HomeMy WebLinkAboutCraig WTP Hydro REF Round IXRenewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 1 of 27 7/8/14
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 27 7/8/14
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 27 7/8/14
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION
Please specify the legal grantee that will own, operate, and maintain the project upon completion.
Name (Name of utility, IPP, local government, or other government entity)
City of Craig, Alaska
Type of Entity: Fiscal Year End:
Local Government June 30
Tax ID #92-6000139
Tax Status: ☐ For-profit ☐ Non-profit X Government (check one)
Date of last financial statement audit:
Mailing Address: Physical Address:
PO Box 725 500 3rd Street
Craig, AK 99921 Craig, AK 99921
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-826-3275 907-826-3278 planner@craigak.com
1.1 Applicant Point of Contact / Grants Manager
Name: Title:
Brian Templin City Planner
Mailing Address:
PO Box 725
Craig, AK 99921
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-826-3275 907-826-3278 planner@craigak.com
1.1.1 APPLICANT SIGNATORY AUTHORITY CONTACT INFORMATION
Name: Title:
Jon Bolling City Administrator
Mailing Address:
PO Box 725
Craig, AK 99921
Telephone: Fax: Email:
907-826-3275 907-826-3278 jbolling@aptalaska.net
1.1.2 Applicant Alternate Points of Contact
Name Telephone: Fax: Email:
Joyce Mason 907-826-3275 907-826-3278 finance@craigak.com
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 4 of 27 7/8/14
1.2 Applicant Minimum Requirements
Please check as appropriate. If applicants do not meet the minimum requirements, the application
will be rejected.
1.2.1 Applicant Type
☐ An electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS 42.05, or
☐ An independent power producer in accordance with 3 AAC 107.695 (a) (1), or
X A local government, or
☐ A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities)
1.2 APPLICANT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS (continued)
Please check as appropriate.
X 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)
X 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)
X 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)
X 1.2.5 We intend to own and operate any project that may be constructed with grant funds for
the benefit of the general public. If no please describe the nature of the project and who will
be the primary beneficiaries. (Indicate yes by checking the box)
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 5 of 27 7/8/14
SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY
2.1 Project Title
Provide a 4 to 7 word title for your project. Type in the space below.
Craig Water Treatment Plant Micro-Hydro
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.
Lat: 55°27’26.74” N Long: 133°01’44.51”W
27650 Port St. Nicholas Road, Craig, AK. 99921
2.2.2 Community benefiting – Name(s) of the community or communities that will be the
beneficiaries of the project.
Craig, Alaska
2.3 Project Type
Please check as appropriate.
2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type
☐ Wind ☐ Biomass or Biofuels (excluding heat-only)
X 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 X Final Design and Permitting
X Feasibility and Conceptual Design ☐ Construction
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 6 of 27 7/8/14
2.4 Project Description
Provide a brief one paragraph description of the proposed project.
Provide design, engineering and permitting to install and operate a micro-hydro power generator in
line of the raw water supply line from the Craig municipal water source (North Fork Lake) to the
Craig water treatment plant and Prince of Wales Hatchery Association Chinook Salmon hatchery to
provide electrical power for the water treatment plant and hatchery.
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.
Reconnaisasance – Completed by DOWL Engineers as part of 2014 Water Master Plan (in-kind)
Feasibility and Conceptual Design – Included in current funding request
Final Design – Included in current funding request
Permitting – Included in current funding request
Construction – To be included in future funding request
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
Reconnaissance Complete Study Complete Reconnaissance Study
Feasibility and
Concept Design
Advertise for engineering
services, Solicit Bids
Complete Request for
Proposals
Select Engineer and Award
Contract
Signed Contract
Complete Feasibility Study and
Conceptual Design (including
project cost estimates)
Feasibility Report
(including conceptual
design and construction
cost estimates)
Final Design and
Permitting
Complete Fieldwork Required
for Final Design and Permitting
As-Built and Site
Condition Survey
Complete Final Design
Final Design Drawings and
Bid Specifications
Complete Permitting Secured Permits
Construction To Be Determined in Future
Funding TBD TBD
N/A This Phase of Project
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 7 of 27 7/8/14
3.2 Budget
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 City of Craig sees significant financial benefit from this project. The city is providing $10,000
match to this phase and will provide match for the future construction phase as well.
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
(List milestones based on phase
and type of project. See sections
2.3 thru 2.6 of the RFA )
$ $ $
Feasibility and Concept Design $ 30,000 $ $30,000
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
TOTALS $ $ $
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $ $ $
Travel & Per Diem $ $ $
Equipment $ $ $
Materials & Supplies $ $ $
Contractual Services $30,000 $ $30,000
Construction Services $ $ $
Other $ $ $
TOTALS $ $ $30,000
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 8 of 27 7/8/14
Milestone or Task
RE- Fund
Grant
Funds
Grantee
Matching
Funds
Source of Matching
Funds:
Cash/In-kind/Federal
Grants/Other State
Grants/Other
TOTALS
(List milestones based on phase
and type of project. See sections
2.3 thru 2.6 of the RFA )
$ $ $
Final Design and Permitting $50,000 $10,000 $60,000
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
TOTALS $ $ $
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $ $ $
Travel & Per Diem $ $ $
Equipment $ $ $
Materials & Supplies $ $ $
Contractual Services $50,000 $10,000 $60,000
Construction Services $ $ $
Other $ $ $
TOTALS $ $ $60,000
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 9 of 27 7/8/14
Milestone or Task
RE- Fund
Grant
Funds
Grantee
Matching
Funds
Source of Matching
Funds:
Cash/In-kind/Federal
Grants/Other State
Grants/Other
TOTALS
(List milestones based on phase
and type of project. See sections
2.3 thru 2.6 of the RFA )
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
TOTALS $ $ $
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $ $ $
Travel & Per Diem $ $ $
Equipment $ $ $
Materials & Supplies $ $ $
Contractual Services $ $ $
Construction Services $ $ $
Other $ $ $
TOTALS $ $ $
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 10 of 27 7/8/14
Milestone or Task
RE- Fund
Grant
Funds
Grantee
Matching
Funds
Source of Matching
Funds:
Cash/In-kind/Federal
Grants/Other State
Grants/Other
TOTALS
(List milestones based on phase
and type of project. See sections
2.3 thru 2.6 of the RFA )
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ $
TOTALS $ $ $
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $ $ $
Travel & Per Diem $ $ $
Equipment $ $ $
Materials & Supplies $ $ $
Contractual Services $ $ $
Construction Services $ $ $
Other $ $ $
TOTALS $ $ $
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 11 of 27 7/8/14
3.2.3 Cost Justification
Indicate the source(s) of the cost estimates used for the project budget.
