HomeMy WebLinkAboutShungnak Solar Application FinalRenewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction 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.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction 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)
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction 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.
This project will be constructed in Shungnak, Alaska (population: 261) and will benefit Shungnak
and its neighbor, Kobuk (population: 148).
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 within the village of Shungnak on a lot just northwest of the existing
power plant. Shungnak is 150 miles east of Kotzebue. The community coordinates are
66.888060”North Latitude and -157.136390 West Longitude. Kobuk is approximately seven miles
from Shungnak; its coordinates are 66.908570 North and -156.881020 West.
2.2.2 Community benefiting – Name(s) of the community or communities that will be the
beneficiaries of the project.
This project will benefit Shungnak and Kobuk, which are seven miles apart but connected by an
electrical intertie.
2.3 PROJECT TYPE
Put X in boxes as appropriate
2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type
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
X 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
Feasibility X Construction and Commissioning
Conceptual Design
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction 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.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is seeking $585,000 from this Grant Program to
add a solar energy component to the existing diesel power generation system that serves two
communities. It will construct a new 50kW array of 288 Photovoltaic (PV) modules in Shungnak,
Alaska. The array will be inclined at 34 degrees from May through September, and 90 degrees
the remainder of the year to take advantage of the solar angle at this northerly location , and
would serve Shungnak and Kobuk via an existing electrical intertie. The annual power
production of the array is estimated to be approximately 44,623 kWh (with shading). The solar
array will be located on a lot just northwest of the existing Shungnak power plant which has
been committed to AVEC for this use. Total project cost is $650,000 and AVEC is prepared to
match grant funds with $65,000.
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 lower energy costs in Shungnak and Kobuk and will provide a fuel savings of
between 3,300 - 3,500 gallons/year. Using AVEC’s 2011 fuel price of $6.94/gallon, this project
will save approximately $24,000 per year. Based on the Institute for Social and Economic
Research (ISER) estimate for average delivered fuel price in Shungnak in 2013 at $5.30, the total
cost savings in the first year could be $18,000. Note that AVEC believes that this project will
result in much greater financial savings than estimated by the ISER cost/benefit analysis
because the known cost of delivered fuel in 2011 is more than $2.40 higher than the ISER’s
2011 cost ($4.54).
Currently, diesel-fuel power generation is the only source of electricity in Shungnak and Kobuk.
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 this remote
community. In 2009, when a study of solar power potential was completed, Shungnak had the
second highest cost of delivered fuel of all AVEC communities. In 2011, at $6.94/gal, Shungnak
had the highest delivered fuel cost for power generation of all 55 AVEC villages. Much of the
fuel for Shungnak must be flown in because the Kobuk River is often too low to accommodate
fuel barges. Air deliveries are complicated by a periodic shortage of aircraft that are equipped
to deliver fuel. As a result, fuel delivery costs are high. In 2011, all 24 fuel deliveries to
Shungnak were made by air.
Although the cost of energy is high, Shungnak residents use more energy per meter than most
AVEC villages. Shungnak’s average residential energy consumption has been above the average
consumption of all AVEC villages since 1992. It is unknown why Shungnak (along with the
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 4 of 26 September 2012
nearby community of Ambler) consume more power than other communities, but it is
suspected that their high latitude position, and darker, colder winters contribute to this
elevated electric usage for lighting.
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 to construct a new 50kW array of solar panels in Shungnak, Alaska. The
project will cost $ 650,000. AVEC requests $ 585,000 from the State of Alaska through a
Renewable Energy Fund award. AVEC will provide $65,000 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. $585,000
2.7.2 Cash match to be provided $65,000
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) $650,000
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) $650,000
2.7.7 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings) $24,000 per year
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.)
$
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction 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, as the electric utility serving Shungnak and Kobuk, 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 project manager for AVEC’s 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 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 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 the ultimate grant and project responsibilities.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction 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 schedule and organized by AEA milestones is as follows:
Milestones Tasks Start Date End Date
Final Design Complete 12/31/12
All Permits Received 12/31/12
Bid Documents Complete 12/31/12
Contractor and Vendors
Selection and Award Complete
Vender Request for Quotes Prepared
and Sent. Bid Docs Sent to Interested
Contractors. 7/1/2013 7/31/2013
Vender and Contractor Bids Received
and Reviewed 8/1/2013 8/31/2013
Equipment and Materials
Ordered
Orders Written, Reviewed, Placed
9/1/2013 9/30/2013
Equipment and Materials
Received
Shipping
4/1/2014 4/30/2013
Construction/Installation Hire Locals 5/1/2014 5/15/2014
Training Concurrent with Installation 5/1/2014
Surveying/subdivide Lot 5/1/2014 5/31/2014
Site Work 6/1/2014 6/30/2014
Construction 7/1/2014 7/31/2014
Installation of Panels 8/1/2014 8/31/2014
Integration and Testing 9/1/2014 9/30/2014
Final Acceptance,
Commissioning and Start Up
10/1/2014
All Final Reporting 11/1/2014
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 has been used to successfully design an d
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
would maintain ultimate authority programmatically and financially.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 7 of 26 September 2012
Brent Petrie, Manager, 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 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 Shungnak residents to
ensure that the community is informed.
