HomeMy WebLinkAboutKotlik Rnd 6 Grant App FINALRenewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA 13-006 Application Page 1 of 26 September 2012
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. If no please describe the nature of
the project and who will be the primary beneficiaries.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 2 of 26 September 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)
Kotlik Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project
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.
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.
Kotlik (population 601) is located on the east bank of the Kotlik Slough, 35 miles northeast of
Emmonak in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. It lies 165 air miles northwest of Bethel and 460 miles
from Anchorage. It lies at approximately 63.034170 North Latitude and -163.553330 West
Longitude. (Sec. 25, T028S, R026W, Kateel River Meridian.)
2.2.2 Community benefiting – Name(s) of the community or communities that will be the
beneficiaries of the project.
This project will benefit the community of Kotlik, Alaska.
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
Other (Describe)
2.3.2 Proposed Grant Funded Phase(s) for this Request (Check all that apply)
Pre-Construction Construction
Reconnaissance Design and Permitting
X Feasibility Construction and Commissioning
X Conceptual Design
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 3 of 26 September 2012
2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Provide a brief one paragraph description of your proposed project.
AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechni cal work to
determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Kotlik. The work will involve obtaining a
letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower and
geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location,
studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to
determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be
created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation.
Permits and site control will be obtained for the conceptual design of this project.
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.)
The primary financial benefit from this project would be to determine whether the wind
resources are suitable to provide power to the community and to prepare a conceptual design
of a wind facility.
Assuming the installation of a 300 kilowatt (kW) capacity system, it could produce 630,720
kilowatt hours (kWh) annually. The possible displacement of diesel fuel used for village power
generation in Kotlik could be 47,351 gallons per year. Using AVEC’s 2011 average cost of fuel
($4.20 per gallon) this project could save $198,874 during the first year of operation. Over the
life of the project, the estimated savings would be $3,977,484.
The average annual price for residential electricity was $0.59 per kilowatt hour (kWh) in 2011.
This far exceeds the national benchmark of $0.264/kWh. The residents of Kotlik would benefit
from this project as it would mitigate the volatile energy costs found in rural Alaska.
The primary source of income for the majority of Kotlik is from commercial fishing for herring
and salmon. All fish processing is currently done in other communities. Local infrastructure
offers limited jobs at the Kotlik School, the Kotlik City and Utilities offices, the Tank Farm, the
Village Corporation office, health clinic, HeadStart, tribal councils, the U.S. Postal Service, and
the two stores located in Kotlik. Subsistence living combined with job scarcity is reflected in the
high unemployment rate, 34.6%, and low median household income of $33,750.
The Kotlik Community Development Planning Board has identified many critical and long term
needs of the community. Many community-use buildings are old and heating them is
inefficient. The high cost of electricity is a constraint to fulfilling the needs of m aintenance,
repair and development within the community. Stabilizing the rising costs of energy production
would ease the burden felt by the residents and allow for progress in achievement of
community goals.
Sources: Kotlik Community Development Plan, Alaska Community Database
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 4 of 26 September 2012
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.
The total project cost for the project is $150,000 of which $142,500 is requested in grant funds
from AEA. The remaining $7,500 (5%) would be matched in cash by AVEC.
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. $142,500
2.7.2 Cash match to be provided $ 7,500
2.7.3 In-kind match to be provided $
2.7.4 Other grant applications not yet approved $
2.7.5 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.7.1 through 2.7.3) $150,000
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)
$3,060,000
2.7.7 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings) $198,874 (first year savings)
$3,977,484 (project life)
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.)
$ to be determined
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 5 of 26 September 2012
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 would provide overall project management and oversight. AVEC is the electric utility
serving Kotlik. To further support the AVEC team in project delivery, wind resource,
engineering, and environmental consultants would be selected.