Cost estimates were extrapolated from information included in the Craig Water Master Plan
updated in April 2015. A copy of the Hydropower Feasibility Evaluation, including cost estimates is
attached.
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 $80,000
Cash match to be provided $10,000
In-kind match to be provided $
Total costs for project phase(s) covered in application (sum of above) $90,000
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 $11,510
Feasibility and Conceptual Design $30,000
Final Design and Permitting $60,000
Construction $196,000
Total Project Costs (sum of above) $297,510
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.
$5,000
Option 2: Diesel generation OFF
For projects that will result in shutting down
diesel generation please estimate:
1. Annual non-fuel savings of shutting off
diesel generation
2. Estimated hours that diesel generation
will be off per year.
3. Annual O&M costs associated with the
proposed renewable project.
1. $
2. Hours diesel OFF/year:
3. $
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 12 of 27 7/8/14
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.
The project will be monitored by the Project Manager through regular meetings with the selected
design/engineering firm. AEA will be invited to attend progress meetings and will receive regular
update information from the project manager.
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.
Operations of the new hydro generator will be included in overall management of the Public Works
Department. The department is currently fully staffed and is capable of maintaining and repairing
the infrastructure. The department is also capable of managing contractors to make repairs or
perform maintenance functions as necessary. Maintenance of the equipment will be included in
the department’s annual budget (energy cost savings will cover all O&M costs) which is overseen
by the city’s treasurer and accounting staff.
The city intends this project to be a load shaving project and does not anticipate becoming a
qualifying facility and selling power back to the utility.
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.
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 Project Manager will be Brian Templin, Craig City Planner. Mr. Templin has over 11 years
experience with the City of Craig managing grants, project management, environmental permitting
and performing other duties directly related to managing this project. A full resume is attached.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 13 of 27 7/8/14
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
The project team is fully capable and qualified to manage this project with extensive experience
managing capital design, engineering and construction projects. The City of Craig planning,
publics work and finance directors are all experienced with grant projects, including design and
engineering and are fully capable of executing this project and maintain the grant.
The City of Craig has a long and successful history of capital project management experience. A
list of those successful projects is provided below:
1. False Island Industrial Dock Expansion (EDA), 2001, $400,000
2. Craig Ice House Construction (EDA), 2001-2002, $442,000
3. Craig Water Treatment Plant Expansion (ADEC), 2003, $280,000
4. Craig Boat Haul Out Trailer and Storage (USFS), $350,000
5. East Hamilton Drive Pump Station (ADEC), 2005, $354,000
6. Port St. Nicholas King Salmon Hatchery (ADF&G), 2005-2006, $250,000
7. West Hamilton Drive Pump Station (ADEC), 2006, $409,600
8. Craig Wood Boiler Project (AEA), 2006-2007, $1,500,000
9. Seafood Processing/Cold Storage Building (EDA), 2008-2009, $4,500,000
10. Prince of Wales Health Center (Denali Commission), 2009-2010, $4,100,000
11. Craig Street Paving Project (FHA), 2010 – 2011, $3,500,000
12. Craig Public Ice House Expansion (DCCED), 2011-2012, $300,000
13. Wood Drying Equipment (AEA), 2014, $250,000
The project team has sufficient time to devote to the project and has the expertise to address
technical, economic and environmental issues on this project similar to numerous successful
projects managed by the city.
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.
Joyce Mason will be the project accountant. Joyce is the city’s finance director and is capable and
experienced with managing procurement, contract management and grant accounting/reporting.
Mrs. Mason currently manages all grant accounting for state (including previous AEA grants),
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 14 of 27 7/8/14
federal and private grants for all city departments; accounts receivable for the city and all accounts
payable. Mrs. Mason has the experience and staff required to provide accounting for this project.
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.
Craig uses Accufund to manage all grants and other funds within the city. If awarded, this grant
will be assigned a unique accounting code within Accufund and all expenses and reimbursements
will be tracked with this code. This is the same procedure used for all other grants and funds. The
finance director is experienced in reviewing reimbursement requests to avoid or recode unallowed
expenditures. City funds, including grants, are audited annually. Purchase order requests will be
generated by the project manager, approved by the finance director and processed by the
accounts payable clerk. Invoices will be received by the accounts payable clerk and approved by
the project manager for payment. The project manager will complete grant reports with all financial
reimbursements and reports prepared by the finance director.
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.
This project will utilize existing public works staff to maintain and operate the equipment.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 15 of 27 7/8/14
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.
Based on conceptual calculations shown in the Craig Water System Master Plan (April 2015) there
is potential for up to 188,400 kWh from May to September and up to 99,000 kWh available from
October to April. This total up to 287,400 kWh annually to service facilities that have used between
261,000 and 325,000 kWh annually between 2008 and 2013. Full calculations on available power
are included with the excerpt of the Craig Water System Master Plan attached to this application.
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
This project will likely require review and potential permitting for water use and electrical design.
This application includes a request for funding to complete all required permitting related to the
project. Since the city does not intend to construct a qualifying facility (able to sell power to
external users or the utility) there are no barriers anticipated.
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.
The hydro generator will be situated in-line of the municipal raw water line near the municipal water
treatment plant. This site is owned by the city with no land ownership or access issues.
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.
The proposed project uses existing technology for its intended use. There are no potential
technical risks identified at the feasibility stage. The proposed project includes design, engineering
and permitting. One of the tasks of the contract design engineer will be to determine if there are
additional technical risks and how to address them.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 16 of 27 7/8/14
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
The project will take place within previously developed areas and will not have adverse affects to
the environment. There is no anticipated significant impacts to threatened or endangered species;
habitat issues; wetlands or other protected areas; archeological and historical resources; land
development constraints; telecommunications interference; aviation considerations; visual
aesthetic impacts; or other barriers. The project manager is generally responsible for
environmental permitting for municipal projects and is familiar with requirements under NEPA and
other governing regulations. The selected contract design engineer will also be responsible for
identifying and avoiding or mitigating any additional impacts that are identified.
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.
Electrical power for the water treatment plant and hatchery are currently provided by Alaska Power
and Telephone. Power is primarily generated by hydro from Black Bear Lake with supplemental
and backup generation provided by diesel generators in Craig. Emergency backup power to the
water treatment plant is provided by a diesel powered generator at the water treatment plant site.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 17 of 27 7/8/14
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
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other
iii. Generator/boilers/other type
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other
v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other
vi. Is there operational heat recovery? (Y/N) If yes
estimated annual displaced heating fuel (gallons)
b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Annual O&M cost for labor
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor
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]
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal]
Other
iii. Peak Load
iv. Average Load
v. Minimum Load
vi. Efficiency
vii. Future trends
d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu]
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 18 of 27 7/8/14
5.4.2 Future Trends
Describe the anticipated energy demand in the community over the life of the project.
