*See section 5.4.2.1; heat generation capacities will be assessed during the project*
Is there operational heat recovery? (Y/N) If yes estimated
annual displaced heating fuel (gallons)
Yes.
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 19 of 31 7/20/2020
5.4.2.5 Annual Electricity Production and Fuel Consumption (Existing System)
Use most recent year. Replace the section (Type 1), (Type 2), and (Type 3) with generation
sources
Month Genera-
tion
(Type 1)
(kWh)
Genera-
tion
(Type 2)
(kWh)
Genera-
tion
(Type 3)
(kWh)
Fuel Con-
sumption
(Diesel-Gal-
lons)
Fuel Con-
sumption
[Other]
Pea
k
Loa
d
Mini-
mum
Load
January
February *To be analyzed during the project with data from new logging equipment*
March
April
May
June
July
August
Septem-
ber
October
November
December
Total 14.5 kWh/gal (2019 PCE report)
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 estimated during the project from EPS, NEA and BBB school data*
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.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 20 of 31 7/20/2020
Over the past several years, Naknek has experienced robust growth of onshore seafood pro-
cessing facilities that purchase electrical power from NEA. The community itself maintains a rela-
tively stable approximately 2 MW average load demand throughout the year with generator recov-
ered heat routed to the Bristol Bay Borough school during the school year. Energy demand will be
analyzed for the feasibility analysis, a process enabled by recent installation of engine and distribu-
tion feeder monitoring and logging capability (EPS information, Sept. 2020). NEA’s renewable en-
ergy goal is to supply to the extent possible the 2 MW base load, or approximately 17,500 MWh
per year of electrical energy. Thermal offset options with renewable energy is a more complex
analysis and will be assessed in the feasibility study.
5.4.4 Proposed System Design
Provide the following information for the proposed renewable energy system:
A description of renewable energy technology specific to project location
The total proposed capacity and a description of how the capacity was determined
Integration plan, including upgrades needed to existing system(s) to integrate renewable 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.
NEA’s goal is a wind-solar-diesel system capable of displacing up to 17,500 MWh/year of diesel
generated energy (the energy of a 2 MW base load) with wind and solar power. Assuming 30 per-
cent capacity factor for wind turbines, this would require 6.7 MW of wind power capacity, or a com-
bination of wind and solar that has less wind power capacity and much higher power solar capacity
than the current 80 kW. Given the high variability of the wind resource and the diurnal aspect of the
solar resource, battery storage will be necessary to achieve the goal. With that, NEA would closely
examine Kotzebue Electric Association’s successful wind-diesel system design for ideas and possi-
ble emulation, and if it can be arranged, NEA personnel will travel to Kotzebue to examine the
Kotzebue Electric Association (KEA) wind-diesel system first-hand. KEA has been open about their
wind power experience and supportive in helping other utilities meet their goals. NEA wishes to
learn from KEA’s experience.
5.4.4.1 Proposed Power Generation Units
Unit # Re-
source/
Fuel type
Design ca-
pacity (kW)
Make Model Ex-
pected
capacity
factor
Ex-
pected
life
(years)
Expected
Availability
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 21 of 31 7/20/2020
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
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.
With reference to wind-diesel projects operational in other Alaska hub communities, NEA believes
a goal of replacing their 2 MW mean annual base load with wind and solar power plus battery stor-
age is attainable, or nearly so. An important question to be explored in the feasibility study is die-
sels-off capability. Diesels-off dramatically improves the fuel savings of a wind-solar-diesel power
system, but an implication for NEA to consider, beyond system control and redundancy, is their
heat sales to Bristol Bay Borough school. That heat is critically necessary for the financial health of
the school district as self-generating heat with its fuel oil boiler would be prohibitively expensive.
Hence, the feasibility study will closely examine options to maintain this heat supply, whether al-
ways maintaining a diesel online to create heat or ensuring sufficient excess wind and solar energy
is available to route to a secondary load controller and electric boiler to make up diminished or lost
jacket water heat.
