The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMt Village-St Marys Intertie FinalApp09222012Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design and Permitting AEA 13-006 Application Page 1 of 25 7/3/2011 SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal) Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Type of Entity: Not-for-profit corporation Fiscal Year End: December 31 Tax ID # 92-0035763 Tax Status: For-profit or X non-profit ( check one) Mailing Address 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, AK 99503 Physical Address 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, AK 99503 Telephone 800-478-1818 Fax 800-478-4086 Email 1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT / GRANTS MANAGER Name Brent Petrie Title: Manager, Community Development and Key Accounts Mailing Address 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, AK 99503 Telephone 907-565-5358 Fax 907-561-2388 Email BPetrie@avec.org 1.2 APPLICANT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS Please check as appropriate. If you do not to meet the minimum applicant requirements, your application will be rejected. 1.2.1 As an Applicant, we are: (put an X in the appropriate box) X 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); Yes 1.2.2. Attached to this application is formal approval and endorsement for its project by its 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 Yes or No in the box ) Yes 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. Yes 1.2.4. If awarded the grant, we can comply with all terms and conditions of the attached grant form. (Any exceptions should be clearly noted and submitted with the application.) Yes 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. Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 2 of 25 7/3//2012 SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY This is intended to be no more than a 1-2 page overview of your project. 2.1 Project Title – (Provide a 4 to 5 word title for your project) St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design 2.2 Project Location – Include the physical location of your project and name(s) of the community or communities that will benefit from your project in the subsections below. This electric intertie to wind energy will be constructed between St. Mary’s and Mountain Village. Both Western Alaskan communities are approximately 450 air miles west-northwest of Anchorage. Pitka’s Point will also benefit because it is already intertied to the St . Mary’s electrical system. 2.2.1 Location of Project – Latitude and longitude, 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. This project will be located along the approximately 18-mile gravel road connecting the communities of St. Mary’s and Mountain Village. The City of St. Mary's encompasses the Yup'ik villages of St. Mary's and Andreafsky. It lies at approximately 62.053060 North Latitude and -163.165830 West Longitude. (Sec. 26, T023N, R076W, Seward Meridian.) Mountain Village is located on the north bank of the Yukon River about 20 miles west of St. Mary’s and 470 miles northwest of Anchorage. It lies at approximately 62.085560 North Latitude and -163.729440 West Longitude. 2.2.2 Community benefiting – Name(s) of the community or communities that will be the beneficiaries of the project. This project will benefit St. Mary’s (2011 population of 554) and Pitka’s Point (2011 population of 93), which have already intertied electrical systems, and Mountain Village (2011 population of 835). Another Round 6 Renewable Energy Fund application requests funding to add a wind turbine to St. Mary’s and Pitka’s Point existing energy generation system. This project will design and permit an intertie between Mountain Village and that wind energy system. (In addition, AVEC anticipates that through another future intertie with St. Mary’s, Pilot Station will also benefit from this project.) Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 3 of 25 7/3//2012 2.3 PROJECT TYPE Put X in boxes as appropriate 2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type X Wind Biomass or Biofuels Hydro, including run of river Transmission of Renewable Energy Geothermal, including Heat Pumps Small Natural Gas Heat Recovery from existing sources Hydrokinetic Solar Storage of Renewable X Other (Describe) Electric Intertie to wind energy system 2.3.2 Proposed Grant Funded Phase(s) for this Request (Check all that apply) Pre-Construction Construction Reconnaissance X Design and Permitting Feasibility Construction and Commissioning Conceptual Design 2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Provide a brief one paragraph description of your proposed project. Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is seeking $332,500 from this Grant Program to (final) design and permit an electrical intertie between the communities of St. Mary’s and Mountain Village. AVEC will contribute $17,500 as a cash match. The intertie will be designed with fourteen (14) miles of new connection along the existing gravel road that connects the two communities and will require an upgrade from single-phase to three-phase of an existing eight (8) miles. The conceptual design work indicates the intertie will not require any water crossings; it can be constructed in summer months and will need pole spacing of 125 feet. At present, St. Mary’s and Pitka’s Point are connected by a distribution power line, but Mountain Village is a stand-alone diesel powered community. This project would electrically intertie Mountain Village to the St. Mary’s/Pitka’s Point system. Standby generation capability will be maintained in Mountain Village but primary generation will be delivered by the existing St. Mary’s power plant. AVEC has submitted another Round 6 Renewable Energy Grant Program application to build a wind energy system for the intertied communities of St. Mary’s and Pitka’s Point. This project will add Mountain Village, about 20 miles from St. Mary’s, to that wind system. Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 4 of 25 7/3//2012 2.5 PROJECT BENEFIT Briefly discuss the financial and public benefits that will result from this project, (such as reduced fuel costs, lower energy costs, etc.) This project will stabilize energy costs for households in Mountain Village, St. Mary’s, and Pitka’s Point by sharing the benefits of a wind project between the three communities. The EWT turbine installation proposed in St. Mary’s/Pitka’s Point will be able to be fully exploited to a greater potential. The costs of power generation via diesel generation will also be shared among three communities, helping to stabilize energy costs. This project will also help stabilize the existing high energy costs in Mountain Village by avoiding the costs of a new power plant and associated tank farm. Mountain Village would only need a backup generator to serve the community. In addition, this project would reduce overall operations and maintenance costs. By shifting to a module power plant providing only stand-by power in Mountain Village, AVEC will save approximately $170,000 per year in labor, generator consumables, and replacement parts in Mountain Village. Finally, this project will reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions and the overall contribution to global climate change by eliminating a separate power plant for Mountain Village and by employing more of the proposed wind turbine’s output to serve the larger electric loads of the intertied communities than would be the case for St. Mary’s and Pitka’s Point alone. Please see Section 5: Project Benefits for additional details. 2.6 PROJECT BUDGET OVERVIEW Briefly discuss the amount of funds needed, the anticipated sources of funds, and the nature and source of other contributions to the project. AVEC is proposing a project to complete the final design and all necessary permits to construct an electrical intertie between the communities of St. Mary’s and Mountain Village. AVEC requests $332,500 from the State of Alaska through a Renewable Energy Fund award for its design and permitting effort. AVEC will provide $17,500 as a match contribution. 2.7 COST AND BENEFIT SUMARY Include a summary of grant request and your project’s total costs and benefits below. Grant Costs (Summary of funds requested) 2.7.1 Grant Funds Requested in this application. $332,500. 2.7.2 Cash match to be provided $17,500. 2.7.3 In-kind match to be provided $ 2.7.4 Other grant applications not yet approved $ Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 5 of 25 7/3//2012 2.7.5 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.7.1 through 2.7.3) $350,000. Project Costs & Benefits (Summary of total project costs including work to date and future cost estimates to get to a fully operational project) 2.7.6 Total Project Cost (Summary from Cost Worksheet including estimates through construction) $7,449,000. 2.7.7 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings) $16,050,000 (50 year project period and 3% discount rate) 2.7.8 Other Public Benefit (If you can calculate the benefit in terms of dollars please provide that number here and explain how you calculated that number in your application (Section 5.) $ SECTION 3 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN Describe who will be responsible for managing the project and provide a plan for successfully completing the project within the scope, schedule and budget proposed in the application. 3.1 Project Manager Tell us who will be managing the project for the Grantee and include contact information, a resume and references for the manager(s). 