Both the water treatment plant and the hatchery operations are anticipated to generally increase as
the community and industry grow in the Craig area. It is anticipated that energy demand for the
community and for the facilities affected by this project will grow as well.
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.
Should the engineering and design phase show that the project is practicable, the subsequent
construction and operation of the hydroelectric generator will insulate the city’s water system
customers from increasing electric rate costs. After employee wages, electricity costs are the
single greatest operating expense at the city’s water department. Reduction of this expense has a
direct benefit to each of the city’s water system customers. Insulating the city’s water system
customers is an important consideration given that the local electric utility has twice proposed
substantial increases in their tariff filings with the Alaska Regulatory Commission of Ala ska. A
proposed 6.2 percent increase in 2004, and a proposed 18.6 percent increase in electrical rates in
2013 (later approved at 11.18 percent by the RCA) left rate payers in the region scrambling to
adjust to the increases. Another tariff rate filing to the RCA is expected in 2015 that may also
propose an increase in the tariff. To the extent that these rate shocks can be avoided through
generation of hydroelectricity using existing infrastructure, the city’s water system customers
benefit from reduced operational costs.
The proposed project will significantly reduce electrical costs for the city at the water treatment
plant but will not have an effect (pre or post PCE) on electrical rates in the area.
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
The city anticipates design and engineering of a fixed geometry, c losed conduit reaction turbine in-
line with the city’s 12” raw water main line near the Craig water treatment plant. The purpose of
the grant request is to complete engineering and design specific to the site conditions. The
calculations included in the attached excerpt from the April 2015 Craig Water System Master plan
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 19 of 27 7/8/14
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]
Hydro
b) Proposed annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable)
i. Electricity [kWh] 287,400 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.
The city will require the design engineer to include metering equipment with the hyrdo generation
equipment. Using the generation data and the existing electric meter for the current power we can
calculate energy produced and energy saved.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 20 of 27 7/8/14
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.
Although AP&T uses primarily hydro generated from Black Bear Lake the utility uses diesel
generation to supplement or replace power in 5-18% of the total generation per year due to
generation, peak demand, transmission issues and low water. Using the projected 287,000 kWh
as a basis, 11.5% (midpoint of 5% - 18%) it is reasonable to assume that the project will replace
approximately 33,000 kWh annually that is currently produced using diesel. This will result in
approximately 2,275 gallons of displaced diesel per year and 45,500 gallons of diesel displaced
during the life of the project.
The project will also decrease annual power costs to the city by about $32,000 - $58,000.
Decreased power costs for the facility will generally result in lower water rates or fewer rate
increases for water customers in Craig.
Cost savings to the city owned hatchery will result in increased sustainable operations which have
a direct economic benefit to local commercial, recreation and subsistence fishermen.
6.1.2 Power Purchase/Sale
The power purchase/sale information should include the following:
Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s)
Potential power purchase/sales price - at a minimum indicate a price range
Proposed rate of return from grant-funded project
Identify the potential power buyer(s)/customer(s) and anticipated power purchase/sales price
range. Indicate the proposed rate of return from the grant-funded project.
The city intends to operate this facility as a load shaving facility and does not intend to sell
generated power.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 21 of 27 7/8/14
6.1.3 Public Benefit for Projects with Private Sector Sales
For projects that include sales of power to private sector businesses (sawmills, cruise ships, mines,
etc.), please provide a brief description of the direct and indirect public benefits derived from the
project as well as the private sector benefits and complete the table below. See section 1.6 in the
Request for Applications for more information.
N/A
Renewable energy resource availability (kWh per month)
Estimated sales (kWh)
Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use at private sector businesses ($)
Estimated sales (kWh)
Revenue for displacing diesel generation for use by the Alaskan public ($)
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.
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?
This proposed project does not include the construction phase. While bonds and loans are
feasible for this project these funding sources would likely result in significant rate increases for
consumers.
6.2.3 Cost Overruns
Describe the plan to cover potential cost increases or shortfalls in funding.
The city is experienced in managing similar projects to avoid cost overruns but in the event that an
increase or overrun is experienced the city will cover those additional costs using city funds.
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.
If an affordable feasible design is completed the city will move toward the construction phase as
soon as funds are available. The city intends to pursue future renewable energy funding and state
legislative funding as a primary funding source. In addition the city will look at significant funding of
the project through city capital funds.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 22 of 27 7/8/14
6.3 Other Public Benefit
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
The project will ensure reliable, constant power supply to the city’s water treatment plant
which is a critical piece of infrastructure for the city.
The project will reduce direct costs to production of water which will result in stable rates to
consumers.
The project will ensure that constant power is provided to the hatchery operation which will
ensure survival of valuable fish for release and benefit of commercial, sport and
subsistence fishermen.
The project builds on, and makes new productive use of, existing infrastructure, and
contributes to sustaining long-term commercial economic development for Craig. If
the micro-hydro analysis supports construction then the hydro will become a part of
a larger, in-place range of capital assets that include:
o North Fork Lake Dam. The city is in the final stages of raising the concrete
dam by four feet to increase water storage capacity by more than three
hundred acre feet. The lake behind the dam is the source of the city’s
drinking water. The additional stored water provides new opportunities to
generate power, access water for treatment, and provide water to an existing
king salmon hatchery.
o Craig Water Treatment Plant. The anticipated site of the micro-hydro
generator is on city-owned property that includes the city’s water treatment
plant. As noted in Section 5.4.3, electrical consumption at the water
treatment plant constitutes the greatest non-payroll expense of the city’s
water utility. The close proximity of the water plant to the proposed hydro
generator allows the project to proceed with a minimum of new infrastructure.
o Craig Raw Water Main. The generator would tie into the existing 12”
diameter ductile iron water main that runs the five miles between North Fork
Lake and the city’s water treatment plant. The water main includes two
pressure reducing valves, one of which the proposed micro-hydro generator
will replace. The presence of the second PRV provides along the water main
creates the potential for a second micro-hydro generator between the one
proposed for the water plant and another between the plant and the 660’
elevation height of the dam.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 23 of 27 7/8/14
o Port St. Nicholas King Salmon Hatchery. In addition to providing
hydroelectricity to the water treatment plant, the proposed micro generator
would provide electricity to the Port St. Nicholas king salmon hatchery
facility. This small hatchery raises king salmon for release into Port St.
