HomeMy WebLinkAboutFINAL Cosmos AEA Application_RD9 mdf_JH mdf 91515
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 1 of 51 9/15/15
Application Forms and Instructions
This instruction page and the following grant application constitutes the Grant Application Form for
Round VIII of the Renewable Energy Fund. A separate application form is available for projects
with a primary purpose of producing heat (see RFA section 1.5). This is the standard form for all
other projects, including projects that will produce heat and electricity. An electronic version of the
Request for Applications (RFA) and both application forms is available online at:
http://www.akenergyauthority.org/Programs/Renewable-Energy-Fund/Rounds#round9.
If you need technical assistance filling out this application, please contact Shawn Calfa, the
Alaska Energy Authority Grants Administrator at (907) 771-3031 or at scalfa@aidea.org.
If you are applying for grants for more than one project, provide separate application forms
for each project.
Multiple phases (e.g. final design, construction) for the same project may be submitted as
one application.
If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project, provide milestones
and grant budget for each phase of the project.
In order to ensure that grants provide sufficient benefit to the public, AEA may limit
recommendations for grants to preliminary development phases in accordance with 3 ACC
107.605(1).
If some work has already been completed on your project and you are requesting funding
for an advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the preceding
phases are completed and funding for an advanced phase is warranted. Supporting
documentation may include, but is not limited to, reports, conceptual or final designs, models,
photos, maps, proof of site control, utility agreements, power sale agreements, relevant data
sets, and other materials. Please provide a list of supporting documents in Section 11 of this
application and attach the documents to your application.
If you have additional information or reports you would like the Authority to consider in
reviewing your application, either provide an electronic version of the document with your
submission or reference a web link where it can be downloaded or reviewed. Please provide
a list of additional information; including any web links, in section 12 of this application and
attach the documents to your application. For guidance on application best practices please
refer to the resource specific Best Practices Checklists; links to the checklists can be found
in the appendices list at the end of the accompanying REF Round IX RFA.
In the sections below, please enter responses in the spaces provided. You may add
additional rows or space to the form to provide sufficient space for the information, or attach
additional sheets if needed.
REMINDER:
Alaska Energy Authority is subject to the Public Records Act AS 40.25, and materials
submitted to the Authority may be subject to disclosure requirements under the act if no
statutory exemptions apply.
All applications received will be posted on the Authority web site after final recommendations
are made to the legislature.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 2 of 51 9/15/15
In accordance with 3 AAC 107.630 (b) Applicants may request trade secrets or proprietary
company data be kept confidential subject to review and approval by the Authority. If you
want information to be kept confidential the applicant must:
o Request the information be kept confidential.
o Clearly identify the information that is the trade secret or proprietary in their
application.
o Receive concurrence from the Authority that the information will be kept confidential.
If the Authority determines it is not confidential it will be treated as a public record in
accordance with AS 40.25 or returned to the applicant upon request.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 3 of 51 9/15/15
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)
NANA Regional Corporation
Type of Entity: Land-Owner/IPP Fiscal Year End: 2015
Tax ID #
Tax Status: ☒ For-profit ☐ Non-profit ☐ Government (check one)
Date of last financial statement audit:
Mailing Address: Physical Address:
PO Box 49 NANA Regional Corporation
Kotzebue, AK 99752 100 Shore Avenue
Kotzebue, AK 99752
Telephone: Fax: Email:
(907) 442-3301 (907) 442-4161 Sonny.adams@nana.com
1.1 Applicant Point of Contact / Grants Manager
Name: Sonny Adams Title: Director of Energy
Mailing Address:
909 West 9th Avenue
Anchorage, AK 99501
Telephone: Fax: Email:
(907) 265-4100 (907) 265-4123 Sonny.Adams@nana.com
1.1.1 APPLICANT SIGNATORY AUTHORITY CONTACT INFORMATION
Name: Wayne Westlake Title: President
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 49
Kotzebue, AK 99752
Telephone: Fax: Email:
(907) 442-3301 (907) 442-2866 wayne.westlake@nana.com
1.1.2 Applicant Alternate Points of Contact
Name Telephone: Fax: Email:
Jay Hermanson 907-339-6514 907-339-5327 jhermanson@whpacific.com
1.2 Ap plicant Minimum Requirements
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 4 of 51 9/15/15
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, or
☒ An independent power producer in accordance with 3 AAC 107.695 (a) (1), or
☐ A local government, or
☐ A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities)
1.2 APPLICANT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (continued)
Please check as appropriate.
☒ 1.2.2 Attached to this application is formal approval and endorsement for the project by the
applicant’s board of directors, executive management, or other governing authority. If the
applicant is a collaborative grouping, a formal approval from each participant’s governing
authority is necessary. (Indicate by checking the box)
☒ 1.2.3 As an applicant, we have administrative and financial management systems and follow
procurement standards that comply with the standards set forth in the grant agreement
(Section 3 of the RFA). (Indicate by checking the box)
☒ 1.2.4 If awarded the grant, we can comply with all terms and conditions of the award as
identified in the Standard Grant Agreement template at
http://www.akenergyauthority.org/Programs/Renewable-Energy-Fund/Rounds#round9. (Any
exceptions should be clearly noted and submitted with the application.) (Indicate 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)
As the land-owner, NANA Regional Corporation (NRC) intends to work with the Regulatory
Commission of Alaska, the designated utility for Shungnak and Kobuk, for the provision of energy
in the form of electricity and heat. Furthermore, it is our intention to operate the deployed system to
benefit these economically burdened communities as a not-for-profit entity.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 5 of 51 9/15/15
SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY
2.1 Project Title
Provide a 4 to 7 word title for your project. Type in the space below.
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Design & Permitting
2.2 Project Location
2.2.1 Location of Project – Latitude and longitude (preferred), street address, or community
name.
Latitude and longitude coordinates may be obtained from Google Maps by finding you project’s
location on the map and then right clicking with the mouse and selecting “What is here? The
coordinates will be displayed in the Google search window above the map in a format as follows:
61.195676.-149.898663. If you would like assistance obtaining this information please contact AEA
at 907-771-3031.
The project is located on the Kogoluktuk River.
The communities impacted by this project are Ambler, Shungnak, and Kobuk—located in Northwest
Alaska. Ambler is located on the north bank of the Kobuk River, near the confluence of the Ambler
and the Kobuk Rivers. It lies 30 miles northwest of Kobuk, and 30 miles downriver from Shungnak.
Shungnak is located on the west bank of the Kobuk River. Kobuk is located on the east bank of the
Kobuk River, about 7 miles northeast of Shungnak.
Location coordinates are given in the table below:
Public Land Survey System (PLSS) Info Geographical
Coordinates
Location Section Township Range Meridian Latitude Longitude
Kobuk 3 17N 9E Kateel River 66°55’ N 156°53’ W
Shungnak 9 17N 8E Kateel River 66°53’ N 157°08’ W
Ambler 31 20N 5E Kateel River 67°05’ N 157°51’ W
Kogoluktuk
River
(at Intake)
8 18N 10E Kateel River 66°58’20”
N
156°43’19”
W
Kogoluktuk
River
(at
Powerhouse)
17 18N 10E Kateel River 66°57’52”
N
156°43’48”
W
2.2.2 Community benefiting – Name(s) of the community or communities that will be the
beneficiaries of the project.
The Northwest Arctic, Upper Kobuk communities of Ambler, Shungnak, and Kobuk Alaska are the
communities benefitting from this project. Ambler will benefit with the planned inter-connection
transmission line between Shungnak and Ambler- a project that has a positive benefit-cost ratio
without a renewable energy source. Shungnak and Kobuk are inter-connected with a transmission
line.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 6 of 51 9/15/15
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. (We do not
intend to do full final design and permitting with this request due to the amount and likely availability
☐ Feasibility and Conceptual Design ☐ Construction
2.4 Project Description
Provide a brief one paragraph description of the proposed project.
After careful evaluation of the potential hydropower sources in the Cosmos Hills, as documented in
the Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design Report previously submitted to AEA, project
stakeholders have chosen to move forward with design and permitting for a hydroelectric project on
the Kogoluktuk River.
The Kogoluktuk River project would be a run-of-river project with a small diversion dam and intake,
a long above-ground penstock pipeline, a small Kaplan turbine and powerhouse, and a tailrace back
to the river. The project would also include an access road, a transformer, and a high-voltage
transmission line. At this location, the upstream basin catchment area is approximately 424 square
miles.
2.5 Scope of Work
Provide a scope of work detailing the tasks to be performed under this funding request. This
should include work paid for by grant funds and matching funds or performed as in-kind match.
Task 1: Project Management
The AEA Project Lead is Sonny Adams with NANA Regional Corporation. NRC is providing over
$30,000 in labor to manage the project, coordinate and participate in meetings, and submit quarterly
and final reporting requirements. Sonny will be assisted by James Commack and Glenda Douglas
to provide local project administration coordination in Shungnak and the surrounding communities.
Sonny will follow quarterly and final reporting requirements as described below:
Quarterly Reporting: Technical progress updates will be provided to AEA’s project
monitor summarizing work completed to date, any challenges, and next steps for the
upcoming quarter. The status report will include a listing of funds expended during the
quarter, how the funds were spent, and the amount remaining. Sonny Adams will be
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 7 of 51 9/15/15
responsible for submitting quarterly reports two weeks after the end of each quarter and
will forward copies to our local BIA Agency and Regional Offices.