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. AVEC, as the electric utility serving St. Mary’s and Mountain Village, will provide overall project management and oversight. Brent Petrie, Manager, Community Development and Key Accounts, will lead the project management team consisting of AVEC staff, consultants, and contractors. He has worked for Alaska Village Electric Cooperative since 1998, where he manages the development of alternatives to diesel generation for AVEC such as using wind, hydropower, solar and heat recovery. He also is the program manager for AVEC’s major construction projects. Mr. Petrie has worked in the energy and resource field for more than thirty years, having worked for the federal and state governments as consultant, planner, and project manager. He has been a utility manager or management consultant since 1993. As General Manager of Iliamna- Newhalen-Nondalton Electric Cooperative from 1994 to 1998, he reported to a seven-member, elected board of directors, and served as project manager on its hydroelectric project development. He is an elected member of the Board of Directors of the Utility Wind Interest Group representing rural electric cooperatives and serves on the Renewable Energy and Distributed Generation Advisory Group of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association. Mr. Petrie has a Master’s Degree in Water Resource Management and a Bachelor's Degree in Geography. His resume is Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 6 of 25 7/3//2012 attached. Also involved with the project management and grant administration is Meera Kohler as the President and CEO of AVEC. Ms. Kohler has more than 30 years of experience in the Alaska electric utility industry. She was appointed Manager of Administration and Finance at Cordova Electric Cooperative in 1983, General Manager of Naknek Electric Association in 1990, and General Manager of Municipal Light & Power in Anchorage in 1997. Since May 2000, Ms. Kohler has been the President and CEO of AVEC and in this position has ultimate grant and project responsibilities. 3.2 Project Schedule and Milestones Please fill out the schedule below. 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. The key tasks and their completion dates are: Grant Award Announcement: May 2013 Authorization to Proceed: June 2013 Complete Permitting: February 2014 Complete Site Control : February 2014 Complete Final Design: May 2014 The schedule organized by AEA milestones is as follows: Milestones Tasks Start Date End Date Project Scoping and Contractor Award for Planning and Design The engineering contractor would be selected and a task order would be prepared for work planned for this phase. June 1, 2013 Aug 1, 2013 Permit Applications Permit applications, such as FAA, wetlands, and migratory birds/endangered species consultations, would be prepared and submitted. Aug 1, 2013 Final Environmental Assessment and Mitigation Plans Working with regulatory agencies, environmental documents would be prepared as needed. Aug 1, 2013 Feb 1, 2014 Resolution of Land Use, ROW Issues Working with the communities and corporations, AVEC would secure site control for the wind turbines. Aug 1, 2013 Feb 1, 2014 Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 7 of 25 7/3//2012 Permit Approvals Permits would be issued from the Federal Aviation Administration, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Feb 1, 2014 Final System Design The engineering contractor would complete final design of the wind system and intertie. The design would be reviewed by AVEC personnel prior to final approval. May 1, 2014 Engineers’ Cost Estimate Using the final design, the engineers would prepare the cost estimate for the project. June 1, 2014 Updated Economic Estimate and Financial Analysis Using the number developed in the cost estimate, an updated economic assessment and financial analysis would be prepared. July 1, 2014 Negotiated Power Sales Agreements with Approved Rates n/a Final Business and Operational Plan AVEC would work with all the communities to finalize the Operational Plan. July 1, 2014 3.3 Project Resources Describe the personnel, contractors, accounting or bookkeeping personnel or firms, equipment, and services you will use to accomplish the project. Include any partnerships or commitments with other entities you have or anticipate will be needed to complete your project. Describe any existing contracts and the selection process you may use for major equipment purchases or contracts. Include brief resumes and references for known, key personnel, contractors, and suppliers as an attachment to your application. AVEC will use a project management approach, that includes a team of AVEC staff and external consultants, that has been successful in the design, permitting and construction of other intertie systems in rural Alaska: AVEC staff and their role on this project includes:  Meera Kohler, President and Chief Executive Officer, would act as Project Executive and would maintain ultimate authority programmatically and financially.  Brent Petrie, Manager of Community Development and Key Accounts, would lead the project management team consisting of AVEC staff, consultants, and contractors. Together with his group, Brent would provide coordination of the installation of the solar array. The group’s resources include a project coordinator, accountant, project/construction manager (PM/CM), and a community liaison. Mr. Petrie will be the program manager for this project and will assign project manager resources to Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 8 of 25 7/3//2012 implement the project.  Debbie Bullock, Manager of Administrative Services, would provide support in accounting, payables, financial reporting, and capitalization of assets in accordance with AEA guidelines.  Bill Stamm, Manager of Engineering, leads AVEC’s Engineering Department which is responsible for the in-house design of power plants, distribution lines, controls, and other AVEC facilities. Mr. Stamm has worked at AVEC since 1994. Mr. Stamm was an AVEC line superintendent before he was appointed to Manager of Engineering in 2012. Mr. Stamm’s unit will provide engineering design and supervision.  Mark Bryan, the Manager of Operations, is a Certified Journeyman Electrician and supervises the AVEC’s line operations, generation operations and all field construction programs. He has worked at AVEC since 1980, was appointed Manager of Construction in May 1998 and was promoted to Manager of Operations in June 2003. Mr. Bryan’s unit will oversee operation of this project as part of the AVEC utility system.  Anna Sattler, Community Liaison, will communicate directly with St. Mary’s and Mountain Village residents to ensure that the community is informed. Selection Process for Contractors: The contractor/consultant selection will be made from a pre-qualified list of contractors with a successful track record with AVEC. Pre-qualified contractors have been selected based upon technical competencies, past performance, written proposal, quality, cost, and general consensus from an internal AVEC technical steering committee. The selection of the contractor/consultant will occur in strict conformity with AVEC’s procurement policies and conformance with OMB circulars. 3.4 Project Communications Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status. Please provide an alternative contact person and their contact information. AVEC has systems in place to accomplish reporting requirements successfully. In 2011, AVEC successfully met reporting requirements for 16 state and 19 federal grants. An independent financial audit and an independent auditor’s management letter completed for AVEC for 2011 did not identify any deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that were considered to be material weaknesses. In addition, the letter stated that AVEC complied with specific loan and security instrument provisions. The project will be managed out of AVEC’s Community Development Department. For financial reporting, the Community Development Department’s accountant, supported by the Administrative Services Department, will prepare financial reports. The accountant will be responsible for ensuring that vendor invoices and internal labor charges are documented in accordance with AEA guidelines and are included wit h financial reports. AVEC has up-to-date systems in place for accounting, payables, financial reporting, and capitalization of assets in accordance with AEA guidelines. Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 9 of 25 7/3//2012 AVEC will require that monthly written progress reports be provided with each invoice submitted from contractor(s). The progress reports will include a summary of tasks completed, issues or problems experienced, upcoming tasks, and contractor’s needs from AVEC. Project progress reports will be collected, combined and supplemented as necessary, and forwarded as one report to the AEA project manager each quarter. Quarterly face-to-face meetings will occur between AVEC and AEA to discuss the status of all projects funded through the AEA Renewable Energy Grants program. Individual project meetings will be held, as required or requested by AEA. Meera Kohler, AVEC’s President and CEO, may be contacted as an alternative manager. 3.5 Project Risk Discuss potential problems and how you would address them. AVEC does not see any potential problems with this design and permitting project. However, AVEC management will react quickly to any manpower scheduling problems that might arise within AVEC or with contractors to avoid major consequences for falling behind schedule. AVEC is responsible to its member communities and a board of directors and provides a cash match to the project; staying on schedule and within budget is essential. This project will result in decreasing electricity costs, and AVEC’s member communities are very interested in this project because energy costs can be a large portion of their budgets. AVEC member communities expect status updates on village projects including when and what work wil l occur, who will be involved, and when it will be completed. If work does not occur according to the schedule, AVEC’s CEO and Board of Directors are usually alerted by member communities, and there are repercussions. SECTION 4 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TASKS  The level of information will vary according to phase(s) of the project you propose to undertake with grant funds.  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 satisfied and funding for an advanced phase is warranted. 4.1 Proposed Energy Resource Describe the potential extent/amount of the energy resource that is available. Discuss 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. Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 10 of 25 7/3//2012 Another Round 6 Renewable Energy Program application requests funding to add a wind turbine to St. Mary’s/Pitka’s Point existing energy generation system. This project will design and permit an intertie between Mountain Village and the planned new wind energy system in St. Mary’s/Pitka’s Point. The wind resource measured at the St. Mary’s/Pitka’s Point met tower site is outstanding with measured wind power class 6 by measurement of wind power density and wind speed. Extensive wind resource analysis has been conducted in the Saint Mary’s region, with met towers at a lower elevation site closer to the village of Saint Mary’s and near Mountain Village, in addition to the Pitka’s Point met tower. Documented in Saint Mary’s Area Wind Power Report by V3 Energy, LLC, dated July 20, 2010, the wind resource measured at the nearby Saint Mary’s met tower site is less robust than that measured at Pitka’s Point, and appears to experience similar icing problems. Considering the inland location of Saint Mary’s/Pitka’s Point, the wind resource measure at the Pitka’s Point met tower site is highly unusual, and very favorable, with its combination of a high annual average wind speed, relatively low elevation, likely good geotechnical conditions, and proximity to existing roads and infrastructure. The Pitka’s Point wind resource is comprehensively described in Pitka’s Point, Alaska Wind Resource Report by V3 Energy, LLC, dated April 25, 2012 (Tab F). 4.2 Existing Energy System 4.2.1 Basic configuration of Existing Energy System Briefly discuss the basic configuration of the existing energy system. Include information about the number, size, age, efficiency, and type of generation. The existing diesel power plant in Mountain Village consists of four generators: a 350 kW Cat 3412, a 505 kW Cat 3456, a 601 kW Cat 3412, and a 756 kW MTU 12V2000. These generators were installed in 1984, 2005, 1982, and 2003 respectively. Aggregate generator efficiency in Mountain Village in 2011 was 14.57 kWh/gal. The peak load in 2011 was 542 kW (in November) with an average load of 324 kW. 4.2.2 Existing Energy Resources Used Briefly discuss your understanding of the existing energy resources. Include a brief discussion of any impact the project may have on existing energy infrastructure and resources. Mountain Village uses diesel fuel for electrical power generation, heating oil for boiler (thermal) and home heating (with limited wood burning), thermal heat recovery from the diesel engines at the power plant, and diesel and gasoline fuel for transportation needs. According to the AVEC’s generation data, 196,747 gallons of diesel fuel were consumed to generate 2,838,966 kWh (total) and 2,690,201 kWh (sold). The anticipated effects of this project are less usage of diesel fuel for electrical power Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 11 of 25 7/3//2012 generation, and less use of heating fuel for boiler operations due to injection of excess wind power to the thermal heat recovery loop. This would decrease generator operations and maintenance costs, enabling generators to last longer and need fewer overhauls. Another proposed Round 6 project would add one EWT wind turbine to the electrical power system. The anticipated effects are reduced consumption of diesel fuel for electrical power generation and less usage of heating fuel for boiler operations (due to injection of excess wind power to the thermal heat recovery loop in St. Mary’s). 4.2.3 Existing Energy Market Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy customers. Mountain Village is located on the north bank of the Yukon River, about 20 miles west of St. Mary's on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. The Yukon River is ice-free from June through October. The climate is both maritime and continental. Temperatures range from -44 to 83 °F. Annual precipitation averages 16 inches, with 60 inches of snowfall. Currently, Mountain Village has a stand-alone electric power system with no intertie or connection beyond the village itself. The electricity consumption (sold) in Mountain Village in 2011 was 2,690,201 kWh. The load is highest during the winter months, when the community experiences heavy winds and extended periods of darkness. The addition of the wind turbines to the electric generation system could reduce the amount of diesel fuel used for power generation. An isolated village, Mountain Village is only accessible by airplane, barge, snowmachine or small boat, and so relies mainly on air transportation, especially for delivery of medical goods and the transport of sick or injured individuals, or mothers nearing childbirth. Reliable electric service is essential to maintaining vital navigation aids for the safe operation of aircraft; runway lights, automated weather observation stations, VASI lights, DMEs and VORs (aircraft navigation systems) are all powered by electricity. This project will increase efficiencies and stabilize the costs of the energy system in Mountain Village. Emergency medical service is provided in the health clinic by a health aide. Medical problems and emergencies must be relayed by telephone or by some other communication means for outside assistance. Tele-medicine is rapidly growing in rural Alaska as a means of regular and emergency care, as winter conditions sometime impede air transport and accessibility. Reliable telephone service and tele-medicine require reliable and affordable electric service. Like all of Alaska, Mountain Village is subject to long periods of darkness in the winter. Reliable and affordable electric service is essential for the operation of home lighting, streetlights, and security lighting. Residents rely on subsistence resources including salmon, moose, bear, and waterfowl. Subsistence food is gathered and harvested and stored in Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 12 of 25 7/3//2012 refrigerators and freezers. Refrigeration is essential for the extended storage of perishable foodstuffs, and reliable electric service is essential for proper freeze storage of food. The construction of the proposed project would augment and improve the existing power generation system by reducing maintenance and operations costs. 4.3 Proposed System Include information necessary to describe the system you are intending to develop and address potential system design, land ownership, permits, and environmental issues. 4.3.1 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  Basic integration concept  Delivery methods AVEC is requesting funding to design and permit an intertie between Mountain Village and St. Mary’s. The intertie would enable the community to take advantage of a wind project planned in St. Mary’s (see separate Round 6 application). The intertie will be designed with 14 miles of new connection along the existing gravel road that connects the two communities, and will require an upgrade from single-phase to three-phase of the existing 8 miles. The intertie would run between the airports in both communities. The conceptual design work indicates the intertie will not require any water crossings, can be constructed in summer months and will need pole spacing of 125 feet. Preliminary design of the intertie is included in Tab F. Optimum installed capacity/Anticipated annual generation. The intertie would not have an installed capacity of annual generation; however, the intertie would connect to a 900 kW 52- 900 EWT installed near Pitka’s Point. The EWT turbine, 80% wind turbine availability (6.75 m/s mean wind speed) would produce 2,483,000 kWh annually once connected to Mountain Village. Anticipated barriers. No barriers to successful construction of the intertie are expected. The project will be designed and modeled using knowledge of previous successful intertie projects. 4.3.2 Land Ownership 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. Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 13 of 25 7/3//2012 AVEC has held a number of meetings regarding the project with community members and representatives from the Cities, villages, and the Native Corporations of Mountain Village and St. Mary’s. Land owners (corporations) have been provided draft zone easements and have meetings scheduled in September 2012 to review and approve them. Copies of the unsigned zone easements are included under Tab F. 4.3.3 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 discussion of potential barriers It is likely that the following permits would be needed to construct the intertie:  FAA Determination of No Hazard to Air Traffic  Section 404 Permit (Wetlands Permit) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers  Consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service  Consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer . Once funding is approved, AVEC will prepare a USACE Individual Permit application and conduct required consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for construction. The permit would be expected within 4 month of submitting the application. No work will be conducted prior to obtaining required permits or authorizations. There are no barriers identified for the successful permitting of this proj ect. 4.3.4 Environmental Address 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 discuss other potential barriers Threatened or Endangered species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would be consulted to ensure that the construction of the intertie would have no harmful impact on threatened or endangered species. Construction would be timed to avoid impacts to migratory birds in compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 14 of 25 7/3//2012 Habitat issues. During permitting, the project team would work with agencies to ensure that the project would not impact any State refuges, sanctuaries or critical habitat areas, federal refuges or wilderness areas, or national parks. Wetlands and other protected areas. There may be designated wetlands in the area. A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ wetlands permit would be needed. Archaeological and historical resources. Compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act with the State Historic Preservation Officer would be conducted prior to construction of the intertie. Land development constraints. AVEC will have site control. Aviation considerations. A Federal Aviation Administration Determination of No Hazard to Air Traffic would be sought. Visual, aesthetics impacts. Since the intertie would be constructed between the communities, it is likely that there would be very little concern for visual or aesthetic impacts. AVEC would conduct community meetings to discuss visual impacts and how they could be minimized, in the unlikely event that visual issues arise. 