Material and equipment procurement packages will be formulated by the PM/CM in
collaboration with AVEC’s purchasing manager. Each package will be procured from vendors or
issued from the Cooperative’s materials. Purchase orders will be formulated with delivery
dates consistent with dates required for barge or air transport consolidation. Multip le
materials and/or equipment will be detailed for consolidated shipments to rural staging points,
where secondary transport to the village destination is provided. The PM/CM will track the
shipments and arrange handling services to and around the destination project sites.
The CM will be responsible for the construction activities for all project components of the
facility upgrade. Local labor forces will be utilized to the maximum extent possible to construct
the projects. Local job training will be provided as a concurrent operation under the
management and direction of the PM/CM. All construction costs, direct and indirect, will be
reimbursed on a cost-only basis to the PM/CM, or paid directly by AVEC.
For the proposed facilities, AVEC is responsible for managing the commissioning process in
concert with the PM/CM, designers and vendors. That entails testing and training of
operational personnel, as well as providing for all contract closeout documents.
Selection Process for Contractors/Vendors: The construction contractor/vendor selection will
be made from a pre-qualified list of contractors/vendors with a successful track record with
AVEC. Pre-qualified contractors/vendors have been selected based upon technical
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 8 of 26 September 2012
competencies, past performance, written proposal, quality, cost, and general consensus from
an internal AVEC technical steering committee. The selection of contractors/vendors would
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 succ essfully. 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 Depart ment. 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 with financial reports. AVEC has up-to-date
systems in place for accounting, payables, financial reporting, and capitalization of assets in
accordance with AEA guidelines.
AVEC will require that monthly written progress reports be provided with each invoice
submitted from contractor(s). 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.
Quarterly face-to-face meetings would occur between AVEC and AEA to discuss the status of all
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.
AVEC recognizes and makes plans to avoid major consequences for falling behind schedule on
this project. Since -- for the most part-- installation cannot occur in the winter, missing upfront
tasks like ordering parts and assigning labor could result in missing the summer window. The
project could be delayed an entire year if the tasks are not completed on schedule.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 9 of 26 September 2012
Weather could delay shipping materials into the community; weather can impact the
construction schedule. However, experienced Alaskan contractors, expecting bad weather, will
be selected and will be prepared for weather-related problems.
AVEC is responsible to its member communities and a board of directors and provides a cash
match towards the project, therefore 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 disposable income.
AVEC member communities expect status updates on village projects including when and what
work will 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.
According to National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) solar data, consultant Remote
Power, Inc. expects 44,623 kW to be produced each year by a 50 kW array installed in Shungnak.
This assumes that the array is tilted to 49 degrees from May-September and 85 degrees from
October-April, and there is minimal shading of the panels. This would offset about 3% of
Shungnak’s present annual electric energy.
AVEC decided to explore photovoltaic solar energy as a possible energy source after considering
other options. Wind power is not a feasible solution, since the wind resource in this area is very
low. Biomass (wood) has been suggested as an alternative heating source for all the villages;
however, its use for electricenergy production is unproven in this region. Currently, AVEC and
NANA Regional Native Corporation are exploring hydroelectric options near Ambler and
Shungnak; however, it will be many years before a hydroelectric project could be online in the
area.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 10 of 26 September 2012
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.
AVEC currently provides power to the communit y of Shungnak with diesel generators. The
Shungnak power plant includes one JD 202 kW generator (installed in 1991), one Caterpillar
335kW generator (installed in 1984), and one 314 kW Detroit Diesel (installed in 1998) with a
combined capacity of 851kW. Kobuk became a member of AVEC on July 1, 2012, and the
previous electric utility is nonoperational.
For the communities of Shungnak and Kobuk, the total production of the AVEC plant in
Shungnak in 2011 was 1,569,474 kWh. The peak electric demand in Shungnak and Kobuk in
2011 was 345 kW (in January). Average demand in 2011 was approximately 179 kW. The
Shungnak plant generated 13.6 kWh for each gallon of fuel consumed in 2011.