Final Reporting: The final deliverable to be provided to AEA after project completion is the
Preliminary Engineering Report. Data generated under the AEA project will be in the
appendices of that final report.
Task 2: Public Involvement
During the feasibility and resource assessment phase, team members organized public meetings
in the communities of Ambler, Shungnak, and Kobuk in 2010, to review project parameters and
community input. Team members also met with NANA region stakeholders, state agencies, and
other regulatory agencies. We received reasonable and positive feedback on the project.
To build from this momentum, this project will continue to engage the local community and provide
updates to stakeholders interested in the project’s progress. Local public involvement will be led by
James Commack and Glenda Douglas of the Native Village of Shungnak. At a minimum, they will
provide quarterly updates to the IRA Council, with more frequent communication provided during
the field season and final reporting period. Sonny Adams (NANA) and James will also coordinate
providing project updates to the neighboring villages of Kobuk and Ambler. Other projects Sonny
is working on often bring him to the area anyway, which he will take advantage of for providing in-
person progress updates to village leaders and community members.
The project team will also meet in person or provide written updates to the following stakeholder
groups:
Alaska Energy Authority
Maniilaq Association
Leaders of the Nova Copper/Upper Kobuk Mineral Project
The Northwest Arctic Borough
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)
Kotzebue Electric Association
NANA Lands Committee
Adams and Commack will also provide project updates to the Northwest Arctic Energy Steering
Committee and Northwest Arctic Leadership Team, so the Northwest Alaska Energy Plan can be
updated at the conclusion of this project. Records of public meetings will be kept and compiled
into an organized format to document the public involvement that has occurred on this project.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 8 of 51 9/15/15
Task 3: General Survey
This task includes general surveying of the river bed and area surrounding the powerhouse. The
surveying crew will perform a detailed field survey of the river at the intake and tailrace locations.
This will include the topographic features of the river bed below the water surface and the terrain
in the immediate area of the structures. This information will be used to perform a detailed
hydraulic analysis at the intake and tailrace outfall. Survey elevation control will be established
as part of the general survey. This information will also be used by the hydrology studies.
Costs include travel to the site and approximately three weeks of field work in June or July, as
weather permits. This survey data will provide critical input into design during the next phase of
project work. While LIDAR data is critical for the lower Kogoluktuk River, this will need to be
delayed to a later stage, due to budget limitations. The preliminary road alignment and
hydroelectric ancillary infrastructure (powerhouse, tailrace, intake, and penstock) locations were
aligned and located on NANA land to avoid any Native allotments.
Task 4: Hydrology Data Collection and Investigations
The scope of work in this task is broken into two subtasks: Data Processing and Field
Operations.
Subtask 1: Data Processing 2012-2015: This subtask is needed to evaluate data collected from
2012 to 2015 that has not been processed as needed, to support the Cosmos Hills Hydropower
Hydrologic Network, which consists of four active surface-water stations as follows: Upper Wesley
Creek Station, Upper Kogoluktuk River Station, Upper Kogoluktuk River Falls Station, Wesley
Creek Repeater, Kogoluktuk River Repeater, Upper Kogoluktuk River Falls Repeater and the
new Lower Falls Kogoluktuk Intake Station. This data processing effort will bring data from 3
stations (Upper Wesley Creek, Upper Kogoluktuk River, and Upper Kogoluktuk Falls) to current
QC3 standards to allow evaluation of future data collection needs. Deliverables for this subtask
include:
Incorporate field data from 2012-2015 into automated recorded data in April through
early May. Information will be available through the internal Wiki site for the project.
Perform a senior-level review to make sure all data meets QC3 standards.
Compose an interim report to accompany the period of record (POR) data and submit
to Design Lead, Steve Coleman, and Sonny Adams of NANA, by mid May 2017.
Subtask 2: Field Operations and Data Report - This subtask covers field work to take place
between October 2016 and September of 2017. Preliminary stations were established in 2014 at
the Lower Falls proposed intake location, but only limited data has been collected. This task will
decommission and remove the Upper Kogoluktuk River Station and move to the current
Kogoluktuk River Lower Falls Intake Station location. Discharge measurements in summer
conditions will be started to develop a rating curve for this reach of the river. Typically, about eight
measurements at different flow conditions are needed to develop a rating curve for flow versus
stage. This curve is used to convert continuous stage data to flow data. Most permitting
requirements for this type of application require three to five years of continuous daily flow data.
Upper Wesley Creek Station is reaching this point, but data needs to be processed to make sure
it will meet the regulatory review process. During winter ice cover conditions, open-water rating
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 9 of 51 9/15/15
curves do not work, so direct field measurements are needed to estimate the winter recession
curve.
Field operations will involve field trips in March, June, and September of 2017. Major objectives for
these trips are:
March 2017 – (End of winter snow and ice conditions). Retrieve data from stations that
could be lost during spring break-up and end-of-winter flow conditions.
June 2017 – Demobilize the Upper Kogoluktuk River Station. Establish the Kogoluktuk
River Lower Falls Station (full configuration) and a temperature measurement station
downstream of the proposed outlet location.
September 2017 – Collect field discharge measurements of Kogoluktuk River Lower Falls
Station. Make end-of-summer observations and prepare the station for winter operations.
A data report will be submitted to Design Lead, Steve Coleman, and Sonny Adams of NANA, by
September of 2017.
Task 5: Environmental Studies
While engineering and design activities have achieved a preliminary design level, design is not yet
at a reasonable level for submittal of permits. To prepare for bringing design to 65% and beyond,
a detailed scope is needed to explain the regulatory requirements of various permitting agencies.
The following subtasks will be completed:
Discuss fish habitat issues with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) to
understand their concerns, especially regarding environmental flow requirements during
winter months.
Perform preliminary fish habitat field studies required by ADF&G during summer 2017.
Meet with other agencies, including Alaska Energy Authority, US Fish and Wildlife
Service, and the Regulatory Commission of Alaska to scope environmental and/or
permitting requirements for the project in future phases of work.
Consult with the Alaska State Department of Natural Resources, State Historic
Preservation office on the project and identify what steps are needed for advancing
the project.
Task 6: Preliminary Engineering Report
The Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) will summarize the work performed in Tasks 1 through
5, described above. The individual reports or surveys prepared in Tasks 1 through 5 will be
included as appendices to the PER. In addition, the following will also be included in the PER:
Perform a preliminary thermal analysis of the entire system, including the intake,
penstock, tailrace, and outfall.
Develop preliminary hydraulic designs of the diversion and intake structures and
tailrace and outfall structures. Conceptual design drawings will be refined to
incorporate the new knowledge gained during conversations with ADF&G on
estimated environmental flow requirements, the river cross-section survey, and
hydrology data.
Preliminary penstock pipeline design, between the intake structure and the powerhouse,
will be looked at further to better minimize rock excavation and construction costs.
Refinements will be made to the existing plan and profile drawings that were prepared as
part of previous work. Also, based on the thermal analysis, pipeline material and thermal
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 10 of 51 9/15/15
protection options will be further investigated.
Develop a detailed task list and schedule to show critical path activities for moving the
project through construction. This information will inform future phases of work and
funding applications.
SECTION 3 – Project Management, Development, and Operation
3.1 Schedule and Milestones
Criteria: Stage 2-1.A: The proposed schedule is clear, realistic, and described in adequate detail.
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 in 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 of your proposed project. Add additional rows as needed.
Milestones Tasks
Start
Date
End
Date Deliverables
Project Management
08/16 12/17
Project Management
Plan
Quarterly Reporting 08/16 12/17 Reports
Final Report 12/17 12/17 Reports
Public Involvement Summary Report
Community Meeting
11/16 12/17
Record of Public
Meeting
Stakeholder Meetings 11/16 12/16
General Survey Survey Data
General Survey
07/17 08/17
Survey data
submitted to
engineering
Hydrology Data Collection
and Investigations
Report
Data Processing
2012-2015 01/17 03/17
Final Data Set
Field Operations and
Data Report 03/17 05/17
Data Report
Environmental Studies
Agency Consultation 02/17 03/17 Record of meetings
Fish Habitat Studies 7/17 8/17 Report
Preliminary Engineering
Report
Report
Preliminary thermal
analysis 10/17 11/17
Report
Develop preliminary
hydraulic designs 10/17 11/17
Report
Preliminary penstock
pipeline design 10/17 11/17
Report
3.2 Budget
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 11 of 51 9/15/15
Criteria: Stage 2-1.B: The cost estimates for project development, operation, maintenance, fuel, and
other project items meet industry standards or are otherwise justified.
3.2.1 Budget Overview
Describe your financial commitment to the project. List the amount of funds needed for project
completion and the anticipated nature and sources of funds. Consider all project phases, including
future phases not covered in this funding request.
The total anticipated cost for the Kogoluktuk River Hydroelectric project is:
• Previous work: $ 1,000,000 - Reconnaissance, Feasibility and Conceptual Design
• Current phase: $ 378,535- Engineering, Design, and additional activities.