4.4 Proposed New System Costs and Projected Revenues (Total Estimated Costs and Projected Revenues) The level of cost information provided will vary according to the phase of funding requested and any previous work the applicant may have done on the project. Applicants must reference the source of their cost data. For example: Applicants records or analysis, industry standards, consultant or manufacturer’s estimates. 4.4.1 Project Development Cost Provide detailed project cost information based on your current knowledge and understanding of the project. Cost information should include the following:  Total anticipated project cost, and cost for this phase  Requested grant funding  Applicant matching funds – loans, capital contributions, in-kind  Identification of other funding sources  Projected capital cost of proposed renewable energy system  Projected development cost of proposed renewable energy system Total anticipated project cost, and cost for this phase/requested grant funding/matching funds. This application is for the final design and permitting for 14 miles of new intertie along the existing gravel road that connects St. Mary’s and Mountain Village , and for an upgrade from single-phase to three-phase of the existing 8 miles. AVEC is seeking $332,500 from this Grant Program to design and permit the project. AVEC will contribute $17,500 cash as its match. Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 15 of 25 7/3//2012 Identification of other funding sources. AVEC expects the final construction and commissioning phase of the project would cost $7,449,000. It is possible that the funding for this work would come from AEA’s Renewable Energy Fund program, USDA Rural Utility Service Program, or another grant program, supplemented by AVEC matching funds. Projected capital cost of proposed renewable energy system/projected development cost of proposed renewable energy system. The final phase of this project would be Construction and Commissioning. AVEC estimates this phase could cost $7,449,000. AVEC would provide a 10% cash match for the construction project. 4.4.2 Project Operating and Maintenance Costs Include anticipated O&M costs for new facilities constructed and how these would be funded by the applicant. (Note: Operational costs are not eligible for grant funds however grantees are required to meet ongoing reporting requirements for the purpose of reporting impacts of projects on the communities they serve.) Intertie operating and maintenance costs are expected to be approximately $20,000/yea r. The costs of operations and maintenance would be funded through ongoing energy sales to the AVEC’s customers (member owners) in the villages. 4.4.3 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 AVEC, the existing electric utility serving Mountain Village and St. Mary’s/Pitka’s Poin t, is a member-owned cooperative electric utility and typically owns and maintains the generation, fuel storage, and distribution facilities in the villages it serves. No power purchase or sale would be needed for this project. Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s). Energy produced from the completed wind project and carried to Mountain Village through the proposed intertie would be sold to AVEC’s existing customer (member) base in the community of Mountain Village. Potential power purchase/sales price/Proposed rate of return from grant-funded project. The sales price for the wind-generated electricity would be determined by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska as is done in all AVEC villages. The delivered cost of energy would be reduced as much as possible for customers within Mountain Village under current regulations. Currently, of AVEC’s 55 villages, those with wind power systems experience the lowest electricity cost within the utility. Similar energy cost reductions are expected upon project completion, as proposed in this application. Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 16 of 25 7/3//2012 The intertie project has an expected payback of: 25.8 years (assuming a 50-year project life). See Tab F. 4.4.4 Project Cost Worksheet Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered in evaluating the project. Please fill out the form provided below Renewable Energy Source The Applicant should demonstrate that the renewable energy resource is available on a sustainable basis. Annual average resource availability. St.Mary’s/Pitka’s Point site; accessible via proposed intertie: Class 6 (outstanding); mean annual speed 7.63 m/s at 38 m; Weibull k=1.94; Weibull c=8.64 m/s; mean annual power density=559 W/m^2; classifies as IEC Class II-c site Unit depends on project type (e.g. windspeed, hydropower output, biomasss fuel) 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 4 generators ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other 350 kW Cat; 505 kW Cat; 601 kW Cat; 756 kW MTU iii. Generator/boilers/other type Diesel generators iv. Age of generators/boilers/other 28 years; 7 years; 30 years; 9 years v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other Total efficiency 14.57 kW/gal b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank) i. Annual O&M cost for labor $56,774 (based on $0.02/kWh-labor and non-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] 2,838,699 kWh (2011 total) ii. Fuel usage Diesel [gal] 196,747 gallon 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 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 17 of 25 7/3//2012 iii. Peak Load 542 kW iv. Average Load 324 kW v. Minimum Load vi. Efficiency 14.57 kWh/gallon (AVEC 2011) 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 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] Intertie enables to connection to proposed 900 kW EWT 52-900 turbine at St. Mary’s/Pitka’s Point site b) Proposed annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable) i. Electricity [kWh] EWT 52-900 turbine at St. Mary’s/Pitka’s Point: 2,483,000 kWh/yr (80% availability) ii. Heat [MMBtu] c) Proposed annual fuel usage (fill in as applicable) i. Propane [gal or MMBtu] ii. Coal [tons or MMBtu] iii. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] iv. Other Project Cost a) Total capital cost of new system Intertie: $7,449,000 b) Development cost Intertie design and permitting: $350,000 c) Annual O&M cost of new system $20,000 d) Annual fuel cost $4.18/gal, Mountain Village (2011 AVEC); cost/benefit analysis based on projected fuel price average of $5.90/gal in St. Mary’s and $5.47/gal in Mountain Village over 50 year project period Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 18 of 25 7/3//2012 Project Benefits a) Amount of fuel displaced for i. Electricity Based on 1 EWT in St. Mary’s (Pitka’s Point site) serving both communities vs. 3 NW100s in each village: 52,202 gal/yr ii. Heat iii. Transportation b) Current price of displaced fuel $4.18/gallon (2011 Mountain Village, AVEC data) c) Other economic benefits d) Alaska public benefits Power Purchase/Sales Price a) Price for power purchase/sale n/a Project Analysis a) Basic Economic Analysis Project benefit/cost ratio B/C = 1.11 for 50 year project period (wind turbines and generators replaced every 20 years) Payback (years) 25.8 years, assuming a 50-year project life Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 19 of 25 7/3//2012 4.4.5 Proposed Biomass System Information Please address the following items, if know. (For Biomass Projects Only) n/a SECTION 5– PROJECT BENEFIT Explain the economic and public 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:  Potential annual fuel displacement (gallons and dollars) over the lifetime of the evaluated renewable energy project  Anticipated annual revenue (based on i.e. a Proposed Power Purchase Agreement price, RCA tariff, or cost based rate)  Potential additional annual incentives (i.e. tax credits)  Potential additional annual revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable energy subsidies or programs that might be available)  Discuss the non-economic public benefits to Alaskans over the lifetime of the project Potential Annual Fuel Displacement. Currently, diesel-fuel power generation is the only source of electricity in St. Mary’s and Mountain Village. In general, the cost of fuel is affected by two variables: the price of oil and the cost of delivery. The high cost of fuel transportation is the primary factor behind high fuel costs in these remote communities. However, another Round 6 Renewable Energy Grant Program application requests funding to build a wind energy system for the intertied communities of St. Mary’s and Pitka’s Point. This project will add Mountain Village, about 20 miles from St. Mary’s, to that planned wind system. Anticipated Annual Revenue. This project by itself would not produce revenue. Non-economic Public Benefits. In St. Mary’s and Mountain Village the average price for residential electricity for the calendar year 2011 was $0.5902 per kilowatt hour (kWh), which far exceeds the national benchmark of $0.264/kWh. The average annual residential cost of electricity per household in 2011 was $4,197.18. According to the 2010 Census, 23.5 % of Mountain Village residents had incomes below the poverty level. The median household income in Mountain Village was $47,604. The poorest residents in rural Alaska, including Mountain Village, pay almost half their household incomes for home energy costs, according to a study by the Institute of Social and Economic