Brent Petrie, Manager, Community Development and Key Accounts, would lead the project
management team consisting of AVEC staff, consultants, and contractors. He has worked for
AVEC since 1998, where he manages the development of alternatives to diesel generation for
AVEC such as using wind, hydropower, and heat recovery. He also manages relationships with
AVEC’s largest customers and is the project manager for AVEC’s many construction projects as
an energy partner of the federally funded Denali Commission.
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 Power Supply Task force 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 attached.
Also involved with the project management and grant administration is:
Meera Kohler, the President and CEO of AVEC. Meera 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
the ultimate grant and project responsibilities.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 6 of 26 September 2012
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:
Authorization to Proceed: August 1, 2013
Obtain Site Control/Right of Entry/Permits: September 2013
Ship Met Tower: September 2013
Erect Met Tower: September 2013
Complete Monitor Met Tower Data: October 2013-September 2014
Geotech Field Work: October 2013
Geotech Report: December 2013
Dismantle Met Tower: September 2014
Wind Resource Report: October 2014
Conceptual Design and Cost Estimate: November 2014
The schedule organized by AEA milestone is as follows:
Milestones Tasks Start Date
End
Date
1. Project scoping and
contractor solicitation
AVEC would select contractor(s) for the
wind feasibility, geotechnical analysis,
conceptual design, and permitting
immediately following AEA’s authorization
to proceed.
August 1,
2013
August 15,
2013
2. Detailed energy resource
analysis
To initiate the Wind Resource Analysis
before winter, AVEC would purchase or
refurbish (as necessary), ship, and erect the
met tower in September 2013. AVEC
would immediately seek approvals from
permitting agencies, starting the process
before the grant is awarded to ensure that
the met tower can be installed in the late
fall. The earlier the met tower is collecting
data, the earlier AVEC would have the wind
resource data to ascertain the suitability of
use of this renewable resource. Monitoring
of the met tower would continue until
September 2014, when the met tower
would be dismantled. The wind resource
report would be drafted by the end of
October 2014.
September
15, 2013
October
31, 2014
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 7 of 26 September 2012
3. Identification and
resolution of land issues
AVEC would work with the Kotlik Yupik
Corporation to obtain a letter of non-
objection for the placement of the met
tower and geotechnical work, prior to the
work. AVEC would initiate negotiations of
permanent site control to place turbines, if
feasible.
September
1, 2013
June 1,
2014
4. Detailed analysis of
current cost of energy
and future market
AVEC would analyze the existing and future
energy costs and markets in Kotlik. The
information would be based on AVEC
records and community plans. A
community meeting would be held to
determine future energy markets.
Information regarding energy markets
would be incorporated into the CDR.
February 1,
2014
March 30,
2014
5. Detailed economic and
financial analyses
An economic and financial analysis, which
examines potential final design and
construction costs, operating and
maintenance costs, user rates, and other
funding mechanisms, would be developed
and included in the CDR.
June 1,
2014
August 30,
2014
6. Conceptual business and
operations plan
Draft business and operational plans would
be developed working with the City of
Kotlik and the Kotlik Yupik Corporation. The
conceptual plan would include draft
recovered heat agreements, if feasible.
June 1,
2014
October
31, 2014
7. Conceptual design and
costs estimate
Various wind turbines would be examined
to determine which would be best suited to
fit the lower energy demand and single-
phase electric system in Kotlik. A
reconnaissance level geotechnical study
would be completed. A conceptual design
and cost estimate would be prepared using
information gathered from the wind study
and geotechnical fieldwork.
September
1, 2014
November
1, 2014
8. Permitting and
environmental analysis
Research would be completed to
determine needed environmental permits
for the design and construction phases of
the project.