• Future work: $35,663,000 - Final Design and Construction
• Total: $37,034,335
AEA provided $1 Million for previous phases of the work. In-kind contributions came from NRC and
NovaCopper. These included such items as paying for hydrological studies, engineering, and
reconnaissance activities.
In the current phase, NRC plans to initiate design and permitting of a new hydroelectric project to
serve Shungnak, Kobuk, and eventually Ambler. This work would cost $371,000 with an estimated
$30,000 contribution coming from NRC for project management and administration.
NRC recognizes that funding for the future design and construction phase will be beyond the ability
of the AEA REF to provide. It is our intention to request legislative funding at the State , and
potentially National, level for the final design and construction of this project. For example, NRC
has applied to the Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development for additional funding and is
currently awaiting a decision.
3.2.2 Budget Forms
Applications MUST include a separate worksheet for each project phase that was identified in
section 2.3.2 of this application, (I. Reconnaissance, II. Feasibility and Conceptual Design, III. Final
Design and Permitting, and IV. Construction. Please use the tables provided below to detail your
proposed project’s total budget. Be sure to use one table for each phase of your project. 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 at 907-771-3031 or by emailing the Grants
Administrator, Shawn Calfa, at scalfa@aidea.org.
Milestone or Task
RE- Fund
Grant
Funds
Grantee
Matching
Funds
Source of Matching
Funds:
Cash/In-kind/Federal
Grants/Other State
Grants/Other
TOTALS
Project Management $ $37,200 NRC/Grantee/START
Program $ 37,200
Public Involvement $12,500 $ $12,500
General Survey $51,000 $ $51,000
Hydrology Data Collection and
Investigations $105,275 $ $105,275
Environmental Studies $113,900 $ $113,920
Preliminary Engineering Report $58,500 $ $58,640
TOTALS 341,000 $30,000 $371,335
Budget Categories:
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 12 of 51 9/15/15
Direct Labor & Benefits $ $ $
Travel & Per Diem $ $ $
Equipment $ $ $
Materials & Supplies $ $ $
Contractual Services $ $ $
Construction Services $ $ $
Other $ $ $
TOTALS $ $ $
Matching= 8% of total
3.2.3 Cost Justification
Indicate the source(s) of the cost estimates used for the project budget.
The cost estimate for this phase derives from the Cosmos Hills Conceptual Design and Feasibility
Study Report. NRC recognizes that the state has limited funding available and has provided an
incremental scope of work and budget estimate as found in this report.
3.2.4 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 $341,335
Cash match to be provided $
In-kind match to be provided $ 37,200
Total costs for project phase(s) covered in application (sum of above) $378,535
3.2.5 Total Project Costs
Indicate the anticipated total cost by phase of the project (including all funding sources). Use actual
costs for completed phases.
Reconnaissance $ 1,000,000
Feasibility and Conceptual Design
Final Design and Permitting $ 378,535
$35,663,000 Construction
Total Project Costs (sum of above) $37,041,535
3.2.6 Operating and Maintenance Costs
O&M costs can be estimated in two ways for the standard application. Most proposed RE projects
will fall under Option 1 because the new resource will not allow for diesel generation to be turned
off. Some projects may allow for diesel generation to be turned off for periods of time; these
projects should choose Option 2 for estimating O&M.
Options O&M Impact of proposed RE project
Option 1: Diesel generation ON
For projects that do not result in shutting down
diesel generation there is assumed to be no
impact on the base case O&M. Please indicate
the estimated annual O&M cost associated with
the proposed renewable project.
$193,000 SEE FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT
Option 2: Diesel generation OFF
For projects that will result in shutting down
diesel generation please estimate:
1. Annual non-fuel savings of shutting off diesel
generation
1. Not applicable
2. Hours diesel OFF/year:
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 13 of 51 9/15/15
2. Estimated hours that diesel generation will
be off per year.
3. Annual O&M costs associated with the
proposed renewable project.
3. $
3.3 Project Communications
Criteria: Stage 2-1.C: The applicant’s communications plan, including monitoring and reporting, is
described in adequate detail.
Describe how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status.
Project communications is vital. The team will employ an active project communications plan in order
to perform outreach to the project’s stakeholders and to AEA.
The NRC project manager will have communication responsibility. Communication responsibilities
will include the production of progress reports for grant reporting to AEA and completing adequate
oversight. Weekly and monthly project coordination meetings will be held with the project team to
track progress and address issues as they arise. Two on-site meetings with the Village will be held.
The Project Manager and Consultant staff will travel to Shungnak at the beginning and end of the
project to present project updates to IRA during Council meetings.
3.4 Operational Logistics
Criteria: Stage 2-1.D: Logistical, business, and financial arrangements for operating and maintaining
the project throughout its lifetime and selling energy from the completed project are reasonable and
described in adequate detail.
Describe the anticipated logistical, business, and financial arrangements for operating and
maintaining the project throughout its lifetime and selling energy from the completed project.
The primary focus of this phase is to confirm the logistical, business, financial, and operating
frameworks in effect within the utility’s operations.
At this time, AVEC, the local utility—in association with the land-owner, NRC—will assume
responsibility for the functionality of the installed system. It is intended that the proposed system will
be fully integrated into the power system for Shungnak. To achieve this, the Local Utility Board will
work to ensure the anticipated logistical, business, and financial arrangements are in place for the
successful operation of the hydroelectric project.
SECTION 4 – QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
4.1 Project Team
Criteria: Stage 2-2.A: The Applicant, partners, and/or contractors have sufficient knowledge and
experience to successfully complete and operate the project. If the applicant has not yet chosen a
contractor to complete the work, qualifications and experience points will be based on the applicant’s
capacity to successfully select contractors and manage complex contracts.
Criteria: Stage 2-2.B: The project team has staffing, time, and other resources to successfully
complete and operate the project.
Criteria: Stage 2-2.C: The project team is able to understand and address technical, economic,
and environmental barriers to successful project completion and operation.
Criteria: Stage 2-2.D: The project team has positive past grant experience.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 14 of 51 9/15/15
4.1.1 Project Manager
Indicate who will be managing the project for the Grantee and include contact information, and a
resume. In the electronic submittal, please submit resumes as separate PDFs if the applicant would
like those excluded from the web posting of this application. 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.
The NRC will implement a collaborative project management approach. The team selected by the
NRC has extensive experience and knowledge in the development of renewable energy systems
in the Arctic.
Mr. Sonny Adams, Director of Energy at NRC, will assume the role of Project Manager for this
project and will be assisted by the project management and engineering services of WHPacific.
Mr. Adams will provide oversight to accounting staff and engineering contractors. He will also
provide coordination of special projects including project development, planning, and construction
coordination and reporting. His resume has been attached to the proposal to present his
qualifications.
4.1.2 Expertise and Resources
Describe the project team including the applicant, partners, and contractors. Provide sufficient detail
for reviewers to evaluate:
• the extent to which the team has sufficient knowledge and experience to successfully
complete and operate the project;
• whether the project team has staffing, time, and other resources to successfully complete
and operate the project;
• how well the project team is able to understand and address technical, economic, and
environmental barriers to successful project completion and operation.
If contractors have not been selected to complete the work, provide reviewers with sufficient detail
to understand the applicant’s capacity to successfully select contractors and manage complex
contracts. Include brief resumes for known key personnel and contractors as an attachment to your
application. In the electronic submittal, please submit resumes as separate PDFs if the applicant
would like those excluded from the web posting of this application
At present, we are fully available to support the design and engineering activities associated with
this proposed scope of work.
NRC will rely upon the engineering and project management services of WHPacific. The
WHPacific team has worked on multiple projects in the Upper Kobuk area, including road projects
in Shungnak, biomass projects in Ambler and Kobuk, and on previous phases associated with the
Cosmos Hills Project. WHPacific has also worked closely with Alaska Energy Authority and its
program managers on multiple projects. The engineering team will be led by Steve Coleman, PE,
Dan Nichols, PE, and Michael Lilly, MS.
4.1.3 Project Accountant(s)
Indicate who will be performing the accounting of this project for the grantee and include a resume.
In the electronic submittal, please submit resumes as separate PDFs if the applicant would like those
excluded from the web posting of this application. If the applicant does not have a project accountant
indicate how you intend to solicit financial accounting support.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 15 of 51 9/15/15
NRC’s accounting group will be assigned to assist with project accounting. The Lead Project
Accountant will be Kim Cunningham. See attached resume for review of her qualifications.
4.1.4 Financial Accounting System
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 Renewable Energy Fund Grant Program.
NANA’s Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system is Deltek Costpoint. The Finance/Accounting
department is the primary user of the ERP system. Within Costpoint, NRC will set up a project for
this grant and Kim Cunningham will be the primary accountant involved with accounting for the grant
within the ERP system. As noted above, NRC will set up a project in the accounting system for this
grant. In the project setup, they will only allow direct charges – no overhead will be charged.
Additionally, all costs will be subject to NRC’s normal accounts payable process and the associated
controls including:
Obtainment of necessary approvals
Coding review for all charges to ensure they are accurately charged to the correct projects and
accounts,
Review of supporting documents (invoices, etc.),
Requiring dual signatures for all checks.