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.
Shungnak and Kobuk use diesel and heating oil as primary energy resources. Power is generated
at a plant in Shungnak and provided to Kobuk via an eleven-mile intertie. In 2011, 115,282
gallons of diesel fuel were consumed to generate 1,569,474 kWh.
Installation of a 50 kW solar array will help to offset the operations at the power plant. In
addition, this project would help AVEC and AEA to determine whether solar power is a viable
resource in the upper Kobuk region and other locations in the state. This project could lead to
expansion of the array in Shungnak, and installation of other 50 kW arrays in communities
where diesel is very expensive and where no other renewable energy options are readily
available.
4.2.3 Existing Energy Market
Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy
customers.
Shungnak, 2010 Census population of 262, is located in northwestern Alaska about 150 miles
east of Kotzebue. Approximately 95% of the population is American Indian or Alaska Native. A
federally recognized tribe is located in the community. Shungnak is a traditional village where
residents depend on subsistence activities such as trapping, fishing, hunting and berry picking in
a difficult but rewarding way of life. The 2006-2010 American Community Survey (ACS)
estimated 34.5% unemployment. It listed $41,458 as the average median household incom e,
and a per capita income of $9,269. About 25% of all residents had incomes below the poverty
line.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 11 of 26 September 2012
The community’s average residential electric cost between January 1, 2011 and December 31,
2011 was $0.6944 per kWh, arrived at by dividing gross residential sales for the period by the
total residential kWh sold in Shungnak during the same period. Using gross residential sales
divided by the average number of residential customers, the average annual residential
electricity bill for 2011 was $4,197.
Kobuk, 2010 Census population of 151, is located about 7 miles northeast of Shungnak and 128
air miles northeast of Kotzebue. Approximately 90% of the population is American Indian or
Alaska Native. Shungnak is also a traditional and subsistence-dependent village. For Kobuk, the
2006-2010 American Community Survey estimated 25% unemployment. It listed $28,438 as the
average median household income, and a per capita income of $ 9,407. About 49% of all
residents had incomes below the poverty line.
According to the Alaska Energy Authority’s PCE Report, the community’s average residential
electric cost during fiscal year 2011 was $0.87. Because Kobuk became a member of AVEC a
little over one month ago (July 1, 2012) and the previous electric utility is nonoperational, little is
known about the residential electric bills in the community.
The Denali Commission in Alaska produces an annual update of its Distressed Community List.
Shungnak is listed as a distressed community in 2012. The underlying data for the list is
prepared by the Alaska Department of Labor. It uses the most current population, employment
and earnings data available to identify those Alaska communities considered “distressed”. The
Denali Commission reports Shungnak and Kobuk were also distressed in previous years.
Costs of energy from all sources are high in this community. The State of Alaska fuel study done
in January 2012 surveyed 100 rural Alaskan communities’ retail heating fuel and gasoline costs.
Shungnak and Kobuk were not included in the study; however, the average cost for the
northwestern Alaska communities was $10.59/gal for stove oil and gasoline. AVEC’s average
diesel cost in Shungnak in 2011 was $6.94/gallon (considerably higher than listed in the ISER fuel
cost analysis).
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 12 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
Technological Design/Equipment
The photo-voltaic (PV) generation system would consist of a PV array supported by a ground
mounted structure, with an inverter and power control system in a new enclosure next to the
Shungnak power plant. The DC power cables from the array to the inverter/control system
enclosure, adjacent to the power plant, would be routed via under-ground or above-ground
rigid metal conduit. The new AC connection to the existing power plant 480 V bus would be
routed via an under-ground or above-ground/overhead conduit.
Specifically, the PV array at present is proposed to consist of the following options:
50.4 kW capacity option (as proposed by Solar Wind Consultants in the August 2010
report) consisting of (288) 175 W Sharp solar modules, or equivalent.
(12 modules per string, 12 strings per combiner box.)
56.4 kW capacity option, consisting of (240) 235 W Sharp solar modules, or equivalent.
(12 modules per string, 10 strings per combiner box.)
The array’s DC string wires in rigid conduit would connect to two combiner boxes, with internal
disconnect and fuses.
The panel mounting is anticipated to consist of the following:
An adjustable ground-mounted steel structure which will support the panels at a 34
degree tilt from May to September, and be changed to a 90 degree tilt from October to
April (as proposed by Solar Wind Consultants in the August 2010 feasibility report).
The mounting structure’s foundation would be on gravel to minimize permafrost effects;
although gravel availability may be limited in Shungnak. Triodetic and other types of
foundations for permafrost soils would be evaluated.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 13 of 26 September 2012
The inverter and system control equipment would be installed in a new heated enclosure, on a
new concrete pad.