Research. Yet these households use less than half as much energy as those whose power comes from natural gas or hydro -electric sources. This project, as well as this Renewable Energy Program, is part of the solution to the crushing economics of rural Alaska. This project will increase efficiencies and stabilize the costs of the energy system in Mountain Village. Both Mountain Village and St. Mary’s are isolated villages, accessible only by airplane, Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 20 of 25 7/3//2012 barge, snowmachine or small boat, and so rely mainly on air transportation, especially for delivery of medical goods and the transport of sick or injured individuals, or mothers nearing childbirth. Reliable electric service is essential to maintaining vital navigation aids for the safe operation of aircraft; runway lights, automated weather observation stations, VASI lights, DMEs and VORs (aircraft navigation systems) are all powered by electricity. Emergency medical service is provided in the health clinic by a health aide. Medical problems and emergencies must be relayed by telephone or by some other communication means for outside assistance. Tele-medicine is rapidly growing in rural Alaska as a means of regular and emergency care. Reliable telephone service and tele-medicine require reliable and affordable electric service. In Mountain Village, water is obtained from wells and is treated. Community facilities--such as the school--and homes are connected to a piped water and sewer system. Reliable and affordable electric service is required for the continuous operation of the water and wastewater systems and to prevent freezing of the systems, which would cause extensive damage and interruptions in service. Like all of Alaska, Mountain Village is subject to long periods of winter darkness. Reliable and affordable electric service is essential for the operation of home lighting, streetlights, and security lighting. Outside lighting ensures safety, especially of children, in the many dark hours of the winter months. Poor efficiency is a problem that continues to plague small, remote villages that lack an economic structure to support utilities. In many communities across the country, small and large businesses -- and perhaps industrial facilities-- pay a larger share of utility costs than do residential users. In doing so, they help pay for the necessary upgrades and improvements. Some Alaskan communities have seafood processing plants or tourist facilities that pay a larger share of the utility’s costs. But many Alaskan villages, including these two, have only state and federal programs, and their own-- many times very poor -- households to rely on to operate and maintain what they have and, in rare cases, can build for the future. This project will encourage development of the three communities and will help stabilize the population levels by lowering the cost of electricity to consumers. The very high cost of electricity is particularly difficult for families, and a major hindrance for any economic development to occur in already impoverished communities. Stabilized energy costs would allow community entities, including the cities and Tribes to plan and budget for important economic, land use, recreation and community service, and environmental goals. SECTION 6– SUSTAINABILITY Discuss your plan for operating the completed project so that it will be sustainable. Include at a minimum: Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 21 of 25 7/3//2012  Proposed business structure(s) and concepts that may be considered.  How you propose to finance the maintenance and operations for the life of the project  Identification of operational issues that could arise.  A description of operational costs including on-going support for any back-up or existing systems that may be require to continue operation  Commitment to reporting the savings and benefits As a local utility that has been in operation since 1968, AVEC is completely able to finance, operate, and maintain this project for the design life. AVEC has capacity and experience to operate this project. AVEC has experience in designing and constructing, operating and maintaining energy systems throughout rural Alaska, including intertie projects. Business Plan Structures and Concepts which may be considered: The intertied systems would be incorporated into AVEC’s power plant operation. Local plant operators provide daily servicing. AVEC technicians provide periodic preventative or corrective maintenance and are supported by AVEC headquarters staff, purchasing, and warehousing. How O&M would be financed for the life of the project: The costs of operations and maintenance would be funded through ongoing energy sales to AVEC’s consumers (member owners) in the villages. Operational issues which could arise: AVEC currently operates 5 village-to-village interties and is familiar with maintaining interties in remote locations. No major operational issues are expected. Operating costs: The costs of operations and maintenance would be funded through ongoing energy sales to the villages. Commitment to reporting the savings and benefits: AVEC is fully committed to sharing the savings and benefits accrued from this project information with its shareholders, and sharing information regarding savings and benefits with AEA. SECTION 7 – READINESS & COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER GRANTS Discuss what you have done to prepare for this award and how quickly you intend to proceed with work once your grant is approved. Tell us what you may have already accomplished on the project to date and identify other grants that may have been previously awarded for this project and the degree you have been able to meet the requirements of previous grants. Design and permitting work provided under this grant award will be initiated immediately. Once funding is known to be secured, AVEC will prepare and sign contracts with selected contractors. Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 22 of 25 7/3//2012 Work to obtain site control and finalize the conceptual design is underway. With grant funding, AVEC installed met towers and completed wind studies between 2007 and 2009 at two locations between St. Mary’s and Pitka’s Point. AVEC also used their own funding to examine possible intertie routes to Mountain Village and Pilot Station. This final design component of the overall project is the next logical step in energy infrastructure in the area. SECTION 8– LOCAL SUPORT Discuss what local support or possible opposition there may be regarding your project. Include letters of support from the community that would benefit from this project. All community entities in St. Mary’s and Mountain Village are in full support of this project and look forward to energy cost savings. Please see the attached letters of support in Tab B. SECTION 9 – GRANT BUDGET Tell us how much you want in grant funds Include any investments to date and funding sources, how much is being requested in grant funds, and additional investments you will make as an applicant. AVEC plans to complete final design and permitting of an intertie between Mountain Village and St. Mary’s. This work would cost $350,000. AVEC requests $332,500 from AEA and will provide $17,500 as a cash contribution. A detail of the grant budget follows. AVEC, with Denali Commission funding, completed preliminary design of the intertie (Tab F). AVEC expects the final construction and commissioning phase of the project would cost $7,449,000. AVEC will seek outside funding for this project after it is designed and permitted. AVEC will likely provide a 10% cash match for construction of the project. Renewable Energy Fund Round 6 Grant Application St. Mary’s / Mountain Village Wind Energy Intertie Final Design AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 23 of 25 7/3//2012 Milestone or Task Anticipated Completion Date RE- Fund Grant Funds Grantee Matching Funds Source of Matching Funds: Cash/In- kind/Federal Grants/Other State Grants/Other TOTALS Project scoping and contractor solicitation for planning and design Aug 1, 2013 $4,750 $250 cash $5,000 Permit applications Sept 1, 2013 $19,000 $1,000 cash $20,000 Final environmental assessment and mitigation plans Feb 1, 2014 $14,250 $750 cash $15,000 Resolution of land use, right of way issues Feb 1, 2014 $38,000 $2,000 cash $40,000 Permit approvals Feb 1, 20014 $4,750 $250 cash $5,000 Final system design May 1, 2014 $190,000 $10,000 cash $200,000 Engineers’ cost estimate June 1, 2014 $42,750 $2,250 cash $45,000 Updated economic and financial analysis July 1, 2014 $9,500 $500 cash $10,000 Negotiated power sales agreements with approved rates n/a $0 $0 $0 Final business and operational plan July 1, 2014 $9,500 $500 cash $10,000 TOTALS $332,500 $17,500 $350,000 Budget Categories: Direct Labor & Benefits $57,000 $3,000 cash $60,000 Travel & Per Diem $14,250 $750 cash $15,000 Equipment $ - $ - $ - Materials & Supplies $ - $ - $ - Contractual Services $261,250 $13,750 cash $275,000 Construction Services $ - $ - $ - Other $ - $ - $ - TOTALS $332,500 $17,500 $350,000 Tab A Resumes Tab B Letters of Support St. Mary’s Native Corporation P.O. Box 149 * St. Mary’s, Alaska 99658 * Phone 907-438-2315 * Fax 907-438-2961 September 20, 2012 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Attn: Anna Sattler, Community Liaison 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, Alaska 99503 RE: St. Mary’s Native Corporation Zone Easements Dear Ms. Sattler: The zone easements, as written, would need modification and board approval. Would AVEC be willing to have a public notice and informational meeting to disseminate information about the project and zone easements? Most corporations meet on a quarterly basis. However, we do support AVEC in their efforts to provide alternative energy and a lowered cost for the benefit of our shareholder’s and our community. Sincerely, ST. MARY’S NATIVE CORPORATION Nancy Andrew, CEO File Tab D Governing Body Resolution Tab E Certification Tab F Additional Materials Anchorage, Alaska 995034831 Eagle Street5%#.'241,'%6$#5'/#2 )4#2*+% Saint Mary's to Mountain Village