September
15, 2014
December
15, 2014
9. Final report and
recommendations
All of the memoranda and reports written
for the project would be combined in a
final report and submitted to AEA. The Final
December
31, 2014
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 8 of 26 September 2012
CDR would include the following
information:
Wind Resource
Site Control
Existing and Future Energy Costs
and Markets
Economic and Financial Analysis
Conceptual Business and
Operations Plan
Geotechnical Report
Conceptual Design Analysis and
Cost Estimate, including a turbines
analysis
Environmental Permits
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. Describ e 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 would use a project management approach that has been used to successfully design and
construct wind turbines throughout rural Alaska: a team of AVEC staff and external consultants.
AVEC staff and their role on this project includes:
Meera Kohler, President and Chief Executive Officer, would act as Project Executive and
will maintain ultimate authority programmatically and financially.
Brent Petrie, Manager, Community Development and Key Accounts, would lead the
project management team consisting of AVEC staff, consulta nts, and contractors.
Together with his group, Brent would provide coordination of the installation of the met
tower, geotechnical work, conceptual design, and permitting. 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 implement the project. He will also be responsible
for reporting directly to AEA on the status of the project.
Bill Stamm, Manager of Engineering, would provide technical assistance and
information on the existing power system and possible issues and project study needs.
Debbie Bullock, Manager of Administrative Services, would provide support in
accounting, payables, financial reporting, and capitalization of assets in accordance with
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 9 of 26 September 2012
AEA guidelines.
Anna Sattler, Community Liaison, would communicate directly with Kotlik residents to
ensure that the community is informed.
An AVEC project manager would lead this project. It is likely that one of AVEC’s in-house
contractors would lead the work. The project manager would be responsible for:
Obtaining site control/access and permits for the installation of the met tower and
geotechnical work
Selecting, coordinating, and managing the wind resource, geotechnical, engineering,
and permitting consultants and ensuring that their deliverables are on time and within
budget
Working with AVEC’s Community Liaison to develop the Existing and Future Energy
Costs and Markets Memorandum and the Conceptual Business and Operating Plan
Working to develop the Economic and Financial Analysis
Contractors for this project would include:
Wind Resource Consultant. AVEC currently has an on-call contract with V3 Energy, LLC
for wind resource studies and reports. It is likely that V3 would work on this project.
Doug Vaught’s (V3’s owner) resume is attached.V3 would:
Consult on the installation, operation and maintenance of the tower
Draft the wind resource report
Geotechnical consultant. AVEC would select and employ an experienced geotechnical
consultant who would:
Conduct a reconnaissance level geotechnical and natural hazards field study and
report of the project area
Engineering consultant. AVEC would select and employ an engineering consultant who
would:
Provide conceptual design and engineering specifications for the wind turbines
Environmental Consultant. AVEC currently has an on-call contract with Solstice Alaska
Consulting, Inc. for environmental permitting. It is likely that Solstice would work on this
project. Robin Reich’s (Solstice’s president) resume is attached. Solstice would:
Consult with agencies
Develop and submit permit applications for the met tower
Document permit needs for future wind project
Selection Process for Contractors: The geotechnical and engineering consultant selection
would be based upon technical competencies, past performance, written proposal quality, cost,
and general consensus from an internal AVEC technical steering committee. The selection of
the consultant would occur in strict conformity with AVEC’s procurement policies, and
conformance with OMB circulars.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 10 of 26 September 2012
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 would require that monthly written progress reports be provided with each invoice
submitted from contractors. The progress reports would include a summary of tasks completed,
issues or problems experienced, upcoming tasks, and contractor’s needs from AVEC. Project
progress reports would be collected, combined, and supplemented as necessary and forwarded
as one report to the AEA project manager each quarter.
Semi-annual face-to-face meetings would occur between AVEC and AEA to discuss the status of
all wind projects funded through the AEA Renewable Energy Grants program. Individual project
meetings would 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.
Site Control/Access. Sometimes site control for the placement of met towers or turbines is
difficult; however, because the community supports the project (letters of support have been
received from all community entities), it is not expected that gaining site control would be
difficult.