Nicholas. Those salmon provide for a commercial troll fishery in the Craig
area, make available king salmon for the charter and sport fishing gear
groups, and provides an opportunity for subsistence beach seining in the
bay. The hatchery uses electricity to alternately heat and chill water to
facilitate the raising of eggs and fry prior to release.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 24 of 27 7/8/14
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
The city is very experienced in operating and maintaining facilities similar to this project. The city
has full time public works and facilities managers and staff that will incorporate long term operation
and maintenance into their work plans. The lake providing the water for the project is the primary
source for drinking water for the city and is anticipated to be available in the long term. The city is
currently completing a project to raise the dam, and subsequently the level of the lake by an
additional four feet. This project will be complete by the end of 2015. The increase in the dam will
result in 150 million gallons of additional stored water for use at the new facility.
The facility will be a load shaving facility and energy produced will be used primarily for the city’s
water treatment plant. It is anticipated that as the community demand for water (residential and
commercial uses) increases that the energy demand of the facility will only increase as well. The
energy produced by this project will be in demand by the treatment facility
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
The city is ready to immediately proceed with this phase of the project. No permits are necessary;
there are no land access or use issues; and all necessary material and equipment is in hand.
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.
A resolution of support by the Craig City Council and a letter of support from the Prince of Wales
Hatchery Association is attached.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 25 of 27 7/8/14
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 city has previously received grants from AEA for energy efficiency upgrades; LED streetlight
replacement; and purchase of biomass chip drying equipment. All requirements of these grants
were satisfactorily met.
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.
An excerpt of the city’s Water System Master Plan is attached. A full copy is available upon
request.
SECTION 12 – LIST OF ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION
In the space below please provide a list of additional information submitted for consideration.
N/A
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application -Standard Form I '. ~LA§i~Z?Aua
~ENERGY AUTHORITY
II SECTION 13 ~AUTHQRIZED.SIGNERS' FORM
Community/Grantee Name: City of Craig, Alaska
Regular Election is held: 1st Tuesday in October I Date: 9/2/15
I Authorized Grant Signer{s):
Printed Name Title
Jon Boiling City Administrator
Dennis Watson Mayor
Term
October
2015
I authorize the above person(s) to sign Grant Documents:
Must be authorized b the hi hest rankin or anization/communit /munici
Printed Name Title Term
Jon Boiling City Administrator
Grantee Contact Information:
Mailing Address: PO Box 725
Craig, AK 99921
Phone Number: 907-826-3275
Fax Number: 907-826-3278
E-mail Address: jbolling@aptalaska.net
planner~craig_ak. com
Federal Tax ID #: 92-6000139
Please submit an updated form whenever there is a change to the above information.
AEA 15003 Page 26 of27 7/8/14
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application -Standard Form I ·.. A LA§I?tAxa
-=:>ENERGY AUTHORITY
· SECTIQN 14-ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION
SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING DOCUMI;NTS WITti YOURAPPLICATIQN:
A. Contact information and resumes of Applicant's Project Manager, Project
Accountant(s), key staff, partners, consultants, and suppliers per application form
Section 3.1, 3.4 and 3.6.
Applicants are asked to provide resumes submitted with applications in separate electronic
documents if the individuals do not want their resumes posted to the project web site.
B. Letters or resolutions demonstrating local support per application form Section 9.
C. For projects involving heat: Most recent invoice demonstrating the cost of heating
fuel for the building(s) impacted by the project.
D. Governing Body Resolution or other formal action taken by the applicant's governing
body or management per RFA Section 1.4 that:
Commits the organization to provide the matching resources for project at the
match amounts indicated in the application.
Authorizes the individual who signs the application has the authority to commit
the organization to the obligations under the grant.
Provides as point of contact to represent the applicant for purposes of this
application.
Certifies the applicant is in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local,
laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations.
E. An electronic version of the entire application on CD or other electronic media, per
RFA Section 1.7.
F. CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certifies that this application for a renewable energy grant is truthful
and correct, and that the applicant is in compliance with, and will continue to comply
with, all federal and state laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations and
that they can indeed commit the entity to these obligations.
Print Name
Signature
Title
Date . f i Ur~
AEA 15003 Page 27 of27 7/8/14
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 26 of 27 7/8/14
SECTION 13 – AUTHORIZED SIGNERS FORM
Community/Grantee Name: City of Craig, Alaska
Regular Election is held: 1st Tuesday in October
Date: 9/2/15
Authorized Grant Signer(s):
Printed Name Title Term Signature
Jon Bolling City Administrator
Dennis Watson Mayor October
2015
I authorize the above person(s) to sign Grant Documents:
(Must be authorized by the highest ranking organization/community/municipal official)
Printed Name Title Term Signature
Jon Bolling City Administrator
Grantee Contact Information:
Mailing Address: PO Box 725
Craig, AK 99921
Phone Number: 907-826-3275
Fax Number: 907-826-3278
E-mail Address: jbolling@aptalaska.net
planner@craigak.com
Federal Tax ID #: 92-6000139
Please submit an updated form whenever there is a change to the above information.
Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
Grant Application - Standard Form
AEA 15003 Page 27 of 27 7/8/14
SECTION 14 – ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION
SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WITH YOUR APPLICATION:
A. Contact information and resumes of Applicant’s Project Manager, Project
Accountant(s), key staff, partners, consultants, and suppliers per application form
Section 3.1, 3.4 and 3.6.
Applicants are asked to provide resumes submitted with applications in separate electronic
documents if the individuals do not want their resumes posted to the project web site.
B. Letters or resolutions demonstrating local support per application form Section 9.
C. For projects involving heat: Most recent invoice demonstrating the cost of heating
fuel for the building(s) impacted by the project.
D. Governing Body Resolution or other formal action taken by the applicant’s governing
body or management per RFA Section 1.4 that:
- Commits the organization to provide the matching resources for project at the
match amounts indicated in the application.
- Authorizes the individual who signs the application has the authority to commit
the organization to the obligations under the grant.
- Provides as point of contact to represent the applicant for purposes of this
application.
- Certifies the applicant is in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local,
laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations.
E. An electronic version of the entire application on CD or other electronic media, per
RFA Section 1.7.
F. CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certifies that this application for a renewable energy grant is truthful
and correct, and that the applicant is in compliance with, and will continue to comply
with, all federal and state laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations and
that they can indeed commit the entity to these obligations.