4.2 Local Workforce
Criteria: Stage 2-2.E: The project uses local labor and trains a local labor workforce.
Describe how the project will use local labor or train a local labor workforce.
As the applicant, NRC is deeply committed to its local workforces in the operations of the proposed
system. Currently, the Native Village of Shungnak has been selected by the US Department of
Energy and its START program. The START program will continue the process of workforce
development in Shungnak, building upon the trained power plant and water and sewer operators. In
addition, NRC and its sub-consultants will continue to provide opportunities for the Hydro
Technicians, currently responsible for managing the stream gauging program, who live in Kobuk.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 16 of 51 9/15/15
SECTION 5 – TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
5.1 Resource Availability
Criteria: Stage 2-3.A: The renewable energy resource is available on a sustainable basis, and
project permits and other authorizations can reasonably be obtained.
5.1.1 Proposed Energy Resource
Describe the potential extent/amount of the energy resource that is available, including average
resource availability on an annual basis. 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.
For pre-construction applications, describe the resource to the extent known. For design and
permitting or construction projects, please provide feasibility documents, design documents, and
permitting documents (if applicable) as attachments to this application.
Three potential run-of-the river hydroelectric projects were initially considered. Two of them, the
Wesley Creek and Dahl Creek projects, are on relatively small creeks. During much of the
year, the projects' electric output would be almost completely used by the villages when they
begin operation. The third project, Kogoluktuk River, is much larger, as it is on a much larger
river . The project is large enough to generate electricity surplus to current village needs. The
surplus electricity could be used to supply heat, village growth, or economic opportunities
that develop in the region.
A comparison of one representative scenario is listed below to help describe the projects and
illustrate the differences between them. The scenario below assumes that an intertie is
constructed between Ambler and Shungnak thus linking the electric loads for all three villages.
We have concluded that an interties has a positive benefit cost eve n without a locally based
hydroelectric project. It also assumes AVEC will produce a price forecast for fuel, and that
agencies require some water to bypass the intake and maintain the river’s fish habitat in
between the intake and tailrace. The full Cosm os Hills Hydro Feasibility Study and Conceptual
Design Report is attached to this application as a reference.
Project Information:
Wesley Creek
Dahl Creek
Kogoluktuk
River Drainage Basin (sq.miles) 5 .2 8.5 424
Median Monthly Streamflow (cfs) 9.0 14.6 574.6
Design Flow (cfs) 15 16 170
Static Head (feet) 292 257 64
Installed Hydro Capacity (kW) 260 230 690
Penstock Length (feet) 8,750 9,470 4,300
Hydro Penetration in Year 0 1,000,000 1,210,000 4,940,000
Annual Energy Potential (kWh) 32% 39% 90%
Construction Cost ($) $12,728,000 $14,249,000 $35,663,000
Annual O&M cost $68,100 $76,200 $193,300
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 17 of 51 9/15/15
5.1.2 Permits
Provide the following information as it may relate to permitting and how you intend to address
outstanding permit issues.
List of applicable permits
Anticipated permitting timeline
Identify and describe potential barriers
In this phase of work, WHPacific will consult with agencies to determine necessary permitting.
Known required permits include:
• Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR) water use permit
• Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) Title 16 Resident Fish Passage
• Northwest Arctic Borough (NAB) Title 9 permit
• NANA Land Use permit
• US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE or CORPS) Section 404 permit
• SHPO clearance
• Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Obstruction Evaluation I Airport Airspace Analysis is
(OE/AAA) 7460-1
The NAB board in charge of Title 9 permitting meets quarterly, so acquisition of the permit can take
up to six months. DNR and ADF&G coordinate on their permitting. This portion of the process could
be the most time consuming and is estimated to take a year to 18 months. Experience has shown
that this process may-be accelerated if more information is provided at the outset.
Since a Fish and Fish Habitat Survey and the Reconnaissance Report: Fisheries and Water Quality
Resources (Aquatic Resources): Kogoluktuk River Study Area was completed, a great deal of
information is now available and may allow a streamlining of the process. The ACOE permit
generally takes about 6 months. Many environmental questions will be answered through the
environmental process, including environmental flows.
FERC's licensing process may be required because a small piece of the project is located on
navigable waters within the United States. The project might be exempt, however, since it will have
a minimal impact to the Kogoluktuk River. The report prepared by Solstice Alaska Consulting Inc.
titled "FERC Requirements and Field Study Recommendations," dated March 30, 2010, stated that
a number of the Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric projects could fall under a FERC exemption from
licensing. While not specifically listed in the report, the current Kogoluktuk River project is very
similar in type and size to the listed projects and might qualify for exemption.
5.2 Project Site
Criteria: Stage 2-3.B: A site is available and suitable for the proposed energy system.
Describe the availability of the site and its suitability for the proposed energy system. Identify
potential land ownership issues, including whether site owners have agreed to the project or how
you intend to approach land ownership and access issues.
As the land-owner, NRC is fully committed to developing this project for local use and at the lowest
possible cost without sacrificing long-term financial sustainability of the operating system. The
Kogoluktuk River is an excellent source of renewable energy for the communities of Ambler,
Shungnak, and Kobuk and can be accessed from the Kobuk road network from the Dahl Creek
Camp, in current operations by Nova Copper.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 18 of 51 9/15/15
5.3 Project Risk
Criteria: Stage 2-3.C: Project technical and environmental risks are reasonable.
5.3.1 Technical Risk
Describe potential technical risks and how you would address them.
Due to the low head and high flow associated with the Kogoluktuk, the engineering team identified
a Kaplan turbine as the preferred turbine. The Kaplan turbine is a propeller type water turbine which
has fixed or adjustable blades. The ability to alter the inclination of th e blades allows the turbine to
adjust to suit the load variations. A load governor will be required to limit rapid fluctuations in water
flow that could cause adverse pressure changes in the penstock.
5.3.2 Environmental Risk
Explain whether the following environmental and land use issues apply, and if so how they will be
addressed:
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
A description of potentially affected environmental and land use components is provided below.
Site Control/Access: The Kogoluktuk River project would be designed to stay completely within
NANA-owned lands. The access road to the project would need to be routed to avoid crossing the
State-owned Dahl Creek runway and a Native Allotment located to the east of the runway. No private
parcels or active mining claims were identified as impacted.
Permitting: A scoping meeting will be conducted with all interested agencies to identify
environmental and/or permitting requirements. Fish habitat issues will be discussed with the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game to ascertain their concerns, if any, with special regard to required
environmental flows.
Although some recreational use by whitewater rafters and local subsistence fisherman is reported,
it is noted that flows during the summer are well above the hydraulic capacity of the proposed project
which allows for continued utilization as a whitewater rafting reach. Signage upstream of the
diversion dam could warn potential users of the hazard.
While the project may be exempt, FERC's licensing process may be required because a small piece
of the project is located on navigable waters within the United States.
Weather: Weather could delay geotechnical field work; however, an experienced consultant familiar
with Alaskan weather conditions will be selected. It is unlikely that a delay in the total project
schedule would occur if the fieldwork is delayed.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 19 of 51 9/15/15
5.4 Existing and Proposed Energy System
Criteria: Stage 2-3.D: The proposed energy system can reliably produce and deliver energy as
planned.
5.4.1 Basic Configuration of Existing Energy System
Describe the basic configuration of the existing energy system. Include information about the
number, size, age, efficiency, and type of generation.
AVEC provides electricity to Shungnak & Kobuk via diesel generations with a total capacity of 1,210
kilowatts (from NRC website - Shungnak)
The units shown in Table 1 are based on a review of filings with the Regulatory Commission of
Alaska (RCA), the diesel electric generation plant in Shungnak that also provides power to Kobuk.
Table 1: Shungnak Power Generation Units
Engine Size (kW) Commissioning
dates
Engine Control
Panels
John Deere 6619
(position 1) 202 1991 (Originally
installed in Noatak
in 1985)
Emerson s/n
47G23
CAT 3406 (position 2) 297 1984 Simplex s/n 24575
Detroit Diesel S60
(Position 4) 314 1998 Control Power s/n
1656-8
Cummins KTA1150
(Position 5) 397 1991 Control Power s/n
1656-7
The generator controls are all manually operated. They have analog metering, ice cube (plug-in)
relays, and include modules for load share and paralleling between units.
AVEC’s Shungnak power plant was energized in 1971, with three generation units in the Butler
building. The plant now has two units in the Butler Building and two additional generation modules,
(positions 4 &5). All the engine controls are in the Butler Building
.
Shungnak power plant, 2011
The diesel generation efficiency for
Shungnak is approximately 14.10 kWh/gal.
The electric energy in Kobuk is produced at
the diesel generation plant in Shungnak
and delivered through the existing
Shungnak-Kobuk intertie. The intertie is
approximately 7 miles in length and has
been in existence for about 30 years
(AVEC Kobuk).
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 20 of 51 9/15/15
The intertie does experience outages on occasion. During an outage, Kobuk must self-generate
electricity with their existing diesel plant. This plant is reported to have a capacity of 75 kW (NWAB
Kobuk Comp Plan).
AEA’s Power Cost Equalization Program (PCE) report indicates that Kobuk purchased 624 Wh of
energy on an annualized basis. Additional PCE data indicates that the average demand in Kobuk
is 57.5 kW.