Weather. Weather could delay geotechnical fieldwork and/or the erection of the met tower;
however, experienced consultants and contractors, familiar with Alaskan weather conditions,
would be selected. It is unlikely that a delay in the total project schedule would occur if the
fieldwork or erection of the met tower is delayed. It is possible to erect the met tower du ring
winter months. The met tower would be installed to handle Kotlik’s winter weather conditions.
The met tower would be monitored by local AVEC personnel to ensure the met tower is up and
functioning properly throughout the year.
Construction Funding. By having the project designed and permitted, AVEC would be prepared
to capitalize on many funding opportunities.
Permitting. Permits for the met tower would be acquired, including approvals for the
Federal Aviation Administration and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. AVEC would hire
an environmental consultant familiar with permitting wind projects in Alaska. Early
consultation with agencies would occur in order to flesh out location, natural and social
environment, specific species, and mitigation issues. The consultant would work openly
with the agencies and conduct studies as appropriate.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 11 of 26 September 2012
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 energ y 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.
For this project it is assumed Kotlik is rated as a class 4 wind regime. The appropriate total
rating would be determined by this feasibility study.
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 power generation system in Kotlik consists of 4 diesel generators in a three-phase
electrical system: two 350 kilo-watt (kW) Cummins K19G2 1200 and two 499kW Cummins
K19G4 1800. During times of decreased demand, the smaller generators are utilized to save on
fuel consumption. All engines were installed in 2001. Individual generator efficiency is not
tracked, but the aggregate diesel generator efficiency in 2011 was 13.32 kilo-watt hours per
gallon (kWh/gallon). The plant has an underground fuel supply line from the new consolidated
bulk fuel storage tank facility to a 4,000 gallon day tank.
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.
Existing energy infrastructure in Kotlik is primarily diesel fuel for electrical power generation,
heating oil for boiler (thermal) and home heating, and diesel and gasoline fuel for transport ation
needs. Between January 2011 and December 2011, 151,406 gallons of diesel fuel were
consumed to generate 2,011,072kWh at the AVEC facilities.
The anticipated effects are less usage of diesel fuel for electrical power generation. Also, the
diesel generator use in Kotlik would be decreased, thereby decreasing generator operations and
maintenance costs, enabling generators to last longer and need fewer overhauls
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 12 of 26 September 2012
4.2.3 Existing Energy Market
Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy
customers.
According to a 2005-2009 American Community Survey (ACS), thirty percent of the Kotlik
population is below the poverty line and the median household income is $33,750. Stabilizing
the cost of energy in the community would provide long-term socioeconomic benefits to village
households.
The electricity consumption (sold) in Kotlik between January and December 2011 was
1,834,950kWh. The highest use was during late fall and winter, as Kotlik is exposed to high
winds, subarctic temperatures and darkness during these months. If this study supports the
addition of a wind turbine to the existing electric generation system, the amount of diesel fuel
used would be reduced.
Kotlik is a rural village accessible by air transportation and barge when the Norton Sound and
the Yukon River are ice-free (from mid-June through October). Reliable electric service is
necessary to maintaining the navigational aids for the safe operation of aircraft. Runway lights,
automated weather observation stations, VASI lights, DME’s and VOR’s are all powered by
electricity.
Kotlik has a piped vacuum sewer and circulating water utilidor, including plumbing for homes
located near the City core area. Dependable electric service is required for this system to
function properly.
Emergency medical service is provided in a health clinic by a health aide. Medical problems and
emergencies must be relayed by telephone or by some other communication means for air or
coastal assistance. Reliable telephone service requires reliable electric service.
Kotlik is a Yup’ik Eskimo village that practices fishing, trapping and hunting. The residents rely
heavily on subsistence foods for survival. Providing sustainable electricity to maintain freezers
and cold storage of goods is essential to the residents.
Like all of Alaska, Kotlik is subject to long periods of darkness. Reliable electric service is
essential for the operation of home lighting, streetlights, and community buildings. Outside
lighting greatly improves the safety of village residents.