Print Name Jon Bolling
Signature
Title City Administrator
Date
CITY OF CRAIG
RESOLUTION 15-14
SUPPORTING AN APPLICATION TO THE ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY FOR
FUNDING FOR A FEASIBILITY STUDY, DESIGN AND PERMITTING FOR A
HYDROELECTRIC GENERATOR AT THE CRAIG WATER TREATMENT PLANT
UNDER THE ALASKA RENEW ABLE ENERGY PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City of Craig is a municipality organized linder Alaska Statute; and
WHEREAS, the City of Craig is permitted to draw raw water from North Fork Lake for use at
the Port Saint Nicholas Hatchery and for treatment for municipal drinking water; and
WHEREAS, electrical consumption for the municipal water treatment plant and hatchery
facilities are expensive and a major cost factor for these facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Craig water treatment plant benefits users at Port Saint Nicholas and Craig; and
WHEREAS, the Port Saint Nicholas hatchery supports subsistence, sport and commercial
fishing for communities on the west coast of Prince of Wales Island; and
WHEREAS, much of the power currently generated for use by these facilities is diesel
generated; and
WHEREAS, a feasibility study conducted by DOWL engineering found that a small
hydroelectric generator could be placed in line with the raw water feed; and
WHEREAS, an in line hydroelectric generator would reduce reliance on fossil fuel, reduce
operations costs and benefits area residents; and
WHEREAS, this project is eligible for funding under the Alaska Renewable Energy Program as
administered by the Alaska Energy Authority.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Craig hereby supports an application
for funding for design and permitting for a hydroelectric generation system to be installed in line
with the current raw water line at the Craig water treatment plant using funds from the Alaska
Renewable Energy Fund.
APPROVED ~.}$t lD , 2015.
Prince ofWales ·
HATCHER~
~ro~HSH
September l, 2015
Alaska Energy Authority
Renewable Energy Fund Application
813 WestNorthernLightsBlvd.
Anchorage, AK. 99503
Re: Renewable Energy Fund Round IX
To whom it may concern,
Prince of Wales Hatchery Association
POBox554
Craig, Alaska 99921
907-755-2231/ Fax: 907-755-2440
powha@hughcs.net
I am writing this letter of support for the efforts of the City of Craig, Alaska to obtain a grant
for the feasibility, design, and permitting to install a small hydroelectric generator at the Port
Saint Nicholas Hatchery and City of Craig water treatment plant
The City of Craig constructed the chinook salmon hatchery in 2005 to benefit the common
property fishers who operate in the waters off the west coast ofPrince of Wales Island Prince
of Wales Hatchery Association operates the hatchery fur the city and the Klawock River
Hatchery. The Port Saint Nicholas Hatchery rears and releases 150,000 chinook salmon
smolts each year. Since inception the hatchery has provided over 5,000 adult chinook salmon
to the fisheries with an ex-vessel value of$250,000.
Addition of a hydroelectric generator would decrease the electrical costs of the hatchery
allowing for possible expansion of chinook production and increased opportunities for the
common property fisheries.
Sincerely,
1jfarl.~
Jeffrey H. Lundberg, Manager
Prince of Wales Hatchery Association
April 2015
Water System Master Plan
City of Craig Municipal Water System Craig, Alaska
Master Plan W.O. 61531
Page 50
5.4 Summary of Violations
The City has received eight monitoring and reporting violations since 2010. The last violation
was for failure to submit a Stage 2 D/DBPR result on time. Compliance with regulatory
regulations was achieved on March 29, 2012. The City of Craig does not have any MCL
violations on file with the State of Alaska with the exception of the DBP violation as stated in
Section 5.2.6. The table below summarized the City’s recent violation history.
Table 5.2: Recent Violation History
Violation Year Violation Number Violation Type Return To
Compliance?
2015 2015-11608 HAA5 Monitoring Yes
2015 2015-11617 TTHM Monitoring Yes
2012 2012-1129152 DBP Stage 2 Failure to
submit plan
Yes
2012 2012-1129146 Consumer Confidence
Rule Content Inadequacy
Yes
2012 2012-1129147 Chlorine Monitoring Yes
2012 2012-1129151 Chlorine Monitoring Yes
2012 2012-1129145 Coliform Monitoring Yes
2011 2011-1129144 Alkalinity Monitoring Yes
6.0 HYDROPOWER FEASIBILITY EVALUATION
6.1 Location
The WTP Pressure Reducing Valves (PRVs) are located on the 12-inch-diameter raw water main
in the existing WTP building. These PRVs reduce pressure before flows enter the WTP process
equipment. Installing a hydropower turbine and generator at this site would allow the power
generated to be used directly by the WTP and fish hatchery. The proposed hydropower turbine
and equipment would be located in a new building between the WTP and hatchery to capture
energy from flow in the raw water pipeline before splitting flows to the two facilities.
There is also a PRV located near North Fork Lake that reduces pipeline pressure by
approximately 50 psi. Although the existing pipeline would likely fail due to high internal
pressures without the upper PRV, to provide best case power generation estimates for this study
it is assumed that the existing system could operate with the upper PRV removed. For the future
pipeline system it is assumed that the replacement pipeline would be designed to function
properly without the upper PRV.
City of Craig Municipal Water System Craig, Alaska
Master Plan W.O. 61531
Page 51
In order to check the feasibility, order-of-magnitude cost estimates and power generating
evaluations were performed.
6.2 Demand Trend
The current trend in flow available for power generation exhibits two different levels of
operation:
May through September: flows from 1,000 gpm to 1,300 gpm, and
October through April: flows from 200 gpm to 300 gpm.
Based on current demands and potential growth, the future operational flows are:
February and May through September: flows from 1,100 gpm to 1,850 gpm, and
October through April, not including February: flows from 750 gpm to 850 gpm.
6.3 Power Potential
In order to assess order-of-magnitude maximum power generation potential at the WTP PRV site
based on current and future raw water demands, power output at a water-to-wire efficiency of
about 70 percent was assumed for this site. Such efficiency would be characteristic of fixed-
geometry turbine and induction generator equipment suitable for small installations such as this.
Assumed operation of a hydropower plant at the Craig WTP is based on constant flow settings
through the turbine. Variable WTP rates would need to be balanced by varying flow to the
hatchery to maintain optimal hydropower production.