5.4.3.1 Expected Capacity Factor ~30% (wind)
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-Gal-
lons)
Fuel Con-
sumption
[Other]
Second-
ary load
(kWh)
Stor-
age
(kWh)
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 22 of 31 7/20/2020
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
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. $
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 23 of 31 7/20/2020
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
($)
Annual
Units
Total An-
nual cost
($)
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.
SECTION 6 – ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY AND BENEFITS
6.1 Economic Feasibility
6.1.1 Economic Benefit
Note: Calculation based on a 2 MW wind
project; existing or expanded solar
power capacity not included
Annual Lifetime
Anticipated Diesel Fuel Displaced for Power
Generation (gallons)*
351,600 4,219,000
Anticipated Fuel Displaced for Heat (gal-
lons)
To be modeled To be modeled
Total Fuel displaced (gallons)* 351,600+ 4,219,000+
Anticipated Diesel Fuel Displaced for Power
Generation ($)*
$956,600
Year 1 (2023)
$14,965,000
(20-year cumulative, 3%
discount rate)
Anticipated Fuel Displaced for Heat ($) To be modeled To be modeled
Anticipated Power Generation O&M Cost
Savings
$227,000
Year 1 (2023)
$3,184,000
(20-year cumulative, 3%
discount rate)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 24 of 31 7/20/2020
Anticipated Thermal Generation O&M Cost
Savings
Total Other costs savings (taxes, insurance,
etc.)
Total Fuel, O&M, and Other Cost Savings $956,600
Year 1 (2023)
$14,965,000
(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.
The economic calculated in section 6.1.1 represents projected savings from a 2,000-kW wind pro-
ject without inclusion of solar power, no calculation of excess wind-to-heat, and no consideration of
benefits of an ESS. NEA’s vision is a medium-to-high penetration renewable energy (wind and so-
lar power) system capable of offsetting diesel fuel usage devoted toward its mean annual approxi-
mately 2 MW baseload. That would require more than 2,000 kW of wind capacity but the REF13
Evaluation Model is not designed to consider system complexity that a configuration of this nature
would entail. Hence, a relatively simple system is modeled with the REF13 evaluation spreadsheet,
noting however that the true economic benefit requires further analysis.
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
The proposed project is for feasibility and conceptual design, where project risks will be explored
and addressed.
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
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 25 of 31 7/20/2020
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.)
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
This question will be explored in the project. NEA’s goal, though, is to offset its base load with wind
and solar and position itself as the renewable energy leader of the Bristol Bay region.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 26 of 31 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 27 of 31 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.
It was noted in Section 2.5 that two wind resource assessment studies have been completed in
Naknek: one near the community landfill (completed in 2006 with USDOE funding) and the other at
Cape Suwarof (completed in 2009 at NEA expense). Additional work completed at Cape Suwarof
in 2009, at NEA expense, were avian and geotechnical studies. Presently an NEA-owned, 80-kW
capacity solar PV system is operational on Cape Suwarof. NEA recently applied for a USDOE High
Energy Cost Grant to help replace deteriorated sections of its main district heat (heat recovery)
loop that supplies heat to Bristol Bay Borough school and other community facilities.
8.2 Demand- or Supply-Side Efficiency Upgrades
If you have invested in energy efficiency projects that will have a positive impact on the proposed
project, and have chosen to not include them in the economic analysis, applicants should provide
as much documentation as possible including:
1. Explain how it will improve the success of the RE project
2. Energy efficiency pre and post audit reports, or other appropriate analysis,
3. Invoices for work completed,
4. Photos of the work performed, and/or
5. Any other available verification such as scopes of work, technical drawings, and payroll for
work completed internally.
This will be researched during the feasibility and conceptual design 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
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.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application – Standard Form
AEA 21010 Page 28 of 31 7/20/2020
A
As the proposed project is a feasibility study to determine the potential technical and economic
benefit and challenges of renewable wind and solar power for the communities of Naknek, South
Naknek, and King Salmon, letters of support were not deemed necessary. The NEA board of direc-
tors was briefed on this proposal opportunity during its most recent monthly board meeting on Aug.
31 and fully supports this effort.
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 proposal.
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.