The grid-tied PV inverter would include:
Fronius 55.5 kW 277 V AC, 3-phase power output (as proposed by Solar Wind
Consultants in the August 2010 feasibility report), or similar inverter .
The power electronics/controls would include:
Solar PV-diesel hybrid system supervisory controller by Sustainable Power Systems, or
equivalent, with a ‘reverse power relay’ to prevent back feed into the existing diesel
generation system. Discretionary loads, such as electric heaters, could also be integrated
into the solar-diesel hybrid control system with a secondary load controller.
PV system monitoring and data acquisition system will also be installed and integrated
into AVEC’s existing AC metering system at the Shungnak power plant.
The electrical system connections would include an AC system disconnect switch, to connect
480 V output of converted DC array power to AVEC’s existing diesel power plant bus.
The grounding system would include a PV system grounding wire connected to array modules,
combiner boxes and inverter, with new buried grounding rods installed.
The solar array would be surrounded by a 600-foot long perimeter fence.
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.
The solar array would be located on the lot just northwest of the existing Shungnak power plant.
The land has been committed to AVEC through a memorandum of understanding between AVEC
and the City of Shungnak.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 14 of 26 September 2012
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
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Section 404 (Wetlands) Permit
A Section 404 Clean Water Act (Wetlands) permit would be acquired for the placement of panels
in designated wetlands. It is likely that the project will fall under a Nationwide Permit #51 for
land-based renewable generation facilities because the project would impact less than 0.5 acres
of non-tidal wetlands.
Once funding is approved, AVEC will prepare a USACE Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) and
conduct required consultation with the SHPO for the installation of the array. The permit would
be expected within 1 month of submitting the PCN. No work will be conducted prior to
obtaining required permits or authorizations.
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 and Endangered Species
According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, no threatened, e ndangered or candidate species
or critical habitats are found in the project area.
Habitat Issues
The solar array would be located on a lot leased by AVEC just northwest of the existing
Shungnak power plant and located within the community boundaries. There are no known
habitat issues within the community boundaries.
Wetlands or other protected areas
There may be designated wetlands in the area. A Section 404 Clean Water Act (Wetlands)
permit would be acquired for the placement of poles in designated wetlands. It is likely that the
project will fall under a Nationwide Permit #51 for land-based renewable generation facilities
because the project would impact less than 0.5 acres of non-tidal wetlands.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 15 of 26 September 2012
Historic Properties
Based on a review of the Office of History and Archaeology Alaska Heritage Resources Survey
(AHRS), there are no cultural or historic resources in the project area. The project is also not in
or adjacent to a National Historic Landmark, and it will not impact, use, or alter any building or
structure that was constructed more than 50 years ago. (See attached memorandum from
Cultural Resources Consultants, July 23, 2012.)
Land Development Constraints
The solar array would be located on the lot just northwest of the existing Shungnak power plant.
The land has been committed to AVEC through a memorandum of understanding between AVEC
and the City of Shungnak. The land falls within the City of Shungnak, but it is not zoned.
There is a history of the Kobuk River flooding; however, according to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) Floodplains Management Services, most of Shungnak, including the array
site, is located on a bluff above the river and above the area of flooding. The array would be
constructed above the USACE-recommended building elevation of 32.2 feet.
Telecommunications
No telecommunications interference will occur by the additi on of the solar array in the selected
location.
Aviation
The solar array is not an impediment to aviation in that it is constructed flat on the ground. This
project is located about one mile from the community.
Visual Aesthetics or other Impacts
The solar array will be placed away from the community on a lot next to the power plant. It is
unlikely that the community would have concerns. AVEC will conduct community meetings to
discuss visual impacts and how they could be mitigated, in the unlikely event that such issues
arise.
Other
The project would not be located on a Brownfield site.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction 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
The project will cost $ 650,000. AVEC requests $ 585,000 from the State of Alaska through a
Renewable Energy Fund award. AVEC will provide $65,000 (10%) as a match contribution. No
other funding would be needed for the 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.)
Minimal maintenance will be required for the array. Snow will need to be cleared, and the
array’s incline would need to be changed from 34 degrees from May through September to 90
degrees the remainder of the year to take advantage of the solar angle. The local plant operator
would be responsible for these simple maintenance activities, which would be included in the
cost of maintaining the existing power plant in Shungnak.
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
This is not applicable to this project as AVEC is the applicant and the electrical utility for
Shungnak and Kobuk.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 17 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.