Project Title Analysis Title 1 Analysis Title 2 Cost Basis (Year)Recovered Heat Revenues (Pct of Savings)50% Cost Escalation (Percent) Non Fuel Fuel Escalation Diesel Generation 15 20 0% Years 1 - 5 Bulk Fuel Storage 30 40 0% Years 6 - 10 Wind 15 20 0% Year 11 and thereafter Recovered Heat 15 20 0% Interconnections 30 40 0% Discount Rate Locations: Load Center 1 Load Center 2 Load Center 3 Primary Ops Ctr Must be either Load Center 1 or Load Center 2 (Select from drop-down list) Include Grants in Econ Analysis Saint Mary's Mountain Village Test Location 3 Generating Fuel Price ($/gallon)$4.270 $3.960 $0.000 Heating Fuel Price ($/gallon)$4.270 $3.960 $0.000 Sales: Base Year Base Year Amount (kWh/year)3,083,325 2,690,210 0 Load Growth entered on "Power Stats-Without Intertie" sheet. Base Year Generation (kWh/year)3,220,283 2,838,966 - Losses (Pct of Generation)4.3%5.2%0.0% Existing Fuel Storage (gal)- - - Wind Turbine O&M 0.0469$ Diesel O&M 0.0200$ Saint Mary's to Mountain Village Mountain Village to Test Location 3 Interconnection Distrance (miles)20.0 16 miles new; 8 miles upgrade; 20 assumed Interconnection Cost $7,449,000 Cost per Mile $372,450 $0 Year Energized 2013 3000 Transmission Losses 2.0%2.0% Annual Operating Costs $20,000 Grant (Percent) Saint Mary's Mountain Village Test Location 3 Saint Mary's Mountain Village Test Location 3 Diesel Generation Fuel Efficiency (kWh gen/gallon)13.83 14.57 13.00 14.00 14.60 Note: Year for first interconnect must be before or same as second interconned 2013 Without Interconnection With Interconnection Depr Period Replacement Period No Mountain Village Test Location 3 Saint Mary's Saint Mary's 3.00% 2.00% 1.50% 1.00% Denali Commission Report St. Mary's to Mountain Village Subtitle 2 Future Grants 2013 2.00% Saint Mary's to Mountain Village Generating Upgrades Capital Cost $5,500,000 $5,500,000 $5,800,000 $750,000 Grant (Percent) Year of Capital Cost Expenditure 2014 2014 2013 2014 Annual Operating Costs $683,198 $690,979 $1,234,177 Bulk Fuel Upgades Capital Cost $4,605,600 $3,937,000 $7,182,000 Grant (Percent) Year of Capital Cost Expenditure 2013 2013 2013 Total Gallon after Upgrade Annual Fuel Usage (Maximum)186,978 152,482 0 287,413 0 0 Annual Operating Costs Wind Number of Turbines 3 3 1 Capital Cost/Turbine $1,480,000 $1,480,000 $6,153,991 Grant (Percent) Year of Capital Cost Expenditure 2013 2013 2013 Usable Energy per Turbine (kWh/year)273,333 250,000 2,483,950 80% availability Operating Costs ($/year)$38,458 $35,175 $116,497 Recovered Heat Capital Cost Grant (Percent) Year of Capital Cost Expenditure Heating Fuel Savings (gallons/year) With Wind Without Wind Annual Operating Costs Other Losses Denali Commission Report St. Mary's to Mountain Village Subtitle 2 30 year 0.00%3.00%B/C Without Intertie 170,470$ 113,647$ With Intertie 148,559$ 100,928$ 1.13 50 year 0.00%3.00%B/C Without Intertie 343,681$ 165,456$ With Intertie 310,069$ 149,406$ 1.11 20 year 0.00%3.00%B/C Without Intertie 97,136$ 77,415$ With Intertie 89,706$ 71,987$ 1.08 Net Present Value at Net Present Value at Economic Analysis (x $1,000) Economic Analysis (x $1,000) Net Present Value at Economic Analysis (x $1,000) December 23, 2009 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, Alaska 99503 !Attention:!Matt Metcalf !Subject:!Intertie Alignment Reconnaissance !!St Marys - Mountain Village - Pilot Station !!Reference: 4253.008 Duane Miller Associates (DMA), with representatives of STG, Inc. and Errico Electrical Engineering LLC, conducted a helicopter reconnaissance along the proposed powerline interties between St. Marys and Mountain Village and St. Marys and Pilot Station on October 9, 2009. The purpose of the work was to conduct an aerial reconnaissance of the proposed alignment(s) developed for AVEC between these villages. The proposed intertie alignments were developed from base maps, images, and aerial photography with limited ground truthing. The reconnaissance flights were conducted to observe the proposed intertie routes and to locate potential alternate routes, if feasible. Based on the reconnaissance level assessment, the inferred geology and recommendations for additional field assessment along the intertie route(s) are summarized below. The aerial reconnaissance was conducted with a Bell Jet Ranger helicopter from Yukon Helicopters of Bethel. At the the time of the flights, no snow cover was present and weather was generally light overcast with good visibility. Summary reconnaissance findings and conceptual-level geologic and geotechnical engineering considerations for the St. Marys to Mountain Village and the St. Marys to Pilot Station alignments are provided separately. All proposed alignments will require land status assessment, in particularly corporation lands and allotments. Determination of land ownership along the reconnaissance alignments was not conducted under this scope of services. St. Marys to Mountain Village Powerline Intertie Alignment The proposed St. Marys to Mountain Village alignment roughly follows the existing gravel roadway between the villages, Plate 1. The existing gravel accessway with additional tundra protection at required areas may allow for summer intertie construction. The existing roadway generally follows higher, better drained topography but crosses surface drainages, ponded wet areas, or other lower lying areas along the alignment. The powerline alignment may cross undisturbed areas to reduce length along the existing roadway curves. In general, one significant surface drainage crossing was noted along the existing roadway, as noted on Plate 1, along with other culvert and smaller surface drainage areas along the alignment. In addition, the roadway is north of the existing Mountain Village airstrip, which may pose an airspace restriction requirement for an overhead powerline. An alternative may be to route the powerline south of the airstrip through a lower topographic area. Existing site-specific geotechnical information was not available for the existing roadway. In general, the alignment should be suitable for a conventional pile supported powerline intertie. However, the general geology in St. Marys and Mountain Village indicates a variable thickness of icy silt and frozen organic soil is present over bedrock in the area. Bedrock is generally shallow and may limit pile embedment depths. A shallow pile embedment may result in frost jacking if a driven pile foundation is being considered for the powerline intertie. In general, driven pile embedments on the order of 40 feet are typically recommended in the Yukon Kuskokwim region to resist seasonal frost uplift. Lateral loads, particularly along powerline tangent points will need to be determined for guy anchor design to resist longer-term creep deformation in icy soil. Areas with the potential for deeper surface thaw, such as stream crossings and areas subject to deeper winter snow drifting, may be experiencing permafrost degradation. These areas may pose specific geotechnical engineering challenges. St Marys Area Powerline Intertie Reconnaissance!Duane Miller Associates December 23, 2009! Page 2!A member of the Golder Group of Companies Draft Letter for AVEC Review, December 23, 2009 St. Marys to Pilot Station Powerline Intertie Alignment AVEC developed a preliminary alignment for the St. Marys to Pilot Station intertie, denoted as the red lined alignment presented on Plate 2. Based on the overflight alignments, three general terrains were noted. First, the upland area around Pilot Station was observed. The upland areas are generally well-drained, hilly areas with established ATV or snowmachine trails. The upland area from Pilot Station is well defined with multiple ridges and accessways opportunities toward St. Marys. The AVEC alignment portion near Pilot Station is near the airstrip. An alternate route near the village water tank may reduce airspace conflicts. A similar upland area was identified near St. Marys along the north side of the Andreasfsky River. If feasible, an alternative alignment along the north side of the river would reduce the length within the wetter lowland area and appears to reduce both the span and number of river crossings. The general location of the alternative alignment is denoted as the dark blue and green flight lines presented on Plate 2. The geology of these upland areas is undefined but is expected to be icy soils overlying relatively shallow bedrock. As with the Mountain Village alignment, shallow bedrock, if present, may impact pile embedment depth required to control seasonal frost heave. The second terrain is a lowland area between the upland area near Pilot Station and St. Marys. From the upland area near Pilot Station toward St. Marys, the topography slopes to a lowland area with numerous lakes and drainages. The lowland area is expected to have thicker sediments over bedrock. These areas are also expected to have degrading permafrost and possibly thicker organic sequences, particularly along oxbows. Careful routing through the lowland area is recommended, with attempts to keep the intertie along higher ground as best possible. St Marys Area Powerline Intertie Reconnaissance!Duane Miller Associates December 23, 2009! Page 3!A member of the Golder Group of Companies Draft Letter for AVEC Review, December 23, 2009 The final terrain will be the river crossings. Depending on the final alignment, at least two larger river crossing will be required. These crossings will most likely be overhead. The alternate alignments noted on Plate 2 will increase the intertie distance. However, the alternative alignments result in a reduced overall cost and improved reliability if the intertie foundations are located along upland areas. In addition, if the powerline intertie can be founded on taller towers to permit longer spans, the lowland and river crossing area may be traversed with greater long-term reliability. The depth to bedrock and geotechnical conditions (soil and thermal states) along the lowland areas should be determined as part of the engineering evaluation. If larger towers are being considered for the river spans and the lowland areas, pile groups may be feasible. Site-specific geotechnical assessments should be considered at the tower sites, if taller structures are planned. If you have any questions on our findings or recommendations, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, Duane Miller Associates LLC A member of the Golder Group of Companies draft submittal, no signature Richard Mitchells, P.E. Attachments !Plate 1:!St. Marys to Mountain Village Powerline Intertie Alignment !Plate 2:!St. Marys to Pilot Station Powerline Intertie Alignment! St Marys Area Powerline Intertie Reconnaissance!Duane Miller Associates December 23, 2009! Page 4!A member of the Golder Group of Companies Draft Letter for AVEC Review, December 23, 2009 LOW ER YUKON ENERGY UPGRADES ZONE EAS EM ENT 30704.05 FJD GRA PHIC AUG 2012 EXHIBIT AFILE NAME:Project No: Drawn By : Figure: Date: Sc ale: SAINT M ARY'S T O P ILOT STAT ION INTE RT IE PROJECT !! !! 