Naknek, Alaska Wind Resource Report (landfill site), V3 Energy LLC, Aug. 2006
Naknek, Alaska (Cape Suwarof) Wind Resource Report, V3 Energy LLC, Sept. 2009
Geotechnical Report, Naknek Wind Turbines, HDL, Feb. 2009
Potential Environmental Effects on Wildlife Species from a Proposed Windfarm in Naknek, Alaska,
ABR, Inc., Mar. 2009
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
Community/Grantee Name: Naknek Electric Association
Regular Election is held: I Date:
l.:;·{a =;u,·=-:·.:-t···=h···=·'··a··: .. =·:r;-,: .. l·z::-.'.e=· · -•. d·:.-\;=G··:·· r'·''a-' .. ···n·--:=-t·.··:·s·· · ··l ·g:' :·=n·:;· .. e··'·''~r .. ;·(· ;i~:;=;:.::;.;;.: :::-> ~-= .. ,: .. ::··-~:::··. :_::, ,;.-:_:·.-;\.\'~·~\/;-~;·.=.':·:~:=·~ .--·_:.-.--·.:.· ... ·.·--'.·,:.·_·_.-:.-'.•.:.·.·.·-·--.-.. --··.•.--·_·---'_·:_~· .....• ~:-.·_:·.•.:.-.·.•.· ... = •• _---_·.·.·--_: •• ,'_:,,,·_·,i_·. ___ :_·_i _·-,'-.·_·_i_ ... ----·~·-::_ .. •.·: .. ·:.·::· .. _:._·.--.. _·=.:·,-~:.'.:_---•• -.·_: .. ··=.'=.----·.·_·.•.:_--::.::_ .. · .-.•.= .. :.:.·,-_-.. -.-•·'_-.:_._(~.~.·-~.-·~-_.:·_.:·:;_·.·-... ·.:,·:·--_--_;:.,.·:·,· .• ,'·-~: ... '_-'-'--_-.• _·_:_~_.'_--· .. :,) .. ' __ :,-:= ·_·.: ·. '.'"'-. ·.,,,', .,,., .. '•,....... ,',', ""''•'· .: ..... '.'. , .. ,. . ....... •.·< ~Ji !!'<.::>.';, .,.,,._,:,·:.:.i . .\:,":, '.:.:•':•:\·,;·.,.:;;c,>·· , ,
Printed Name Title Term Signature£"'\ i'\
Mark Huber Finance Manager continuous ~~\l~ --"
Printed Name
Dianne King General Manager
Mailing Address: PO Box 118, Naknek, AK 99633
Phone Number: 907-246-4261
Fax Number:
Email Address: service@naknekelectric.com
Federal Tax ID #: 92-0027674
AEA21010 Page29 of3l 7/20/2020
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13
Grant Application -Standard Form
SECTION 14-ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION
SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WITH YOUR APPUCATION:
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
Signature
Title
Date
AEA 21010 Page 30 of31 7/20/2020
NEA Board of Directors
PO Box 118
Naknek, AK
September 25, 2020
Alaska Energy Authority
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application
813 West Northern Light Blvd.
Anchorage, AK 99503
Dear AEA,
As the Naknek Electric Association (NEA) Board of Director president and speaking on behalf of the full
board, this letter is to express the board's approval, support, and endorsement of NEA's proposed
Renewable Energy Fund Round 13 project, "Naknek Service Area Wind and Solar Power Feasibility and
Conceptual Design." The Board authorizes Dianne King, General Manager of NEA, to spend $11,500 in
cash as matching funds for the proposed grant project.
NEA is in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws including all existing credit and federal
tax obligations.
The Board of Directors looks forward to briefings on the project and we hope that the project will point
the way toward the introduction of large scale wind and solar power in Naknek to serve the larger
service area, which includes South Naknek and King Salmon.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have concerns, questions, or would like more information.
Thank you.
Respectfully,
Tim McDermott
President, Board of Directors
Naknek Electric Association
POST OFFICE BOX 118 NAKNEK, ALASKA 99633
PHONE 907.246.4261 I FAX 907.246.6242