The Alaska Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development recently allocated
approximately $1.5M to the Northwest Arctic Borough for improvements to t he Shungnak-Kobuk
intertie. It is assumed that the existing intertie will continue to have the capacity to supply the electric
energy needs of Shungnak-Kobuk (from Cosmos Hills study, but edited for updates).
The combined annual generation for Shungnak-Kobuk for the past seven years is shown in the
following table (AIDEA PCE).
Electric Demand
Shungnak PCE Ambler PCE Combined PCE
FY Year
Energy
Generated,
kWh
Avg
Power,
kW
Energy
Generated,
kWh
Avg
Power,
kW
Energy
Generated,
kWh
Avg.
Power,
kW
2008 1,483,862 169 1,321,573 151 2,805,435 320
2009 1,477,747 169 1,245,599 142 2,723,346 311
2010 1,578,459 180 1,249,161 143 2,827,620 323
2011 1,546,541 177 1,314,441 150 2,860,982 327
2012 1,588,139 181 1,343,144 153 2,931,283 335
2013 1,732,010 204 1,318,829 147 3,050,839 351
2014 1,721,532 186 1,249,892 141 2,971,425 327
Escalation Rate 1.8% 0.9% 1.4%
The electrical demand in both communities has risen over the past several years. It is assumed this
trend will continue at a conservative rate of 1% for both communities. The projected generation for
the next 50 years is shown in the following table.
Projected Energy Demand
Shungnak-Kobuk,
kWh
Ambler,
kWh
Combined,
kWh
FY 2016 (year 0) 1,606,819 1,329,832 2,936,651
FY 2038 (year 25) 2,060,636 1,705,419 3,766,056
FY 2063 (year 50) 2,642,626 2,187,084 4,829,710
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 21 of 51 9/15/15
Existing Energy Generation and Usage
a) Basic configuration (if system is part of the Railbelt1 grid, leave this section blank)
i. Number of generators/boilers/other:
See previous section
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other
See previous section
iii. Generator/boilers/other type
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other
v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other
13.99 kWh/gal
vi. Is there operational heat recovery? (Y/N) If yes
estimated annual displaced heating fuel (gallons)
Yes
b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Annual O&M cost for labor 167,000 * 60% / 2 = $50,046 (O&M displaced by Project)
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor 167,000 * 60% / 2 = $50,046 (O&M displaced by Project)
c) Annual electricity production and fuel usage (fill in as applicable) (if system is part of the
Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Electricity [kWh] 2,936,651
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal] 209,911
Other
iii. Peak Load 604 kW
iv. Average Load 335 kW
v. Minimum Load NA
vi. Efficiency 13.99 kWh/gal
vii. Future trends
d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu]:
220,393 gallons
ii. Electricity [kWh]
iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons]
vi. Other
1 The Railbelt grid connects all customers of Chugach Electric Association, Homer Electric Association, Golden Valley Electric
Association, the City of Seward Electric Department, Matanuska Electric Association and Anchorage Municipal Light and Power.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 22 of 51 9/15/15
5.4.2 Future Trends
Describe the anticipated energy demand in the community over the life of the project.
Energy demand for Shungnak and Kobuk has shown an increasing trend over the last 10 years.
These communities have viable employment opportunities with a mining exploration camp in the
summer time and several members are employed annually at Red Dog Mine. Thus, it is likely that
energy demand will continue to grow in these targeted communities.
In addition, Nova Copper continues to develop its resources at the Upper Kobuk Mineral Project and
has annual exploration activities at the Dahl Creek & Bornite Camp. Please note that mining
activities were not included in the benefit cost analysis associated with this project. However, as
prudent managers, we recognize the future possibility of an operating mine in the sub-region.
5.4.3 Impact on Rates
Briefly explain what if any effect your project will have on electrical rates in the proposed benefit
area over the life of the project. For PCE eligible communities, please describe the expected impact
would be for both pre and post PCE.
Shungnak, Ambler and Kobuk are PCE eligible communities. Consumers in these communities
received $570,000 during recent fiscal years in PCE credits for eligible kWh sales (kWh) to
residences and community facilities. About 73% of sales in Kobuk and Shungnak and 59% of sales
in Ambler were not eligible for PCE. As a result, those consumers will receive the entire benefit of
reduced power costs through their electric rates. Power sales that are eligible for PCE will see 5%
of the benefit of reduced electric costs in their electric rates, with the other 95% accruing to the state
of Alaska through reduced PCE credits to end users.
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
Optimum installed capacity
Anticipated capacity factor
Anticipated annual generation
Anticipated barriers
Integration plan
Delivery methods
Intake
The intake structure at the Kogoluktuk River would consist of 10-foot-high concrete diversion walls
and intake screens. The intake screens will be installed in a concrete box structure that directs the
flow to the penstock. Two types of intake screens will be utilized: flat plate fine screens and Coanda
screens. The flat plate fine screens will be situated parallel to the water flow to allow for self-cleaning.
The Coanda screens will be installed perpendicular to the water flow in the portion of the intake
structure located at the end of the diversion wall. The intake portion of the diversion wall is four feet
shorter than the portion of the wall spanning the river and will act as a broad-crested weir.
The screens will be located a minimum of two feet above the stream bed to minimize the sediment
entering the intake structure. The total intake capacity will be 170 cfs with the flat plate screens sized
for 50 cfs and the Coanda screens for 120 cfs. Water will be continuously diverted for hydro
operation and to maintain fluid conditions in the intake, penstock, and tailrace at all times. The
hydroelectric plant is expected to generate power year-round, although any prescribed
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 23 of 51 9/15/15
environmental flows can significantly impact winter operation, possibly to the point of curtailing it
completely. At flows higher than 170 cfs, both sets of intake screens would be completely
submersed. During the average summer flows, the intake structure would have approximately five
feet of freeboard above the screens. A more detailed hydraulics analysis may show that constricting
the river at the intake location with the deeper pool and higher velocities could provide the needed
flow year around. This technique is often used with intake designs in colder regions.
The additional height for the diversion wall takes into account an ice cap that will form during the
winter months. During design, the thickness of the ice cap should be verified to reduce the height of
the diversion wall as much as possible. Removal of debris will be considered at this structure with
similar technologies; debris boom, higher velocities, and diversion of a small percentage of the flows
in the river.
With the presence of indigenous fishes in the Kogoluktuk River, fish passage may be required. Flows
in the Kogoluktuk River vary from a low flow of 50 cfs to a high flow of 10,500 cfs. The velocities in
the fish ladder will be between 4 fps and 12 fps depending on the flow in the river. Adjustments
during design can be made to ensure that fish passage can be made by a majority of the adults for
each species found in the river system.
Penstock
The penstock for the Kogoluktuk River
powerhouse will follow the Kogoluktuk
River, on a pipe bench cut and/or blasted
out of the steep river banks. Pipe burial will
not be possible along most of the
alignment.
The conceptual design for the penstock
pipeline is a 72-inch diameter insulated
and jacketed pipe secured to the pipe
bench and/or the rock walls. The overall
length of the penstock will be
approximately 4,300 linear feet.
Materials being considered are HDPE,
steel, and fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP). All materials have the capability to adequately handle
the static head.
Powerhouse
The powerhouse for the Kogoluktuk River will require a relatively large foundation, two floor levels,
a crane, and a pre-engineered metal building with an outer layer of insulated wall panels providing
a thermal break. Equipment would be installed through a roll up garage door that would also have
hinged insulated wall panels covering the opening.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 24 of 51 9/15/15
Tailrace
The tailrace for the Kogoluktuk would be a below-grade concrete-encased draft tube transitioning to
a concrete box structure that will channel water into a culvert discharging back to the river. A layer
of insulation is included over the water conveyance.
Foundations
The concrete foundation is expected to be placed
directly on excavated bedrock and will require
anchors and a drainage system to reduce potential
flotation forces.
Before actual design of the foundations, site specific
geotechnical explorations will be required to confirm
these conceptual design assumptions.
Hydroelectric System
A Kaplan turbine was selected, as they perform well
under conditions with low head and high flow. The
Kaplan turbine is a propeller type water turbine
which has fixed or adjustable blades. The ability to
alter the inclination of the blades allows the turbine
to adjust to suit the load variations. This provides
high efficiencies under considerable variation of
load. A set of wicket gates or vanes controls the flow
of water through the unit. A load governor will be required to limit rapid fluctuations in water flow that
could cause adverse pressure changes in the penstock.
For the Kogoluktuk River project a Kaplan turbine at 600 - 720 rpm would be used. Water-to-wire
equipment would include a synchronous generator, switchgear and control panels, hydraulic power
unit, turbine inlet valve, dismantling joint and associated turbine piping.
Optimum installed capacity:
The Kaplan turbine has a slightly improved efficiency over Pelton and Turgo units. The energy output
also incorporates a higher minimum operation flow. For these projections, an environmental flow
rate of 46.0 cfs has been assumed. This volume is 8% of the average annual flow. Head loss through
the large diameter pipeline is generally minimal, except at the higher flows which r educe energy
output as shown in the exhibit below.