ܲሺ݇ݓሻ ൌܳሺ݃݉ሻ ൈ ܪሺ݂ݐሻ ൈ 62.4
ܮܾ
݂ݐ ଷ ൈ .746
ܭݓ
݄ ൊ 448.8
݃݉
݂ܿݏ ൈ 550
݂ݐ െ ݈ܾ
ݏ݁ܿ/݄
ൈ %݂݂݁݅ܿ݅݁݊ܿݕ
At the WTP PRV, the majority of the elevation drop in this pipeline has occurred, so the
maximum head that can be used to generate hydropower is available at that point. Our
understanding is that the existing PRVs reduce the raw water main hydraulic grade line to an
elevation of approximately 150 feet (Elevation 60 feet plus 40 psi). For this evaluation it was
assumed the target turbine discharge hydraulic grade line elevation is 150 feet. The elevation at
the North Fork Lake water source is approximately 650 feet. This means approximately 500 feet
City of Craig Municipal Water System Craig, Alaska
Master Plan W.O. 61531
Page 52
of head is available for hydropower generation through the approximately 6.4-mile-long
pipeline.
The following assumptions and conditions were used to calculate potential energy production:
1. Operation under normal pipeline and water supply system conditions, in order that the
recommended facilities not infringe upon non-power-related beneficial purposes of the
system.
2. Current and future water demands are based on the data presented in the DOWL HKM
City of Craig Growth Summary Memorandum dated March 31, 2014.
3. Available head figures represent the pressure differential between the inlet and outlet of
the existing PRVs at the WTP. These figures have been estimated conservatively and are
assumed to represent available head across the turbine. Small losses in turbine
interconnecting piping and isolation valves are, thereby, assumed to be allowed for in
these figures.
4. To calculate water main friction losses for the current demands, the existing 12-inch raw
water main was used for calculations. To calculate friction losses for future demands, an
enlarged 18-inch raw water main was assumed. The future power potential assumes there
is adequate water supply from North Fork Lake to provide the projected demands.
However, the City’s water rights and water availability from North Fork Lake should be
evaluated as part of future hydropower studies.
5. Assuming an average flow rate for each operation period (Spring/Summer and
Fall/Winter), 100 percent equipment availability (24-hour-per-day operation, zero
downtime), maximum annual energy production is then calculated (average kilowatts
(kW) from each operation period times 24 hours times operation period in days). The
results of the maximum energy production evaluation are summarized in Table 6.1.
The maximum annual potential energy production from this site is included at the end of this
memorandum (Appendix B).
City of Craig Municipal Water System Craig, Alaska
Master Plan W.O. 61531
Page 53
Based on information provided by the City of Craig for 2008 to 2013, annual energy use at the
WTP and hatchery has varied between approximately 261,000 kWh and 325,000 kWh. Future
energy demands have not been estimated as part of the energy analysis. Peak energy usage is
typically from October to May, which corresponds to the lower flow periods in the water main.
To estimate actual power that can be used at the WTP and hatchery, hydropower equipment
sizing was estimated.
Table 6.1: Maximum Hydropower Production Summary
Operation
Scenario/Period
Maximum
Power
(kW)
Maximum
Available Power1
(kW)
Energy
Production
(kWh)
Total Annual Energy
Production (kWh)
Current – May to Sept 75 52 188,400
Current – Oct to April 27 19 99,000
Current Total -- -- -- 287,400
Future – May to Sept
and Feb 123 86 372,500
Future – Oct to April 73 51 228,100
Future Total -- -- -- 600,600
1 – Maximum available power assumes a water to wire efficiency of 70 percent.
6.4 Equipment Sizing
General equipment selection is driven by conditions of operation. The closed-conduit operation
dictates that reaction turbine technology should be employed (versus impulse or “Pelton Wheel”
technology). Maintaining closed-conduit operation also prevents exposing the raw water supply
to atmospheric pressure, which could over-oxygenate the water supply and have negative
impacts at the hatchery. The relative size of the proposed project and the need to minimize cost
dictate that a fixed geometry type turbine (pump equipment) be chosen. An adjustable geometry
turbine, with wicket gates and/or runner vanes that can be adjusted to improve performance over
a range of hydraulic conditions is prohibitively costly in this size of project (three to five times
higher in cost). However, fixed-geometry machines have more limited operating ranges.
Since this installation would exist at a WTP and fish hatchery with significant electrical load,
two operating scenarios are possible:
1. The plant can operate as a Qualifying Facility (QF), under which the local utility
interconnects with the project and purchases the excess generated power at rates based
upon its avoided cost of energy.
City of Craig Municipal Water System Craig, Alaska
Master Plan W.O. 61531
Page 54
2. The power generated can be used onsite, reducing the facility’s energy costs (load-
shaving operation).
The resulting electrical installation can avoid some of the control and protection costs associated
with a typical QF installation.
Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T) provides electrical service on Prince of Wales Island.
AP&T only buys back power from QFs when running their diesel generators, and then they will
only purchase up to 25 kW. Typically, diesel generation occurs in March and April, and
occasionally in the summer if flows are too low to meet demand through their hydropower
facility. Water demands in the City of Craig’s raw water main are typically lowest in March and
April. The load-shaving hydropower installation was selected for further evaluation in this
memorandum and the QF buy-back configuration was excluded from feasibility for several
reasons: WTP and hatchery electric demands can be at least partially met by an onsite load-
shaving hydropower facility; constructing a QF facility would cost significantly more than a
load-shaving facility; and AP&T buy-back periods are typically short and infrequent, which
limits revenue potential.
Two sizing alternatives were developed – one for the current demands and one for future
demands:
Alternative 1 – Current Demands: Select a small unit, sized to operate best on the year-
round lower range of flows. This minimizes cost, but sacrifices the power generating
potential of the high flow summer months when power would be available for sale to
AP&T.
Alternative 2 – Future Demands: Select a slightly larger unit sized to operate during the
year-round lower-range of project future flows.
On the basis of the site condition data, equipment manufacturer recommendations1 for unit sizing
were as follows:
Alternative 1 – Current Demands: Cornell turbine, 25-kW-rated turbine output, 22-kW-
rated generator output.
1 Phone and email correspondence with Steve Perry, P.E., April 3, 2014, Cornell Pump Co. Clackamas, OR.
City of Craig Municipal Water System Craig, Alaska
Master Plan W.O. 61531
Page 55
Alternative 2 – Future Demands: Cornell turbine, 45-kW-rated turbine output, 40-kW-
rated generator output.
The above configurations are based upon preliminary equipment selections and manufacturer
budgetary quotations. At flows beyond a given turbine’s maximum discharge capacity, the unit is
assumed to remain online, while excess flow is bypassed by the existing or new PRVs.