The addition of a locally available renewable resource would improve the existing power
generation system and assist in stabilizing the cost of energy in this rural community.
Sources: Alaska Community Database.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 13 of 26 September 2012
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
Renewable Energy Technology. AVEC plans to conduct a feasibility analysis, resources
assessment, conceptual design, and permitting to assess the possibility of using wind power in
Kotlik. If the wind resource proves suitable and funding is obt ained, wind turbines would be
installed to serve the community. Currently, AVEC anticipates that a 300 kW capacity system
could be installed; however, this study will assist in determining the best wind energy
generation alternative.
Optimum installed capacity/Anticipated capacity factor/Anticipated annual generation. The
purpose of this work is to gather background information to plan a future alternative energy
facility. Anticipated capacity and generation would be examined for a number of turbine types
to determine the best option for the community.
Anticipated barriers. The potential barriers to success of this project include weather,
permitting, site control, and construction funding. Weather is a minor barrier and does not pose
a threat to the completion of this project. Permitting, based on an initial investigation, does not
appear to be a significant hurdle to completing this phase of the project. Construction funding
would be easier to obtain with design and permits in hand. Site control should not be difficult to
obtain, since the City, Tribe, and Kotlik Yupik Corporation support the project (See Section 8 and
Tab B).
Basic integration concept/Delivery methods. The wind turbines would need to interconnect
with the existing diesel power plant. Secondary load control would dispatch boilers as required
to use excess wind energy while allowing the diesel generators to continue running at efficient
levels. Conceptual design, to be completed as a part of this project, would detail how power
from a wind turbine would be integrated and delivered into the existing system in Kotlik.
The delivery method would be examined, to determine what turbine type would be best suited
for the system, area, and load.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 14 of 26 September 2012
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.
AVEC has not obtained site control for the placement of the met tower or conducting
geotechnical fieldwork. A letter of non-objection would be sought from the corporation or city,
depending on location, after project funding is assured. Starting with a community meeting to
announce that the project has been funded, AVEC’s community liaison would lead the effort to
gain site control. Since the major landholders support the project (See Section 8 and Tab B), site
control is not expected to be an obstacle to the placement of the met tower and conducting
geotechnical fieldwork.
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
FAA Air Navigation Hazard Permitting.
The met tower placement would be selected based on airspace availability and limitations to
meet the FAA’s Notice Criteria. If the project proves to be feasible, AVEC would seek a no-
hazard determination from FAA for the potential turbines after the turbine location and type
have been selected. AVEC would do this early in the process to ensure that adequate time and
resources are allocated to this effort. It is expected to take about 3 months to obtain the FAA
determination for the turbines.
Endangered Species Act/Migratory Bird Treaty Act Consultation. Consultation with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in compliance with the Endangered Species Act and Migratory
Bird Treaty Act would be required to install the met tower. A finding letter stating that the
project would not be expected to impact threatened or endangered species or birds would be
drafted and submitted to the USFWS once AVEC is assured this project is funded. It is expected
that AVEC would receive concurrence from the Service within one month. The authorization
would be issued prior to initiating met tower work in September 2013.
Clean Water Act (Section 401) Permit. If the met tower is erected within designated wetlands, a
US Army Corps of Engineers authorization would be required. Because of the limited footprint
of the met tower and geotechnical work, a “Nationwide Permit” would be sought. The
application/preconstruction notice would be submitted to the Corps once funding is assured,
and the permit would be issued prior to initiating met tower work in September 2013.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 15 of 26 September 2012
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 installation of a met tower would have no effect on threatened or endangered
species. If clearing is required for the installation of the met tower, it would be timed to avoid
impacts to migratory birds in compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
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. If the met tower is placed in designated wetlands, a U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers’ wetlands permit would be needed.
Archaeological and historical resources. Compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act
and consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer would be conducted prior to
construction of the wind turbines.