Large Kaplan Runner with Adjustable Stainless Steel
Blades – Photo is illustrative of this type of turbine;
actual project turbine is anticipated to be smaller.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 25 of 51 9/15/15
Kogoluktuk River Hydro Energy Potential
Anticipated capacity factor: 82 percent
Anticipated annual generation: 2,936,651 kWh
Anticipated barriers: The anticipated barriers are described in the preceding and following
paragraphs.
Basic integration concept: Electricity generated through the Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project
can be integrated and distributed through AVEC’s existing village distribution lines. AVEC is working
now on systems to integrate interruptible power for heat when there is excess energy from
renewable resources such as wind. A similar control concept will work for excess hydro integration.
Hydroelectric generation above what is needed to meet AVEC’s electrical system requirements can
be delivered to loads such as the water treatment plant via a secondary load control (SLC) system.
The SLC systems have been demonstrated as a mechanism for wind integration and benefit the
community by reducing fuel requirements for water treatment plants.
Delivery methods: Power will be transmitted via the existing Shungnak-Kobuk intertie at Kobuk,
located approximately six miles southwest of the proposed Kogoluktuk River powerhouse location.
The transmission line from the hydroelectric power plant would be strung on wooden poles, following
the access road for approximately half way and directly overland the remaining distance.
A separate project to connect Ambler via intertie with the existing Shungnak-Kobuk intertie has a
positive net present value (benefit/cost >1) whether or not the hydro project is constructed. The
Ambler intertie project was prioritized as medium term (5-10 years) in the Draft Northwest Arctic
Regional Energy Plan to meet the regional goal to “Increase energy efficiency and lower costs
through consolidated energy production and interties within sub regions.” If that is accomplished,
hydroelectric power would be delivered to Ambler via that intertie.
0
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,000,000
8,000,000
80 130 180 230 280Annual Energy Output, kWhHydraulic Capacity (cfs)
Kogoluktuk River Hydro Potential
Energy Output (no Environmental Flow)
Energy Output (with Environmental Flow)
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 26 of 51 9/15/15
Proposed System Design Capacity and Fuel Usage
(Include any projections for continued use of non-renewable fuels)
a) Proposed renewable capacity (Wind,
Hydro, Biomass, other)
[kW or MMBtu/hr]
690 Kw (hydro)
b) Proposed annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable)
i. Electricity [kWh] 4,940,000 kWh
ii. Heat [MMBtu]
c) Proposed annual fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Propane [gal or MMBtu]
ii. Coal [tons or MMBtu]
iii. Wood or pellets [cords, green tons,
dry tons]
iv. Other
d) i. Estimate number of hours renewable
will allow powerhouse to turn diesel engines
off (fill in as applicable)
5.4.5 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.
Specific metering equipment has not been specified. However, project developers intend to specify
metering equipment that will enable constant communication with the Utility, AEA, and equipment
manufacturers.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 27 of 51 9/15/15
SECTION 6 – ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY AND BENEFITS
6.1 Economic Feasibility
Criteria: Stage 2-4.A: The project is shown to be economically feasible (net positive savings in fuel,
operation and maintenance, and capital costs over the life of the proposed project).
6.1.1 Economic Benefit
Explain the economic benefits of your project. Include direct cost savings, and how the people of
Alaska will benefit from the project. The benefits information should include the following:
Anticipated annual and lifetime fuel displacement (gallons and dollars)
Anticipated annual and lifetime revenue (based on i.e. a Proposed Power Purchase
Agreement price, RCA tariff, or cost based rate)
Additional incentives (i.e. tax credits)
Additional revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable energy subsidies or
programs that might be available)
The economic model used by AEA is available at
http://www.akenergyauthority.org/Programs/Renewable-Energy-Fund/Rounds#round9. 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.
A Benefit-Cost Analysis was completed for the Kogoluktuk River Hydroelectric project. The
economic analysis uses three fuel price scenarios. Two of them are taken from an Institute from
Economic Research report (ISER, 2012). ISER prepares fuel price projections fo r over 150 Alaska
villages. The two fuel price scenarios used in the economic analysis are described as ISER Medium
fuel case, and ISER High fuel case. Because these two fuel price scenarios are based on past
practices, they under-predict future fuel prices due to the unfortunate but increasing frequency of air
delivery of fuel in the Upper Kobuk Region. For that reason, the report also uses a fuel price
projection that includes AVEC’s expectation of future air delivery: a forecast of 50% air delivery in
Ambler and 100% air delivery in Shungnak.
The final variable in the economic scenarios consists of environmental flows. Environmental flows
are streamflow that government agencies require to bypass the hydroelectric intake to maintain
certain streamflow in the section of the river between the intake and tailrace. The greater the
environmental flow, the less water available to produce electricity, especially during periods of low
flow, as in winter. Unfortunately, the actual agency-required environmental flows will not be known
until permitting is finished. Agencies could require a volume that is either higher or lower than the
economic model assumes. It is even possible that no required flow will be required if appropriate
mitigation is found. The economic analysis used two environmental flow scenarios: with and without
a required flow.
Other economic assumptions include:
2013 Dollars: All numbers are reported in 2013 dollars.
Discount Rate: A discount rate of 2.5% was selected to discount future benefits to 2013
dollars. The selection of the discount rate is based on the recently completed Southeast
Integrated Resource Plan prepared by Black and Veatch for AEA.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 28 of 51 9/15/15
Term of Analysis: The term of analysis is 50 years, consistent with other AEA hydro analyses.
Load Growth: The analysis assumes a 1% continuous load growth for the villages. This
growth is less than the load growth that has occurred in the village in the last five years.
Ambler Intertie Benefits Excluded: The Ambler Intertie has a positive net present value
(benefit/cost >1) whether or not the hydro projects are constructed. Including those benefits
and costs would greatly increase benefit/cost ratios for each of the hydro projects; all project
scenarios would look much better. However, doing so would also make it difficult to
determine what portion of the positive benefits occurs because of the hydro projects, and
what portion occurred because of the intertie. Therefore, the benefits and costs specific to
that intertie are not included in the analysis. Specifically, capital costs for intertie construction,
intertie operation and maintenance costs, and avoided power plant benefits are not included
in the economic analysis.
Environmental Flows: Permitting agencies may require a minimum flow be released over a
project’s diversion dam to maintain water levels in the stream between the intake and
tailrace. The flows could be required to support fish in that area or for other environmental
purposes. These flows would decrease the water available to the hydro projects. Until
detailed permitting and design is completed, the required environmental flow for each project,
if any, is unknown. Yet the flows have a significant effect on project economics. They
decrease the water available for the project, decrease the electricity output, and decrease
project benefits.
For this analysis, the economic benefits are modeled in two ways: The first assumes there
is no required environmental flow; and the second assumes environmental flows will be
required. While results from the analysis present two scenarios, with and without
environmental flows, the actual required number could be between those two, or perhaps
more than what was modeled. If appropriate mitigation were found, perhaps no
environmental flows would be required.
For the hydro project, the economic analysis analyzes 12 scenarios: three alternative fuel cases,
two environmental flows (with and without required by-pass flows), and two intertie connections (with
and without the Ambler Intertie). These scenarios were analyzed using the daily operational model
to determine the annual savings provided by the development over the analysis term.
The economic analysis presented assumes that the Ambler intertie is constructed. The intertie
construction cost is a necessary part of the hydro projects. However, the economic analysis does
not include the costs and benefits of the intertie. Including the intertie’s benefit and cost would
significantly increase the benefit/cost ratio for all of the hydro projects. However, to keep the decision
for the hydro projects separate from that for the intertie, the intertie benefits/costs are not included
in the economic analysis. Specifically, capital costs for intertie construction and avoided power plant
benefits are not included in the economic analysis for the hydro projects. This allows reviewers to
evaluate the individual benefits and costs of the hydro projects.
The following table shows that the Kogoluktuk project will benefit the cases that included the
expected Ambler intertie and the added value of “excess” electricity for heat (although the ratio is
only 1.00 in the ISER Medium Fuel Case scenario). Even with environmental flows and no intertie,
the Kogoluktuk River Project has a positive BCR in two of the three cases studied. Finally, including
heat as a benefit also showed high Benefit/Cost ratios of up to 1.84!
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 29 of 51 9/15/15
Hydro Project Benefit to Cost Ratios, including the Heat Value of Electricity
Fuel Case Environmental Flow Intertie Kogoluktuk
ISER Medium Fuel Case No No 1.23
ISER High Fuel Case No No 1.68
AVEC Fuel Case No No 1.54
ISER Medium Fuel Case Yes No 0.81
ISER High Fuel Case Yes No 1.11
AVEC Fuel Case Yes No 1.02
ISER Medium Fuel Case No Yes 1.37
ISER High Fuel Case No Yes 1.84
AVEC Fuel Case No Yes 1.83
ISER Medium Fuel Case Yes Yes 1.00
ISER High Fuel Case Yes Yes 1.34
AVEC Fuel Case Yes Yes 1.32
Summary of Project Benefits:
Potential annual fuel displacement (gallons and dollars) over the lifetime of the evaluated
renewable energy project: 188,128 gallons/year for electricity and 43,446 gallons/year for heat.