6.5 Estimated Annual Energy Production
The annual energy production for the two equipment alternatives was estimated assuming 100
percent equipment availability (24-hour-per-day operation, zero downtime) and multiplying the
equipment kW output by 24 hours and by 365 days.
The hydropower generation evaluation for the City of Craig WTP PRV site is summarized in
Table 6.2.
Table 6.2: Hydropower Evaluation Summary
Alternative Generating
Equipment
Annual Energy
Production (kWh)
Annual Energy
Value1
Estimated Project
Cost (2014)
1 - Current 25 kW 153,000 $32,000 $255,000
2 - Future 45 kW 276,000 $58,000 $286,000
1 – Energy value based on recent retail rates quoted by AP&T.
6.6 Cost Estimates
Detailed cost estimates for the current and future alternatives are included in Appendix B. Cost
estimates should be considered order-of-magnitude with 2014 as the cost basis year.
Annual Energy Production: The figures are based upon current and projected future pipeline
operation. In addition, they are based upon ideal staging of unit(s) as pipeline flow varies. They
should, therefore, be considered maximum values. Energy costs are derived from recent electric
rates quoted by AP&T for Prince of Wales Island.
Permitting and Mitigation: No mitigation costs are anticipated. All land-disturbing activities are
confined to areas within the existing WTP and PRV.
Access/right-of-way: All nonutility construction occurs at the existing WTP, so no easement or
right-of-way costs were included in the estimates.
City of Craig Municipal Water System Craig, Alaska
Master Plan W.O. 61531
Page 56
Preliminary Engineering/Final Design: This line item includes costs for additional studies, final
design, construction documents, construction administration, and inspection. This is estimated as
a percentage of construction cost.
6.7 Recommendations
As mentioned previously, a reaction turbine is preferred over an impulse or “Pelton Wheel”
turbine. Reaction turbines are more efficient for pressurized pipelines and this turbine would also
prevent aerating the raw water supply prior to the WTP or hatchery. For salmonid hatcheries,
low dissolved oxygen (DO) levels in the water supply are typically more of a concern than high
DO. However, it is possible for fish to suffer from gas bubble disease at very high total dissolved
gas (TDG) concentrations (>103 percent TDG).2 Gas bubble disease can cause salmonid fry to
develop certain conditions that can eventually lead to death. Increasing the dissolved oxygen
content of the water supply before the WTP can also create treatment issues, such as reducing
settling efficiency, “air binding” in filter media, and inaccurate turbidity measurements.3
However, because a reaction type turbine should have minimal effect on increasing DO
concentrations in the raw water supply, this type of turbine is recommended for a hydropower
system at the Craig WTP.
Based on initial economic analysis of alternatives, it appears that a hydropower turbine at the
Craig WTP has potential to reduce power costs at the WTP and hatchery. However, a detailed
economic evaluation should be performed along with a preliminary engineering report to
determine the payback period before the City of Craig has enough information to determine if
constructing a hydropower facility at this location is economically feasible.
7.0 CAPITAL PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
Capital improvement projects were developed based on the findings from all previous sections.
This section prioritizes these projects on a scale from 1 to 4. Projects with a rating of 1 or 2 are
considered to be short term capital improvement projects (CIPs), and projects rated 3 and 4 are
considered to be long-term CIPs. This rating system, along with the priority explanation, can be
2 Alaska Department of Fish and Game. (April 2014). Non-Infectious Diseases - Gas Bubble Disease.
http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/species/disease/pdfs/fishdiseases/gas_bubble_disease.pdf.
3 Scardina, Paolo. (2004). Effects of Dissolved Gas Supersaturation and Bubble Formation on Water Treatment Plant
Performance.. Blacksburg, Virgina.
APPENDIX C
Small Hydropower Feasibility Hydroelectric Maximum Power Estimate
City of Craig - Small Hydropower Feasibility
Hydroelectric Maximum Power Estimate
Existing Demands
Power (kilowatts) = H (ft) x Q (gpm) x 62.4 lb/ft3 x 0.746 kW/hp / (448.8 gpm/cfs x 550 ft-lb/sec
Enter data in green cells;yellow cells contain formulas
Summer Operation
Flow 1200 gpm
Pipe Diameter 12 in
Reservoir El. 650 ft
Turbine El. 60 ft
Velocity 3.41 fps
Pipe Headloss 167.0 ft
Pressure In (psi) 183.2 (1 psi=2.31 ft)
Pressure Out (psi) 40 (1 psi=2.31 ft)
System Efficiency 70%
Operation Period 150 days
Max Theoretical Power 74.8 kW
Available Power 52.3 kW
Energy 188,386 kWh
Spring/Winter Operation
Flow 300 gpm
Pipe Diameter 12 in
Velocity 0.85 fps
Pipe Headloss 12.8 ft
Pressure in (psi) 250.1 (1 psi=2.31 ft)
Pressure out (psi) 40 (1 psi=2.31 ft)
System Efficiency 70%
Operation Period 215 days
Max Theoretical Power 27.4 kW
Available Power 19.2 kW
Energy 99,044 kWh
Maximum Annual Revenue/Avoided Costs
APC Rate B - Diesel Fuel Avoided Cost 0.2709$ $/kWh - Effective Jan. 30 , 2014
APC Rate C - Net Metering Avoided Cost 0.0906$ $/kWh - Effective Jan. 30 , 2014
Average Rate paid at WTP/Hatchery 0.2100$ Based on recent data from APC
Total Generated Energy 287,430 kWh
Annual Diesel Buyback Value 77,865$Assumes all energy at Diesel value
Annual Net Buyback Value 26,041$Assumes all energy at Net Metering value
Annual Avoided Cost 60,360$Assumes all energy at Retail value
H:\24\61531\26WtrDes\Craig Hydropower.xlsx
MaxPower-Existing 4/7/2014
__________________________________________________
Appendix C - Page 1