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. 44,623 kW (based on Remote Power estimate)
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 3
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other JD=202 kW; Cat=335kW; Detroit Diesel=314
kW
Total=815 kW
iii. Generator/boilers/other type Diesel generators
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other 21 years; 28 years; 13 years
v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other 13.6 kWh/gallon
b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Annual O&M cost for labor $140,000 (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] 1,569,474 kWh (2011)
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal] 115,282 gallons (2011)
Other
iii. Peak Load 345 kW (in January 2011)
iv. Average Load 179 kW (2011)
v. Minimum Load
vi. Efficiency 13.6 kWh/gallon (2011)
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
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 18 of 26 September 2012
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]
Solar, 50kW capacity
b) Proposed annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable)
i. Electricity [kWh] 44,623 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 $650,000
b) Development cost
c) Annual O&M cost of new system $892/year (based on AEA $0.02/kWh)
d) Annual fuel cost $0
Project Benefits
a) Amount of fuel displaced for
i. Electricity 3,433 gallons/year
ii. Heat
iii. Transportation
b) Current price of displaced fuel $6.94/gallon (AVEC’s 2011 cost in Shungnak)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 19 of 26 September 2012
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 0.65 (ISER analysis, which AVEC believes to be very low)
Payback (years) 31 years (ISER analysis) 27 years (using AVEC’s 2011 diesel cost)
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
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 20 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
This project will provide a fuel savings of approximately 3,500 gallons/year. Based on a 2011
fuel price of $6.94/gallon, this project will save approximately $24,000 total per year. The
project will pay for itself within 27 years (using AVEC’s 2011 diesel cost).
Non-economic Public Benefits
This project will increase efficiencies of the energy system in Shungnak and Kobuk.
Shungnak and Kobuk are isolated villages which rely on air transpo rtation, 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.
Shungnak and Kobuk are accessible only by airplane, barge, snowmachine or small boat. The
state owns lighted gravel air strips in each community with regularly scheduled small aircraft
service in both communities.
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 electric service.
In Shungnak and Kobuk, water is obtained from wells and is treated. The community facilities
such as the school and homes are connected to a piped water and sewer system. Reliable
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.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction Project
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 21 of 26 September 2012
Reliable electric service is essential for the operation of home lighting, streetlights, and security
lighting. Outside lighting ensures the safety of residents during dark hours.
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 Shungnak and Kobuk, have only
state and federal programs and their own--many times very poor--households to rely on to
operate and maintain what they can and, in rare cases, build for the future.
This project will encourage development of the community by helping to stabilize 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. Shungnak and Kobuk are small remote communities where jobs are very limited.
Typically, jobs are related to the local facilities like the power plant, school and health clinic.
Shungnak and Kobuk residents also find seasonal employment in firefightin g. However,
Shungnak and Kobuk have a strong Native culture and the residents desire to maintain their
way of life that revolves around hunting, fishing and other subsistence activities as well as arts
and crafts production. Those activities are time cons uming and often in conflict with the cash
economy. That conflict, along with scarce jobs, is reflected in high unemployment and low
family incomes. According to the 2010 Census, 25% of Shungnak residents and 49% of Kobuk
residents had incomes below the poverty level. The Alaskan Denali Commission has deemed
Shungnak and Kobuk “distressed communities”.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction 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 the capacity and experience to
operate this project. AVEC has operated solar projects throughout the state and is familiar with
planning, constructing, operating, and maintaining solar systems.
Business Plan Structures and Concepts which may be considered: The solar array will be
incorporated into AVEC’s power plant operation. Local plant operators provide daily servicing.
AVEC technicians provide periodic preventative or corrective maintenance an d 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 the villages.
Operational issues which could arise: Minimal operational issues are expected. The AVEC plant
operator would be responsible for keeping the panels cleared of snow and for changing the tilt of
the panels in the spring and fall.
Operating costs: Based on AEA’s estimate of $0.02/kWh, the operating costs of the 50kW array
would be approximately $892/year.
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
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction 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.
Work as described in this proposal will be initiated upon grant award .
AVEC has completed all the steps leading up to this constructi on project. Design, permitting and
bid documents will be complete by the end of this calendar year. AVEC matching funds will be
available upon grant award.
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 both Shungnak and Kobuk are in full support of this project a nd look
forward to the energy cost savings. Please see the attached letters of support (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.
Construction of a 50 kW PV solar array is estimated to cost $650,000. AVEC requests $585,000
from AEA. AVEC will provide $65,000 (10%) as a cash contribution. A detail of the grant budget
follows.