022N076W 022N075W 022N074W 023N076W 023N075W 023N074W 021N076W 021N075W 021N074W 024N074W024N075W024N076W 23(SMNC) 13(SMNC) 35(SMNC)36(SMNC) 26(SMNC) 11(SMNC) 25(SMNC) 24(SMNC) 14(SMNC) 12(SMNC) 1(SMNC) 1(PPNC)2(PPNC) 28(PPNC) 13(PPNC) 5(PPNC) 20(PPNC) 4(PPNC) 17(PPNC) 9(PPNC) 29(PPNC) 33(PPNC) 12(PPNC)8(PPNC) 19(PPNC) 18(PPNC) 7(PPNC) 6(PPNC) 16(PPNC) 21(PPNC) 20(PSI) 35(PSI) 28(PSI) 24(PSI) 12(PSI) 16(PSI) 32(PSI) 11(PSI) 25(PSI) 13(PSI) 2(PSI) 36(PSI) 4(PSI) 8(PSI) 33(PSI) 1(PSI) 8(PSI) 5(PSI) 21(PSI) 17(PSI) 29(PSI) 34(PSI) 18(PSI) 27(PSI) 7(PSI) 6(PSI) 31(PSI) 30(PSI) 19(PSI) 18(PSI) 7(PSI) 6(PSI) 34(NNC) 22(NNC) 32(NNC) 15(NNC) 28(NNC)26(NNC) 21(NNC) 27(NNC) 33(NNC) 20(NNC)21(NNC) 2(NNC) 17(NNC) 34(NNC) 10(NNC) 3(NNC) 1(NNC) 14(NNC)13(NNC) 16(NNC) 22(NNC) 26(NNC) 8(NNC) 3(NNC) 11(NNC) 36(NNC) 29(NNC)27(NNC) 34(NNC) 35(NNC) 28(NNC) 12(NNC) 27(NNC) 23(NNC) 31(NNC) 30(NNC) 19(NNC) 18(NNC) 7(NNC) 6(NNC) 22(NNC) 15(NNC) Saint Mar y's Pilot S tation ³ Miles0241 Nerkli km ute N ativ e C or po rat ion (N NC ) Pilot S tation In co rpo rat ed (P SI) Pitk a's Po int Na tive C orp or atio n (PP NC ) St M ary's N at ive C orp ora tio n (SM NC ) St. Mary’s Native Corporation INTERTIE ZONE EASEMENT Page 1 of 4 ST. MARY’S NATIVE CORPORATION ZONE EASEMENT The GRANTOR, ST. MARY’S NATIVE CORPORATION, (herein called the GRANTOR), whose address is P.O. Box 149, St. Mary’s, Alaska, 99658, for good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant to ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., an Alaskan non-profit electric cooperative membership corporation, whose address is 4831 Eagle Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99503, hereinafter called the GRANTEE, an easement and right-of-way in perpetuity for the purposes of constructing, reconstructing, maintaining, repairing, operating, improving, upgrading and updating above, beneath and on the surface of the below-described lands, electric transmission, distribution, and/or communication lines(s) and/or systems, including poles, towers, conductors, transformers, pads, pedestals and associated apparatus, and such other structures as the GRANTEE may now or shall from time to time deem necessary, in the following described parcel(s) of land situated in the Bethel Recording District, Fourth Judicial District, State of Alaska, along, under, through and across the entire parcel described as follows: Seward Meridian, Township 23 North, Range 76 West, Sections 1, 11, 12, 13, 14, 23, 24, 25, 26, 35 and 36. After construction and survey by GRANTEE, the easement will be fifty (50) feet on each side of the centerline of the facilities described above. GRANTEE shall provide a copy of the survey to GRANTOR, and GRANTEE will record a Record of Survey. Upon recording of the Record of Survey, the extent of this easement shall be reduced to the dimensions shown on the Record of Survey. GRANTEE’s rights shall include the right: 1. of ingress and egress to said lands as may be reasonably necessary for the purposes described above; 2. to cut, trim, excavate, remove, and control the growth of trees, shrubs, and other vegetation on, above, or adjoining said lands which, in the sole, good faith judgment of Grantee, might interfere with the proper functioning and maintenance of said line or system; and 3. to license, permit or otherwise agree to the exercise of these rights by any other authorized person or entity for electrical or communications purposes. St. Mary’s Native Corporation INTERTIE ZONE EASEMENT Page 2 of 4 Reserving unto the GRANTOR the right to use said property in any way and for any purpose not inconsistent with the rights hereby acquired; provided that GRANTEE shall have the right, as may be necessary, to enter upon said property for the purposes herein described, and provided that no building or buildings or other permanent structures shall be constructed or permitted to remain within the boundaries of said easement without written permission of GRANTEE, its successors or assigns. GRANTOR agrees that all facilities, including any main service entrance equipment, installed on the above described lands at the GRANTEE’s expense shall remain the property of the GRANTEE, removable at the option of the GRANTEE, upon termination of service to or on said lands. This easement shall be a covenant running with the land and shall be binding on the GRANTOR, heirs, executors, administrators and assigns forever. If the GRANTOR requires lands within this zone easement in the future, this easement may be amended contingent on agreement between the GRANTEE and GRANTOR. If the intertie is not constructed within 15 years from the date of this grant, the zone easement will automatically terminate. St. Mary’s Native Corporation INTERTIE ZONE EASEMENT Page 3 of 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTOR has caused this Easement Agreement to be executed this ____________ day of ____________________, 2012. Attachment: Exhibit A GRANTOR: ST. MARY’S NATIVE CORPORATION By: Elsie Boudreau Its: President ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF ALASKA ) ) ss. ______________ JUDICIAL DISTRICT ) THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on the day of , 2012, before me, the undersigned Notary Public for the State of Alaska, duly commissioned and sworn as such, personally came ______________________, for and on behalf of ST. MARY’S NATIVE CORPORATION and acknowledged that this Easement was signed and sealed on behalf of ST. MARY’S NATIVE CORPORATION by proper authority delegated and vested in himself/herself, and acknowledged further said instrument to be the free act and deed of ST. MARY’S NATIVE CORPORATION. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal the day and year first above written. (place seal here) Notary Public for Alaska My Commission expires: St. Mary’s Native Corporation INTERTIE ZONE EASEMENT Page 4 of 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTEE has caused this Easement Agreement to be executed this day of _____________, 2012. GRANTEE: ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. By: ______________________________________ Meera Kohler Its: President & CEO ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF ALASKA ) ) ss. THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT ) THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on the day of , 2012, before me, the undersigned Notary Public for the State of Alaska, duly commissioned and sworn as such, personally came Meera Kohler, President & CEO of ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. and acknowledged that this Easement Agreement was signed and sealed on behalf of ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. by proper authority delegated and vested in herself, and acknowledged further said instrument to be the free act and deed of ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal the day and year first above written. Notary Public in and for the State of Alaska My Commission Expires: After recording in the Bethel Recording District, please return to: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, AK 99503 Pitka’s Point Native Corporation INTERTIE ZONE EASEMENT Page 1 of 4 PITKA’S POINT NATIVE CORPORATION ZONE EASEMENT The GRANTOR, PITKA’S POINT NATIVE CORPORATION, (herein called the GRANTOR), whose address is P.O. Box 289, St. Mary’s, Alaska, 99658, for good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant to ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., an Alaskan non-profit electric cooperative membership corporation, whose address is 4831 Eagle Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99503, hereinafter called the GRANTEE, an easement and right-of-way in perpetuity for the purposes of constructing, reconstructing, maintaining, repairing, operating, improving, upgrading and updating above, beneath and on the surface of the below-described lands, electric transmission, distribution, and/or communication lines(s) and/or systems, including poles, towers, conductors, transformers, pads, pedestals and associated apparatus, and such other structures as the GRANTEE may now or shall from time to time deem necessary, in the following described parcel(s) of land situated in the Bethel Recording District, Fourth Judicial District, State of Alaska, along, under, through and across the entire parcel described as follows: Seward Meridian, Township 22 North, Range 75 West, Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 28, 29 and 33, and Seward Meridian, Township 22 North, Range 76 West, Sections 1, 2, 12 and 13. After construction and survey by GRANTEE, the easement will be fifty (50) feet on each side of the centerline of the facilities described above. GRANTEE shall provide a copy of the survey to GRANTOR, and GRANTEE will record a Record of Survey. Upon recording of the Record of Survey, the extent of this easement shall be reduced to the dimensions shown on the Record of Survey. GRANTEE’s rights shall include the right: 1. of ingress and egress to said lands as may be reasonably necessary for the purposes described above; 2. to cut, trim, excavate, remove, and control the growth of trees, shrubs, and other vegetation on, above, or adjoining said lands which, in the sole, good faith judgment of Grantee, might interfere with the proper functioning and maintenance