City of Craig - Small Hydropower Feasibility
Hydroelectric Maximum Power Estimate
Future Demands with Enlarged Pipeline
Power (kilowatts) = H (ft) x Q (gpm) x 62.4 lb/ft3 x 0.746 kW/hp / (448.8 gpm/cfs x 550 ft-lb/sec
Enter data in green cells;yellow cells contain formulas
Summer Operation
Flow 1400 gpm
Pipe Diameter 18 in
Reservoir El. 650 ft
Turbine El. 60 ft
Velocity 1.77 fps
Pipe Headloss 30.9 ft
Pressure In (psi) 242.3 (1 psi=2.31 ft)
Pressure Out (psi) 40 (1 psi=2.31 ft)
System Efficiency 70%
Operation Period 180 days
Max Theoretical Power 123.2 kW
Available Power 86.2 kW
Energy 372,496 kWh
Spring/Winter Operation
Flow 800 gpm
Pipe Diameter 18 in
Velocity 1.01 fps
Pipe Headloss 11.0 ft
Pressure in (psi) 250.9 (1 psi=2.31 ft)
Pressure out (psi) 40 (1 psi=2.31 ft)
System Efficiency 70%
Operation Period 185 days
Max Theoretical Power 73.4 kW
Available Power 51.4 kW
Energy 228,131 kWh
Maximum Annual Revenue/Avoided Costs
APC Rate B - Diesel Fuel Avoided Cost 0.2709$ $/kWh - Effective Jan. 30 , 2014
APC Rate C - Net Metering Avoided Cost 0.0906$ $/kWh - Effective Jan. 30 , 2014
Average Rate paid at WTP/Hatchery 0.2100$ Based on recent data from APC
Total Generated Energy 600,627 kWh
Annual Diesel Buyback Value 162,710$Assumes all energy at Diesel value
Annual Net Buyback Value 54,417$Assumes all energy at Net Metering value
Annual Avoided Cost at WTP/Hatchery 126,132$Assumes all energy at Retail value
H:\24\61531\26WtrDes\Craig Hydropower.xlsx
MaxPower-Future 4/7/2014
__________________________________________________
Appendix C - Page 2
City of Craig - Small Hydropower Feasibility
Hydroelectric Power Estimate
Existing Demand
Power (kilowatts) = H (ft) x Q (gpm) x 62.4 lb/ft3 x 0.746 kW/hp / (448.8 gpm/cfs x 550 ft-lb/
Enter data in green cells;yellow cells contain formulas
Annual Operation
Flow 300 gpm
Pipe Diameter 12 in
Reservoir El. 650 ft
Turbine El. 60 ft
Velocity 0.85 fps
Pipe Headloss 12.8 ft
Pressure In (psi) 250.1 (1 psi=2.31 ft)
Pressure Out (psi) 40 (1 psi=2.31 ft)
Max Theoretical Power 27.4 kW
Turbine/Generator Rating 25.0 kW
System Efficiency 70%
Available Power 17.5 kW - Turbine/generator output
Operation Period 365 days
Total Generated Energy 153,300 kWh
Annual Avoided Energy Cost
Average Rate paid at WTP/Hatchery 0.210$ Based on recent data from APC
Annual Avoided Cost at WTP/Hatchery 32,200$
H:\24\61531\26WtrDes\Craig Hydropower.xlsx
Power-Existing 4/7/2014
__________________________________________________
Appendix C - Page 3
City of Craig - Small Hydropower Feasibility
Hydroelectric Power Estimate
Future Demand
Power (kilowatts) = H (ft) x Q (gpm) x 62.4 lb/ft3 x 0.746 kW/hp / (448.8 gpm/cfs x 550 ft-lb
Enter data in green cells;yellow cells contain formulas
Annual Operation
Flow 800 gpm
Pipe Diameter 18 in
Reservoir El. 650 ft
Turbine El. 60 ft
Velocity 1.01 fps
Pipe Headloss 11.0 ft
Pressure In (psi) 250.9 (1 psi=2.31 ft)
Pressure Out (psi) 40 (1 psi=2.31 ft)
Max Theoretical Power 73.4 kW
Turbine/Generator Rating 45.0 kW
System Efficiency 70%
Available Power 31.5 kW - Turbine/generator output
Operation Period 365 days
Total Generated Energy 275,940 kWh
Annual Avoided Energy Cost
Average Rate paid at WTP/Hatchery 0.210$ Based on recent data from APC
Annual Avoided Cost at WTP/Hatchery 57,900$
H:\24\61531\26WtrDes\Craig Hydropower.xlsx
Power-Future 4/7/2014
__________________________________________________
Appendix C - Page 4
City of Craig, AK
DOWL HKM #: 1124.61531.01
Water Master Plan
Small Hydropower Feasibility
Item Unit Cost Total Cost
Project Components $128,000
Mobization, Taxes, Bonds, Insurance1 1 LS $21,000 $21,000
25 kW Turbine & Generator Equipment 1 LS $25,000 $25,000
New 12" PRV for Bypass flow 1 LS $15,000 $15,000
Other Mechanical 1 LS $12,000 $12,000
Switchgear and Controls 1 LS $8,000 $8,000
Interconnection Equipment 1 LS $12,000 $12,000
Structures and Sitework 1 LS $30,000 $30,000
Miscellaneous 1 LS $5,000 $5,000
Major Field Items $128,000
Unlisted Items & Contingencies 25%$32,000
Total Field Cost $160,000
Legal Fees 1% $2,000
Permitting/Fees 3% $5,000
Preliminary Engineering/Final Design/Const. Admin 55% $88,000
Non-Contract Costs $95,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $255,000
Notes: 1 - Mobilization, taxes, bonds and insurance estimated at 20% of sum of other construction items
Existing Pipeline and Demands - 25 kW turbine and generator installed at location of existing PRV near WTP.
Quantity Subtotals
H:\24\61531\26WtrDes\CraigHydro CostEst.xlsx 4/8/2014
__________________________________________________
Appendix C - Page 5
City of Craig, AK
DOWL HKM #: 1124.61531.01
Water Master Plan
Small Hydropower Feasibility
Item Unit Cost Total Cost
Project Components $144,000
Mobization, Taxes, Bonds, Insurance1 1 LS $24,000 $24,000
25 kW Turbine & Generator Equipment 1 LS $28,000 $28,000
New 18" PRV for Bypass flow 1 LS $25,000 $25,000
Other Mechanical 1 LS $12,000 $12,000
Switchgear and Controls 1 LS $8,000 $8,000
Interconnection Equipment 1 LS $12,000 $12,000
Structures and Sitework 1 LS $30,000 $30,000
Miscellaneous 1 LS $5,000 $5,000
Major Field Items $144,000
Unlisted Items & Contingencies 25%$36,000
Total Field Cost $180,000
Legal Fees 1% $2,000
Permitting/Fees 3% $5,000
Preliminary Engineering/Final Design/Const. Admin 55% $99,000
Non-Contract Costs $106,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $286,000
Notes: 1 - Mobilization, taxes, bonds and insurance estimated at 20% of sum of other construction items
Future Pipeline and Demands - 45 kW turbine and generator installed at location of existing PRV near WTP.
Quantity Subtotals
H:\24\61531\26WtrDes\CraigHydro CostEst.xlsx 4/8/2014
__________________________________________________
Appendix C - Page 6