Funding from an AEA REF Round 1 grant award was used for a feasibility analysis and resources
assessment for this project.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
Shungnak Solar Energy Construction 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
Confirmation that all
design and feasibility
requirements are complete
12/31/12
$- $- $-
Completion of bid
documents 8/31/2013 $3,600 $400 Cash $4,000
Contractor/vendor
selection and award 4/30/2014 $1,800 $200 Cash $2,000
Construction Phases 5/31/2014 $558,000 $62,000 Cash $620,000
Integration and testing 6/30/2014 $9,000 $1,000 Cash $10,000
Decommissioning old
systems 8/31/2014 $- $- Cash $-
Final Acceptance,
Commissioning and Start-
up
9/30/2014
$5,400 $600 Cash $6,000
Operations Reporting 11/1/2014 $7,200 $800 Cash $8,000
TOTALS $585,000 $65,000 $650,000
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $18,000 $2,000 Cash $20,000
Travel & Per Diem $9,000 $1,000 Cash 10,000
Equipment $0 $0
Materials & Supplies $0 $0
Contractual Services $0 $0
Construction Services $558,000 $62,000 Cash $620,000
Other $0 $0
TOTALS $585,000 $65,000 $650,000
Tab A
Resumes
Tab B
Letters of Support
Tab D
Governing Body Resolution
Tab E
Certification
Tab F
Additional Materials
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
Photovoltaic Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Prepared for
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc.
4831 Eagle St.
Anchorage, AK 99503
Prepared by
Solstice Alaska Consulting, Inc
11760 Woodbourne Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99516
And
Solar Wind Consultants
915 30th Avenue
Suite 229
Fairbanks, AK 99701
August 2010
Purpose of R eport
In 2009, the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) applied for separate Alaska Energy Authority
(AEA) Renewable Energy Grants to construct photovoltaic (PV) solar systems in Ambler, Shungnak, and
Noatak.AEA awarded AVEC the funding to study and design one project in Ambler, Shungnak, or
Noatak. After discussions, it was determined that solar siting and feasibility studies would be conducted
in the three villages.
The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of the solar siting studies in Ambler, Shungnak, and
Noatak.The information is presented to AVEC and AEA to assist in determining how to move forward
with these solar projects.
Background
Existing Power Issues
Currently, diesel-fuel power generation is the only source of electricity in these communities.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 delivery costs in Ambler, Shungnak, and
Noatak.In 2009, Ambler,Shungnak, and Noatak had the third,second, and first highest cost of
delivered fuel of all AVEC communities.Much of the fuel for Ambler and Shungnak must be flown in
because the Kobuk River is often too low to accommodate fuel barges.The Noatak River changed
course in the mid-1990s and since then all deliveries of fuel to Noatak have been by air.Air deliveries
are also complicated by a periodic shortage of aircraft that are equipped to deliver fuel.. As a result fuel
delivery costs are high.In 2009 in Ambler,12 out of the 15 fuel deliveries were made by air. In
Shungnak in 2009, 25 of the 28 fuel deliveries were made by air. In Noatak in 2009, all 28 of the fuel
deliveries were by air.
The average AVEC delivered fuel costs in 2009 to Ambler,Shungnak, and Noatak were $3.79/gallon,
$4.35/gallon,and $6.41/gallon respectively.In 2008, average delivered fuel costs were significantly
higher in Ambler and Shungnak; $6.13/gallon in Ambler and $5.55/gallon in Shungnak.
Although the cost of energy is high, Ambler,Shungnak, and Noatak residents use more energy than most
AVEC villages. Ambler’s average residential consumption of energy is above the average consumption of
all AVEC villages most years, according to AVEC records. Shungnak and Noatak’s average residential
energy consumption has been above the average consumption of all AVEC villages since 1992.It is
unknown why these communities consume more power than other communities,but it is suspected
that their high latitude position, and darker,colder winters contribute to this electric usage.
Potential Renewable Energy Solutions
AVEC decided to explore solar energy as a possible energy source after considering other options.Wind
power is not a feasible solution, since the wind resource in this area is very low. Biomass (wood)has
been suggested as an alternative heating source for all the villages; however, its use for energy
production is unproven. Currently, AVEC and NANA Regional Native Corporation are exploring
hydroelectric options near Ambler and Shungnak; however, it will be years before it is determined
whether hydropower is a feasible alternative energy source.