Land development constraints. No land development constraints are currently identified;
however, if any should arise, AVEC will work with the appropriate agencies to ensure the project
is in compliance.
Telecommunications interference. The met tower would be placed in a location that would not
interfere with the telecommunications service.
Aviation. Met tower placement would be selected based on airspace availability and limitations
to meet the FAA’s Notice Criteria.
Visual, aesthetics impacts. If final data supports placement of wind turbines, AVEC will conduct
community meetings to discuss visual impacts and how they could be mitigated.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 16 of 26 September 2012
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. AVEC plans to conduct a Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment, and Conceptual
Design to assess the possibility of using wind power in Kotlik. This work would cost $150,000.
AVEC requests $142,500 from AEA. AVEC would provide $7,500 as a matching cash
contribution.
Identification of other funding sources. Once the turbine type is determined, the next phase of
this project would be final design and construction. Although it is difficult to determine without
an assessment of the resource and what type, size, and number of turbines would be needed,
AVEC expects that final design and construction would cost $3,060,000. It is possible that the
funding for this work could come from AEA’s Renewable Energy Fund program, USDA Rural
Utility Service program, or another grant program.
Projected capital cost of proposed renewable energy system/projected development cost of
proposed renewable energy system. The final phase of this project would be Design and
Construction and Commissioning (Phase IV). AVEC estimates that this phase could cost
$3,060,000. 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.
The met tower would require monthly monitoring and data management. It is expected that
this would cost $700 total for the year that the met tower is erected. The cost would be funded
by this grant. If the turbines prove feasible, their maintenance would be funded by AVEC’s
general operating costs.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 17 of 26 September 2012
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
Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s). AVEC, the existing electric utility
serving Kotlik, is a member-owned cooperative electric utility and typically owns and maintains
the generation, fuel storage, and distribution facilities in the villages it serves.
Kotlik has 128 households and a health clinic, city office, school, and water treatment
plant/washeteria, which purchase power from AVEC. At this point in project development, the
potential power price and rate of return on the project is unknown.
Potential power purchase/sales price/ Proposed rate of return from grant -funded project. At
this point in project development, the potential power price and rate of return on the project is
unknown. Work done under this grant would determine this.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 18 of 26 September 2012
4.4.4 Project Cost Worksheet
Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered
in evaluating the project.
Renewable Energy Source
The Applicant should demonstrate that the renewable energy resource is available on a
sustainable basis.
Annual average resource availability. Class 4 wind assumed
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
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other CMS=350kW; CMS=350kW; CMS=499kW;
CMS=499kW Total=1,698kW
iii. Generator/boilers/other type Diesel engine generators
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other 11 years (all were installed in 2001)
v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other 13.32kWh/gallon (aggregate of all generators)
b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Annual O&M cost for labor $140,00/year (combined 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] 2,011,072 kWh (2011 actual)
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal] 151,406 gal (2011 actual)
Other
iii. Peak Load 414 kW (2011 actual)
iv. Average Load 229 kW (2011 actual)
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
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 19 of 26 September 2012
v. Minimum Load
vi. Efficiency 13.32 kWh/gallon (2011 actual)
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]
Wind, 300 kW capacity
b) Proposed annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable)
i. Electricity [kWh] 630,720 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 [cords, green tons, dry tons]
iv. Other
Project Cost
a) Total capital cost of new system $3,060,000
b) Development cost
c) Annual O&M cost of new system $29,580/year (based on $0.0469/kWh for wind
energy)
d) Annual fuel cost
Project Benefits
a) Amount of fuel displaced for
i. Electricity 47,351 gal/yr
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 20 of 26 September 2012
ii. Heat
iii. Transportation
b) Current price of displaced fuel $4.20/gal
c) Other economic benefits
d) Alaska public benefits
Power Purchase/Sales Price
a) Price for power purchase/sale
Project Analysis
a) Basic Economic Analysis
Project benefit/cost ratio 1.07
Payback (years) 14.3 years
4.4.5 Proposed Biomass System Information
Please address the following items, if know. (For Biomass Projects Only)
N/A
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 21 of 26 September 2012
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.