Anticipated annual revenue (based on i.e. a Proposed Power Purchase Agreement price, RCA
tariff, or cost based rate):
N/A
Potential additional annual incentives (i.e. tax credits):
Because AVEC is a non-profit organization, tax credits are not anticipated as a benefit. Furthermore,
NRC is not in need of tax credits.
Potential additional annual revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable energy
subsidies or programs that might be available):
In addition to saving the direct cost of fuel, AVEC could sell green tags from the project.
Non-economic public benefits to Alaskans over the lifetime of the project:
The villages of Kobuk, Shungnak and Ambler do not have access to the electrical grid, so all power
must be produced locally. Diesel fuel is the primary source of heat and power generation for these
communities. Because of the difficult logistics, including delivery by air, and the need for on-site fuel
storage, fuel costs are extremely high. This region has some of the highest prices in the nation for
electricity. Diesel prices vary considerably depending on world market, delivery method and
availability. The inclusion of hydropower for Kobuk, Shungnak and Ambler will stabilize the cost of
energy, buffering residences from the impact of market forces which drive up the cost of diesel.
The Kobuk River has changed course near Shungnak, and all 2013 fuel for power generation was
delivered by barge to both Shungnak and Ambler. Air transport is the only other alternative for fuel
delivery.
Since less fuel will be required to serve the communities, a hydro project will have a positive
environmental benefit by reducing potential for fuel spills during transport, storage, and use. While
all precautions are observed during delivery, there is always some chance of an incident and the
consequences can be severe.
The hydro resource on the Kogoluktuk River is expected to provide power in excess of that needed
for the villages’ electrical needs. Using additional hydropower to heat local community facilities, such
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 30 of 51 9/15/15
as water treatment plants, government buildings, and clinics will reduce heating costs, similar to
wind to heat projects currently funded through the renewable energy fund. Reductions in heating
costs for water and sewer utilities would be passed on to residents in the form of lower utility bills.
However, this savings is not quantified in this report.
Reduced power rates for commercial customers who do not benefit from Power Cost Equalization
(PCE) subsidies, could attract business to the region, providing a regional economic boost, as well
as new job opportunities for residents.
As costs for electricity are reduced in the Upper Kobuk, the state will be able to decrease their
expenditures from the PCE endowment, extending the life of that program and its benefit for rural
Alaskans.
The following summaries illustrate the costs and benefits of the Kogoluktuk River Hydroelectric
project with and without environmental flows required.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 31 of 51 9/15/15
Kogoluktuk River Hydroelectric Project Summary
Ambler-Shungnak Intertie Constructed, No Environmental Flows, AVEC 2013 Fuel Case
Development Scheme
Design Flow 170 cfs
Static Head 64 ft
Installed hydro capacity 690 kW
Annual Energy Potential 4,940,000 kWh
Design/Permitting Start 7/1/2014
Project Online Date 7/1/2019
Total Installed Cost $35,629,200
Annual O&M Cost $178,146
Net Present Cost (NPC 2013) $34,794,329 50 yr term, 2.5% discount rate
Resultant Cost Savings
FY 2013 (year
0)
FY 2038 (year
25)
FY 2063 (year 50)
Energy Demand, kWh 2,936,651 3,766,056 4,829,710
Displaced Diesel Energy, kWh 2,631,909 3,102,617 3,546,205
Hydro Penetration 90% 82% 73%
Displaced Diesel Fuel, gal 193,097 225,664 258,471
Displaced Fuel Value (2013 $) $1,362,030 $1,202,859 $1,129,800
Displaced Nonfuel Value (2013 $) $100,092 $62,436 $72,347
Heating Potential, kWh 1,523,714 1,245,315 1,013,422
Net Present Value (NPV 2013) $53,864,342 50 yr term, 2.5% discount rate
Benefit to Cost Ratio 1.55
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
9/1 10/1 11/1 12/1 1/1 2/1 3/1 4/1 5/1 6/1 7/1 8/1Power (kW)Day of Year
Operational Chart, FY 2013 Diesel for Heat
Diesel for Electricity
Hydropower for Heat, kW
Hydropower for Electricity
Hydropower Output
Avg Electrical Demand
Heat + Electrical Demand
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 32 of 51 9/15/15
Ambler-Shungnak Intertie Constructed, Environmental Flows Required, AVEC Fuel Case
Development Scheme
Design Flow 170 cfs
Static Head 64 ft
Installed hydro capacity 690 kW
Annual Energy Potential 3,800,000 kWh
Design/Permitting Start 7/1/2014
Project Online Date 7/1/2019
Total Installed Cost $35,629,200
Annual O&M Cost $178,146
Net Present Cost (NPC 2013) $34,794,329 50 yr term, 2.5% discount rate
Resultant Cost Savings
FY 2013 (year
0)
FY 2038 (year
25)
FY 2063 (year 50)
Energy Demand, kWh 2,936,651 3,766,056 4,829,710
Displaced Diesel Energy, kWh 1,669,835 2,042,405 2,473,613
Hydro Penetration 57% 54% 51%
Displaced Diesel Fuel, gal 122,512 149,881 181,802
Displaced Fuel Value (2013 $) $864,150 $798,910 $794,675
Displaced Nonfuel Value (2013 $) $89,376 $58,826 $69,700
Heating Potential, kWh 1,353,280 1,173,019 953,506
Net Present Value (NPV 2013) $36,781,277 50 yr term, 2.5% discount rate
Benefit to Cost Ratio 1.06
6.1.2 Power Purchase/Sale
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
9/1 10/1 11/1 12/1 1/1 2/1 3/1 4/1 5/1 6/1 7/1 8/1Power (kW)Day of Year
Operational Chart, FY 2013 Diesel for Heat
Diesel for Electricity
Hydropower for Heat, kW
Hydropower for Electricity
Hydropower Output
Avg Electrical Demand
Heat + Electrical Demand
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 33 of 51 9/15/15
The power purchase/sale information should include the following:
Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s)
Potential power purchase/sales price - at a minimum indicate a price range
Proposed rate of return from grant-funded project
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.
AVEC, the existing electric utility serving Ambler, Shungnak and Kobuk, is a member-owned
cooperative electric utility and typically owns and maintains the generation, fuel storage, and
distribution facilities in the villages it serves. The hydroelectric project will become a part of the local
community’s generating assets.
Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s):
Energy produced from the completed hydro project would be integrated in to AVEC’s power supply
system and sold to AVEC’s existing customer base in the communities of Ambler, Shungnak and
Kobuk.
Potential power purchase/sales price/proposed rate of return from grant-funded project:
The sales price for the hydro-generated electricity would be determined by the Regulatory
Commission of Alaska as is the case in all AVEC villages. The delivered cost of energy would be
reduced as much as possible for members and customers within Ambler, Shungnak and Kobuk
under current regulations. Currently, of AVEC’s 55 villages, those with wind power systems pay the
lowest electricity costs within the utility. Similar energy cost reductions are expected upon
completion of the hydro project, as proposed in this application.
6.1.3 Public Benefit for Projects with Private Sector Sales
For projects that include 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.
Numerous non-economic public benefits for Northwest Alaska are expected over the lifetime of this
project. An important benefit of installing the proposed hydroelectric system would be to reduce the
direct and indirect costs of using fossil fuels in the region. This project could help stabilize energy
costs and provide long-term socio-economic benefits for village households. Locally produced,
affordable energy will empower community residents and may help avert rural-to-urban migration.
This project is expected to produce several environmental benefits resulting from a reduction in
hydrocarbon use. These benefits include:
1. Reduced potential for fuel spills or contamination during transport, storage, or use (thus
protecting vital water and subsistence food sources);
2. Improved air quality;
3. Decreased contribution to global climate change from fossil fuel use; and
4. Decreased coastal erosion due to climate change.
At this stage, Nova Copper is only involved in exploration activities- an operating mine does not
exist.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 34 of 51 9/15/15
Renewable energy resource availability (kWh per month) n/a
Estimated sales (kWh) n/a
Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use at private sector businesses ($) n/a
Estimated sales (kWh) n/a
Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use by the Alaskan public ($) n/a
6.2 Financing Plan
Criteria: Stage 2-4.B: The project has an adequate financing plan for completion of the grant-funded
phase and has considered options for financing subsequent phases of the project.
6.2.1 Additional Funds
Identify the source and amount of all additional funds needed to complete the work in the phase(s)
for which REF funding is being applied in this application. Indicate whether these 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.
The Native Village of Shungnak’s recently submitted a proposal to the Department of the Interior
Bureau of Indian Affairs Grant Program to Assess, Evaluate and Promote Development of Tribal
Energy and Mineral Resources. The scope of this grant proposal is engineering, environmental,
hydrology, and public involvement in the amount of $375,000. The Cosmos Hills project team is
anticipating a response from the DOI in the Fall of 2015.
6.2.2 Financing opportunities/limitations
If the proposed project includes final design or construction phases, what are your opportunities
and/or limitations to fund this project with a loan, bonds, or other financing options?
It is not feasible to pursue loan, bond, or other financing vehicles at this time in order to support this
current phase. The NRC team is only requesting partial engineering funding from AEA. With that
said, there remains the possibility of private sector financing, rural utility services loans, and other
project financing vehicles that will be actively explored.
6.2.3 Cost Overruns
Describe the plan to cover potential cost increases or shortfalls in funding.