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 2
Study Methods
AVEC hired Remote Power, Inc.to study the solar energy potential and possible locations for PV panels
in Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak. Remote Power, using the Solar Pathfinder™(SP) site analysis tool,
first generated sunpath diagrams from digital photos taken at each site.The sunpath diagrams were
then used to determine solar positions and shading effects of landscape features on potential solar
energy systems at each location.These images were then analyzed using Solar Pathfinder Assistant™
Version 4.0 (SPA) software to determine the most appropriate location for PV panels.Production
estimates and fuel savings were then estimated through analysis of these images and an estimation of
the effect the surrounding landscape would have on a potential PV array.
Remote Power considered other issues associated with maintaining PV panels in cold, high latitude
environments. Remote Power studied fixing the solar array tilt to keep snow from accumulating on the
panels and inhibiting power production versus mounting panels on adjustable racks to maintain an
optimum angle for year-round power production, especially in the late spring to early fall.Remote
Power also investigated locations and options for PV panels considering the potential for vandalism of
the solar arrays in the villages.
Features in Common to All PV Options / General Considerations
The PV arrays at that would be installed in the three villages would consist of 175-watt monocrystalline
cell modules manufactured by Sharp Solar. The inverter that would be used with the PV arrays is
manufactured by Fronius and would produce 277 vac 3-phase power.Unless otherwise noted, the tilt
angle of each array, adjusted twice annually, would be 52 degrees from May through September and 90
degrees the remainder of the year.As much as possible, all trees or other obstructions to sunlight
would be removed to ensure optimum system performance.
The ideal foundations for PV arrays in Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak have not been determined.
Typically, foundations for unheated structures on ice rich and permanently frozen soils are constructed
to ensure that the active layer is contained in a thaw-stable material such as gravel or that the load is
supported by the frozen soil under the active layer.Foundations used to support the PV arrays in this
study are expected to be installed on large quantities of non-frost susceptible soil such as gravel. Since
gravel may not locally available in some communities, the shipping costs for this material could add
substantially to overall project cost. The amount of gravel would be dependent upon the area of the
foundation and the depth of the active layer of the soil that would have to be removed.
If a large Triodetic foundation, a stiff foundation designed to resist twisting and buckling caused by
heaving ground, were considered for this site, further research should be conducted to determine the
capabilities and limitations of the Triodetic foundation. Additionally, ballast material added to the
foundation or some sort of anchoring mechanism would be necessary to keep the solar array from
blowing over or shifting in the event of high winds in the area.
An alternative installation option would be to drive piles into the permafrost at a depth substantial
enough to resist jacking (and creep settlement) and install the array on the piles.Pile depths depend on
the conditions of the soil.A geotechnical report should be conducted for all foundation options to
determine active layer depth and soil composition.
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 3
Connection to the existing AVEC power system was investigated for this study.There was concern that
under certain conditions a large PV array could back feed power into the existing diesel generators,
providing more power than the system might require, and causing a power reversal fault. As a safety
precaution, a "reverse power relay" would be installed to prevent this from occurring.Reverse power
relays are standard equipment on grid tie generators.On a multi generator system, the relays enable
the generator that is being over-powered to disconnect from the grid.Another option to handle excess
power would be to shunt the power into a storage battery or use it in a recovered heat system.
Ambler Solar Project Options
Four solar project options were investigated in Ambler, as described below.Table 1 summarizes the
findings.
Ambler Option #1 (Schwatka Street Option)
Ambler Solar Site Option #1 is located across Schwatka Street,just southwest of the existing AVEC
power plant facility (Figure 1).This lot slopes to the northwest and is currently covered with a mixture
of densely growing black spruce and willows.1 A PV array at this site would consist of 180 PV modules
rack mounted in a single long row running east to west.The relatively narrow east-west dimension of
the property would limit the array size to 30.5kW instead of the preferred 50.4 kW size.
1 Because of dense vegetation growth, it was difficult to obtain a useful SP image of the site; however, SP images
were taken from less obstructed areas adjacent to the site, and digital photographs were taken of the surrounding
area to determine the project configuration and potential production.
Figure 1. Ambler PV Option #1 location.
Site 1: 30.5 kW Array
AVEC Power Plant
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 4
Power Estimate/Fuel Savings
The annual power production of Ambler Option #1, estimated based on the installation of a 31.5 kW
array, would be 24,982 kWh (with shading), and the estimated fuel savings would be approximately
1,850 gallons annually.2 At the 2008 average cost of delivered fuel to Ambler ($6.13/gallon),the annual
savings associated with this option would be about $11,332.At the 2009 average cost of delivered fuel
to Ambler ($3.79/gallon), the annual savings associated with this option would be approximately $7,012.
Installation Cost
Ambler Option #1 would cost between $346,500 and $378,000 (assuming $11-12/watt).This cost does
not include connection to the existing power lines or fencing around the array.