The anticipated annual fuel displacement for the completed project wou ld be 47,351 gallons
per year and 947,020 gallons over the anticipated 20 year lifetime of the installation. Based on
ISER’s 2015 estimated fuel costs, this project could save approximately $215,447 per year
during its first full year of operation. (2015 projected fuel cost number was derived from ISER’s
2015 medium fuel cost projection for the community plus the mid-price of social cost of carbon
per gallon in 2011 dollars).
Anticipated annual revenue/Potential additional annual incentives/Potential additional
annual revenue streams. Because this project is in the concept design stage, revenue and
incentives are unknown.
Non-economic public benefits. Providing a reliable renewable resource would benefit all of
Alaskans as it mitigates potential hazardous environmental incidents that could threaten water
and land resources. There would be a reduced potential for fuel spills or contamination,
improved air quality, and the decreased reliance on fossil fuels. Wind energy supports the
Kotlik Community Vision: “Protect subsistence, the environment and our Culture while
improving our livelihood.”
Data from this project will provide important information regarding wind resources in rural
Alaska to be applied in future projects.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 22 of 26 September 2012
SECTION 6– SUSTAINABILITY
Discuss your plan for operating the completed project so that it will be sustainable.
Include at a minimum:
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 operating wind projects throughout the state and is very familiar
with planning, constructing, operating, and maintaining wind systems.
Business Plan Structures and Concepts which may be considered: The wind turbine(s) 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 will be financed for the life of the project: The costs of operations and maintenance
would be funded through ongoing energy sales.
Operational issues which could arise: There are no known met tower operational issues.
Operational issues of the proposed turbines would be determined.
Operating costs: Different turbines have different operating costs; however , using AEA’s default
cost of wind energy, estimated O&M would cost $29,580 (based on $0.0469/kWh for wind
energy).
Commitment to reporting the savings and benefits: AVEC is fully committed to sharing the
savings and benefits information accrued from this project with its member owners and with
AEA.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 23 of 26 September 2012
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.
Once funding is known to be secured, AVEC would seek a non -objection letter from the Kotlik
Yupik Corporation and begin the FAA and USFWS permitting process for the met tower. AVEC
would seek contractors to install the met tower and complete the geotechnical work once the
grant agreement is in place.
Met tower installation and geotechnical work would occur before winter. Work that can be
completed before the wind study is completed would occur over the winter, including analysis
of current cost of energy and future market, and the economic and financial analyses. Once the
wind study is completed, the conceptual design and permitting would occur.
No other grants have been secured for this work in the past.
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.
The community is very committed to moving this project forward and fully supports this project.
Letters of support for this project have been received from the City of Kotlik, the Kotlik Yupik
Corporation and the Tribal Councils of Kotlik. Letters of support can be found under 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 conduct a feasibility analysis, resources assessment, conceptual design, and
permitting to assess the possibility of using wind power in Kotlik. This work is estimated to cost
$150,000. AVEC requests $142,500 from AEA. AVEC will provide $7,500 as a cash contribution.
A detail of the grant budget follows. To date, no funds have been obtained for this project.