Our team will employ strict cost containment strategies during this phase in order to produce a useful
project. Through our team’s QA/QC process, we will also assure that all tasks are value engineered
in order to minimize construction costs.
6.2.4 Subsequent Phases
If subsequent phases are required beyond the phases being applied for in this application, describe
the anticipated sources of funding and the likelihood of receipt of those funds.
The amount requested from AEA for the engineering phase is insufficient to complete all needed
work. NRC and the affiliated stakeholder intend to reach out to the US Department of Energy, the
US Department of the Interior, USDA Rural Development, and other Federal Agencies in order to
complete the engineering work. It is intended to utilize a combination of funding, including loans
and other grant funding, in order to complete the construction for the construction phase.
6.3 Other Public Benefit
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 35 of 51 9/15/15
Criteria: Stage 3-4.C: Other benefits to the Alaska public are demonstrated. Avoided costs alone will
not be presumed to be in the best interest of the public.
Describe the non-economic public benefits to Alaskans over the lifetime of the project. For the
purpose of evaluating this criterion, public benefits are those benefits that would be considered
unique to a given project and not generic to any renewable resource. For example, decreased
greenhouse gas emission, stable pricing of fuel source, won’t be considered under this category.
Some examples of other public benefits include:
The project will result in developing infrastructure (roads, trails, pipes, power lines, etc.) that
can be used for other purposes
The project will result in a direct long-term increase in jobs (operating, supplying fuel, etc.)
The project will solve other problems for the community (waste disposal, food security, etc.)
The project will generate useful information that could be used by the public in other parts of
the state
The project will promote or sustain long-term commercial economic development for the
community
A potential public benefit to this project is establishing an Energy Pathway for Nova Copper and its
quest to develop mining operations in the area. Access to reliable energy/power is considered to
be a primary obstacle in the development of this mining resource. By demonstrating effective
renewable energy at the local level, mine developers can learn and integrate renewable energy into
its own mine planning, creating economic benefit for all Alaskans.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 36 of 51 9/15/15
SECTION 7 – SUSTAINABILITY
Describe your plan for operating the completed project so that it will be sustainable throughout its
economic life.
Include at a minimum:
Capability of the Applicant to demonstrate the capacity, both administratively and financially, to
provide for the long-term operation and maintenance of the proposed project
Is the Applicant current on all loans and required reporting to state and federal agencies?
Likelihood of the resource being available over the life of the project
Likelihood of a sufficient market for energy produced over the life of the project
Proposed business structure(s) and concepts that may be considered:
NANA Regional Corporation will work with AVEC and the local stakeholders in the planning,
engineering, construction and commissioning of the proposed facility. An appropriate structure will
be developed to manage the operations of the proposed hydroelectric facility that involves the land-
owner and the operating utility.
AVEC, the existing electric utility serving the Upper Kobuk sub region, is a member -owned
cooperative electric utility. AVEC owns and maintains the generation, fuel storage, and distribution
facilities in the villages it serves. The hydroelectric project will become a part of AVEC’s generating
assets.
AVEC has been in operation in the Alaskan northwest since 1968, providing service to the largest
area in the world for a retail cooperative. In many cases, AVEC and local governments operate as
a partnership. The village governments hire the plant operators and oversee the day-to-day
operation of the power generating and distribution plants. AVEC mechanics and lineman make
scheduled and unscheduled visits, as necessary, to each community.
How you propose to finance the maintenance and operations for the life of the project:
AVEC maintains repair and replacement funds that will finance the project’s maintenance and
operation.
Identification of potential operational issues:
The main operational issue identified is the potential buildup of debris at the intake. Removal of
debris such as vegetation, sand, and gravel or ice will be required at the intake to reduce wear or
damage of the turbine. The layout of the intake will facilitate debris removal. The design may include
a seven-foot pool near the intake to accommodate ice build-up and avoid restricting flow. AVEC’s
power plant operators will be tasked with daily or more frequent inspection and clearing of the intake.
Operational cost description, including on-going support for back-up or existing systems
needed to continue operations:
Diesel plants will continue to operate as backup in Shungnak and Ambler. As shown in the
worksheet in section 4, the anticipated cost is approximately $100,000 per year in labor and non-
labor costs.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 37 of 51 9/15/15
Commitment to reporting the savings and benefits:
AVEC understands the need for accountability in RE projects. AVEC maintains the necessary
records to report to AEA the actual performance of the projects. AVEC will provide all data required
by AEA.
SECTION 8 – PROJECT READINESS
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
Previous work on this project was funded through AEA REF Round I. Match was provided by
NANA Regional Corporation and NovaCopper. Projects that were completed as previous phases
of this project resulted in the following reports:
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Feasibility Study; FERC Requirements and Field Study
Recommendations – March 30, 2010
Cosmos Hills Hydropower Study: Reconnaissance Report – September 22, 2010
Cosmos Hills Hydropower Study: Summer-Fall 2010 Report – July 2010
Cosmos Hills Technical Review and Assessment of Alternatives – October 2011
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Feasibility Study; Geotechnical Investigation Kog oluktuk River
Hydropower Site – December 14, 2011
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Pre-Construction Program; Reconnaissance Report: Fisheries
and Water Quality Resources (Aquatic Resources): Kogoluktuk River Study Area – April 25,
2012
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Pre-Construction Program; Reconnaissance Report: Wetlands
and Other Waters of the United States: Kogoluktuk River Study Area – April 5, 2012
Cosmos Hills Hydrologic Network Installation and Operation, August 2010- December 2011
– May 2012
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Project; Field Reconnaissance Report – December 4, 2012
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design Report - Draft,
September 6, 2013
All previous funding requirements are up to date and will be completed with finalization of the
Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design Report.
Upon approval of currently-requested funding for design and permitting, we are prepared to
begin immediately as illustrated with the proposed schedule and milestones.
SECTION 9 – LOCAL SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION
Describe local support and opposition, known or anticipated, for the project. Include letters,
resolutions, or other documentation of local support from the community that would benefit from
this project. The Documentation of support must be dated within one year of the RFA date of July
8, 2015.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 38 of 51 9/15/15
Please refer to attached letter of support
SECTION 10 – COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER AWARDS
Identify other grants that may have been previously awarded to the Applicant by the Authority 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.
The Cosmos Hills project is in full compliance with other awards. The Cosmos Hills Feasibility Study
and Conceptual Design has been accepted and closed out.
SECTION 11 – LIST OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION FOR PRIOR PHASES
In the space below please provide a list additional documents attached to support completion of
prior phases.
Local and regional support for the project has been expressed throughout the life of the project thus
far. Most recently, we have received the following letters of support.
Letter from Mr. Sonny Adams, NANA Regional Corporation, expressing support and pledging
in-kind funding for the project
Letter from Mr. Ingemar Mathiasson, Northwest Arctic Borough, expressing support
Letter from Mr. Billy Lee, Tribal Administrator, Native Village of Shungnak
Letter from Ms. Helen Mitchell for Mr. Melvin Lee, Mayor, City of Shungnak
Letter from Ms. Carolyn Ballot, Vice Mayor, City of Ambler
Signed support questionnaires from five members of the Ambler Traditional Council (one
member is opposed and did not participate)
The Native Village of Kobuk has provided letters and resolutions in the past and are not in
opposition to the project.
SECTION 12 – LIST OF ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION
In the space below please provide a list of additional information submitted for consideration.
Letter of Support from the Native Village of Shungnak
Letter of Support from the Native Village of Kobuk
Letter of Support from AVEC
Letter of Support from the City of Ambler
Letter of Support from the Northwest Arctic Borough
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 48 of 51 7/8/14
Appendix B: Letters of Commitment & Support
P. O. Box 1110 ∙ Kotzebue, Alaska 99752 ∙ (907) 442 -2500 ∙ Fax (907) 442-2930 ∙ www.nwabor.org
Northwest Arctic Borough
Ambler Buckland Candle Deering Kiana Kivalina Kobuk
Kotzebue Noatak Noorvik Selawik Shungnak
September 10, 2015
NANA Regional Corporation
Al Adams, Jr.
909 9th Ave
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Regarding: Letter of Support for Renewable Energy Grant Program
Round IX: Cosmos Hills Hydro Project
Dear Mr. Adams:
The Northwest Arctic Borough Energy Steering Committee strongly supports your
application to the Alaska Renewable Energy Fund Round IX, for funding of the design,
engineering, and environmental activities of a hydro project on the Kogoluktuk River. The
Feasibility Study and Conceptual Design Report, completed in 2014, shows a promising
scenario for lowering electric prices for residents of the local villages of Shungnak, Ambler,
and Kobuk. As stated in the report, this project will provide economic opportunity, improve
the potential for mineral development, and has potential to benefit the region in employment
and expedited exploration.
Our Regional Strategic Energy Committee recognizes this project as one with high potential
for development and applauds you in your consistent efforts to develop alternative energy
projects in the NANA Region and look forward to working collaboratively with you to
complete this project.
In our Borough it is recognized that all Stakeholders needs to work together for the
development of the local resources. This effort will create a more sustainable and cleaner
future for the coming generations.
Sincerely,
Reggie Joule
Mayor