of said line or system; and 3. to license, permit or otherwise agree to the exercise of these rights by any other Pitka’s Point Native Corporation INTERTIE ZONE EASEMENT Page 2 of 4 authorized person or entity for electrical or communications purposes. Reserving unto the GRANTOR the right to use said property in any way and for any purpose not inconsistent with the rights hereby acquired; provided that GRANTEE shall have the right, as may be necessary, to enter upon said property for the purposes herein described, and provided that no building or buildings or other permanent structures shall be constructed or permitted to remain within the boundaries of said easement without written permission of GRANTEE, its successors or assigns. GRANTOR agrees that all facilities, including any main service entrance equipment, installed on the above described lands at the GRANTEE’s expense shall remain the property of the GRANTEE, removable at the option of the GRANTEE, upon termination of service to or on said lands. This easement shall be a covenant running with the land and shall be binding on the GRANTOR, heirs, executors, administrators and assigns forever. If the GRANTOR requires lands within this zone easement in the future, this easement may be amended contingent on agreement between the GRANTEE and GRANTOR. If the intertie is not constructed within 15 years from the date of this grant, the zone easement will automatically terminate. Pitka’s Point Native Corporation INTERTIE ZONE EASEMENT Page 3 of 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTOR has caused this Easement Agreement to be executed this ____________ day of ____________________, 2012. Attachment: Exhibit A GRANTOR: PITKA’S POINT NATIVE CORPORATION By: Anna Tinker Its: President ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF ALASKA ) ) ss. ______________ JUDICIAL DISTRICT ) THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on the day of , 2012, before me, the undersigned Notary Public for the State of Alaska, duly commissioned and sworn as such, personally came ______________________, for and on behalf of PITKA’S POINT NATIVE CORPORATION and acknowledged that this Easement was signed and sealed on behalf of PITKA’S POINT NATIVE CORPORATION by proper authority delegated and vested in himself/herself, and acknowledged further said instrument to be the free act and deed of PITKA’S POINT NATIVE CORPORATION. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal the day and year first above written. (place seal here) Notary Public for Alaska My Commission expires: Pitka’s Point Native Corporation INTERTIE ZONE EASEMENT Page 4 of 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTEE has caused this Easement Agreement to be executed this day of _____________, 2012. GRANTEE: ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. By: ______________________________________ Meera Kohler Its: President & CEO ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF ALASKA ) ) ss. THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT ) THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on the day of , 2012, before me, the undersigned Notary Public for the State of Alaska, duly commissioned and sworn as such, personally came Meera Kohler, President & CEO of ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. and acknowledged that this Easement Agreement was signed and sealed on behalf of ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. by proper authority delegated and vested in herself, and acknowledged further said instrument to be the free act and deed of ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal the day and year first above written. Notary Public in and for the State of Alaska My Commission Expires: After recording in the Bethel Recording District, please return to: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, AK 99503 Nerklikmute Native Corporation INTERTIE ZONE EASEMENT Page 1 of 4 NERKLIKMUTE NATIVE CORPORATION ZONE EASEMENT The GRANTOR, NERKLIKMUTE NATIVE CORPORATION, (herein called the GRANTOR), whose address is P.O. Box 87, St. Mary’s, Alaska, 99658, for good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant to ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., an Alaskan non-profit electric cooperative membership corporation, whose address is 4831 Eagle Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99503, hereinafter called the GRANTEE, an easement and right-of-way in perpetuity for the purposes of constructing, reconstructing, maintaining, repairing, operating, improving, upgrading and updating above, beneath and on the surface of the below-described lands, electric transmission, distribution, and/or communication lines(s) and/or systems, including poles, towers, conductors, transformers, pads, pedestals and associated apparatus, and such other structures as the GRANTEE may now or shall from time to time deem necessary, in the following described parcel(s) of land situated in the Bethel Recording District, Fourth Judicial District, State of Alaska, along, under, through and across the entire parcel described as follows: Seward Meridian, Township 21 North, Range 75 West, Section 3, and Seward Meridian, Township 22 North, Range 75 West, Section 1, 2, 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 26, 27 and 34, and Seward Meridian, Township 23 North, Range 75 West, Sections 6, 7, 8, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 and 36, and Seward Meridian, Township 23 North, Range 76 West, Sections 15, 21, 22, 27, 28 and 34. After construction and survey by GRANTEE, the easement will be fifty (50) feet on each side of the centerline of the facilities described above. GRANTEE shall provide a copy of the survey to GRANTOR, and GRANTEE will record a Record of Survey. Upon recording of the Record of Survey, the extent of this easement shall be reduced to the dimensions shown on the Record of Survey. GRANTEE’s rights shall include the right: 1. of ingress and egress to said lands as may be reasonably necessary for the purposes described above; 2. to cut, trim, excavate, remove, and control the growth of trees, shrubs, and other vegetation on, above, or adjoining said lands which, in the sole, good faith Nerklikmute Native Corporation INTERTIE ZONE EASEMENT Page 2 of 4 judgment of Grantee, might interfere with the proper functioning and maintenance of said line or system; and 3. to license, permit or otherwise agree to the exercise of these rights by any other authorized person or entity for electrical or communications purposes. Reserving unto the GRANTOR the right to use said property in any way and for any purpose not inconsistent with the rights hereby acquired; provided that GRANTEE shall have the right, as may be necessary, to enter upon said property for the purposes herein described, and provided that no building or buildings or other permanent structures shall be constructed or permitted to remain within the boundaries of said easement without written permission of GRANTEE, its successors or assigns. GRANTOR agrees that all facilities, including any main service entrance equipment, installed on the above described lands at the GRANTEE’s expense shall remain the property of the GRANTEE, removable at the option of the GRANTEE, upon termination of service to or on said lands. This easement shall be a covenant running with the land and shall be binding on the GRANTOR, heirs, executors, administrators and assigns forever. If the GRANTOR requires lands within this zone easement in the future, this easement may be amended contingent on agreement between the GRANTEE and GRANTOR. If the intertie is not constructed within 15 years from the date of this grant, the zone easement will automatically terminate. Nerklikmute Native Corporation INTERTIE ZONE EASEMENT Page 3 of 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTOR has caused this Easement Agreement to be executed this ____________ day of ____________________, 2012. Attachment: Exhibit A GRANTOR: NERKLIKMUTE NATIVE CORPORATION By: William Alstrom Its: President ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF ALASKA ) ) ss. ______________ JUDICIAL DISTRICT ) THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on the day of , 2012, before me, the undersigned Notary Public for the State of Alaska, duly commissioned and sworn as such, personally came ______________________, for and on behalf of NERKLIKMUTE NATIVE CORPORATION and acknowledged that this Easement was signed and sealed on behalf of NERKLIKMUTE NATIVE CORPORATION by proper authority delegated and vested in himself/herself, and acknowledged further said instrument to be the free act and deed of NERKLIKMUTE NATIVE CORPORATION. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal the day and yea r first above written. (place seal here) Notary Public for Alaska My Commission expires: Nerklikmute Native Corporation INTERTIE ZONE EASEMENT Page 4 of 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTEE has caused this Easement Agreement to be executed this day of _____________, 2012. GRANTEE: ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. By: ______________________________________ Meera Kohler Its: President & CEO ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF ALASKA ) ) ss. THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT ) THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on the day of , 2012, before me, the undersigned Notary Public for the State of Alaska, duly commissioned and sworn as such, personally came Meera Kohler, President & CEO of ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. and acknowledged that this Easement Agreement was signed and sealed on behalf of ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. by proper authority delegated and vested in herself, and acknowledged further said instrument to be the free act and deed of ALASKA VILLAGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal the day and year first above written. Notary Public in and for the State of Alaska My Commission Expires: After recording in the Bethel Recording District, please return to: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, AK 99503