If the wind resource proves to be suitable, AVEC would seek fund ing to construct turbines in
Kotlik. AVEC would provide a 10% cash match to any obtained funding.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Kotlik Wind Feasibility Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 24 of 26 September 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
1. Project scoping and
contractor solicitation Aug 2013 $1,900 $100 Cash $2,000
2. Detailed energy resource
analysis Oct 2014 $19,000 $1,000 Cash $20,000
3. Identification of land and
regulatory issues Jun 2014 $4,700 $250 Cash $5,000
4. Permitting and
environmental analysis
Dec 2014 $6,650 $350 Cash $7,000
5. Detailed analysis of
existing and future energy
costs and markets
March 2014 $4,750 $250 Cash $5,000
6. Assessment of
alternatives Nov 2014 $4,750 $250 Cash $5,000
7. Conceptual Business &
Operations Plan Oct 2014 $1,900 $100 Cash $2,000
8. Concept Design and Costs
Estimate Nov 2014
Geotech $23,750 $1,250 Cash $25,000
Concept Design $55,100 $2,900 $58,000
9. Detailed economic and
financial analysis Dec 2014 $9,500 $500 Cash $10,000
10. Conceptual business and
operations plans Dec 2014 $7,600 $400 Cash $8,000
11. Final report and
recommendations
Dec 2014 $2,850 $150 Cash $3,000
TOTALS $142,500 $7,500 $150,000
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $9,500 $500 Cash $10,000
Travel & Per Diem $9,500 $500 Cash $10,000
Equipment $9,500 $500 Cash $10,000
Materials & Supplies $0 $0 $0
Contractual Services $114,000 $6,000 Cash $120,000
Construction Services $0 $0 $0
Other $0 $0 $0
TOTALS $142,500 $7,500 $150,000
Tab A
Resumes
V3 Energy, LLC Douglas Vaught, P.E. 19211 Babrof Drive Eagle River, AK 99577 USA tel 907.350.5047 email dvaught@mtaonline.net Consulting Services : • Wind resource analysis and assessment, including IEC 61400-1 3 rd ed. protocols • Wind turbine siting, FAA permitting, and power generation prediction • Wind-diesel power plant modeling and configuration design • Cold climate and rime icing environment analysis of wind turbine operations • Met tower/sensor/logger installation and removal (tubular towers 10 to 60 meters in height) Partial List of Clients: • Alaska Village Electric Cooperative • NANA Pacific, LLC • enXco Development Corp. • Bristol Bay Native Corp. • Naknek Electric Association • Kodiak Electric Association • Barrick Gold • Alaska Energy Authority • North Slope Borough • Manokotak Natives Ltd. Representative Projects: • Alaska Village Electric Cooperative. Site selection, FAA permitting, met tower installation, data analysis/wind resource assessment, turbine energy recovery analysis, rime icing/turbine effects analysis, powerplant system modeling. Contact information: Brent Petrie, Key Accounts Mgr, 907-565-5358 • Kodiak Electric Association. Met tower installation, data analysis and modeling for Alaska’s first utility scale turbines (GE 1.5sle) on -line July 2009. Contact information: Darron Scott, CEO, 907 -486-7690. • NANA Pacific, LLC. Site reconnaissance and selection, permitting, met tower installation, wind resource assessment and preliminary power system modeling for Northwest Arctic Borough villages and Red Dog Mine. Contact information: Jay Hermanson, Program Manager, 907-339-6514 • enXco Development Corp. Met tower installation documentation, site reconnaissance , analysis equipment management for utility-sca le wind projects, including Fire Island near Anchorage. Contact information: Steve Gilbert, Alaska Projects Manager, 907-333-0810. • Naknek Electric Association. Long -term wind resource assessment at two sites (sequentially), including site selection, met tower installation, data analysis, turbine research, performance modeling, and project economic analysis. Contact information: Donna Vukich, General Manager, 907-246-4261 • North Slope Borough (with Powercorp Alaska, LLC). Power system modeling, site reconnaissance and selection, FAA permitting, wind turbine cold climate and icing effects white paper. Contact information: Kent Grinage, Public Works Dept., 907-852-0285 Recent Presentations: • Wind Power Icing Challenges in Alaska: a Case Study of the Native Village of Saint Mary’s, presented at Winterwind 2008, Norrköping, Sweden, Dec. 8, 2008.
Tab B
Letters of Support
Tab D
Governing Body Resolution
Tab E
Certification
Tab F
Additional Materials