Payback Period
Based on a cost of between $346,500 and $378,000 and 2009 average fuel costs, it is expected that it
would take between 49 and 54 years to pay for Ambler PV Option #1.At a higher fuel cost, for example
using 2008 average Ambler delivered fuel costs, it would take between 31 and 33 years to pay for the
Ambler PV Option #1.3
Option Analysis
Ambler Option #1 was dismissed from further consideration.Although this option is near the existing
AVEC power plant and has relatively low transmission costs and overall installation costs,the practical
array size is limited and the potential for shading is high.The production from this option would only
displace about 1,850 gallons of diesel annually and would not result in considerable cost savings.
Ambler Option #2 (Old Sewage Lagoon Option)
Ambler Solar Site Option #2 is located at the old sewage lagoon approximately 0.25 miles northwest of
the AVEC power plant.The lagoon,which is scheduled to be closed and filled,would be available for
development after the summer of 2010. A PV array at this site would consist of a 50.4 kW south-facing
array of 180 modules rack mounted in a single long row running east to west.
2 Based on 13.5 kWh/gallon
3 Simple payback calculation: Payback Period=Initial Cost/Annual Cost Savings
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 5
Figure 2. Ambler PV Option #2 location
Sewage
Lagoon site
AVEC Power Plant
& Tank Farm
Site 1
Pow er Estimate/Fuel Savings
The annual power production of Ambler Option #2,estimated on the installation of a 50.4 kW array,
would be approximately 44,623 kWh (with shading), and the estimated fuel savings would be
approximately 3,305 gallons annually.4 At the 2008 average delivered fuel price, the annual savings
associated with this option would be approximately $20,245.At the 2009 average delivered fuel price,
the annual savings associated with this option would be approximately $12,526.
Installation Cost
Ambler Option #2 would cost between $503,600 and $554,000 (assuming $9-10/watt). This cost
includes $50,000 for connecting into the existing power lines, but it does not include the cost of fencing
the array.It is likely that some cost saving would be realized because after the lagoon site is filled and
abandoned, it will be better prepared for installation of the array than other sites where site work would
be required.
Payback Period
Based on a cost of between $503,600 and $554,000 and 2009 average Ambler delivered fuel costs, it is
expected that it would take between 40 and 44 years to pay for Ambler PV Option #2.However, at 2008
fuel costs, it would take between 25 and 27 years to pay for the Ambler PV Option #2.5
Option Analysis
Although this option had the best solar access and energy production capability in Ambler, Option #2
was dismissed from further consideration primarily because of installation cost and the potential for
vandalism at the site.
4 Based on 13.5 kWh/gallon
5 Simple payback calculation Payback Period=Initial Cost/Annual Cost Savings
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 6
Ambler Option #3 (AVEC Facility Option)
Ambler Solar Site Option #3 is located within the AVEC power plant facility.This option includes placing
a south-facing 10.5 kW array consisting of 60 modules northwest of the fuel storage tanks.The location
of the tanks and generator buildings on this property would cause considerable shading of the array.
Power Estimate/Fuel Savings
The annual power production of Ambler Option #3, estimated on the installation of a 10.5 kW array and
considerable shading at the site,would be approximately 7,583 kWh,and the estimated fuel savings
would be approximately 562 gallons annually.6
Installation Cost
Ambler Option #3 would cost between $115,500 and $126,000 (assuming $11-12/watt).Since this
option is located within the existing and fenced AVEC facility, there are no costs associated with fencing
or connection into the existing power system.Using the 2008 average cost of delivered fuel to Ambler,
the annual saving associated with this option would be about $3,442.Using the 2009 average cost of
delivered fuel to Ambler, the annual savings associated with this option would be approximately $2,130.
Payback Period
Based on a cost of between $115,500 and $126,000 and 2009 average fuel costs, it is expected that it
would take between 54 and 59 years to pay for Ambler PV Option #3. At 2008 fuel costs, it would take
between 34 and 37 years to pay for the Ambler PV Option #3.7
6 Based on 13.5 kWh/gallon
7 Simple payback calculation Payback Period=Initial Cost/Annual Cost Savings
Figure 3. Ambler PV Option #3 location
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 7
Option Analy sis
Ambler Option #3 was dismissed from further consideration because of the low power output due to
significant shading from the fuel tanks. Although this option had few costs associated with securing the
array and connecting to the existing power system, the annual production from this option would
only displace about 562 gallons of diesel annually and would not result in considerable cost
savings.
Ambler Option #4 (AVEC Tank Top/Power Plant Roof Option)
Placing a PV array on top of fuel storage tanks and on top of the power plant modules within the AVEC
facility was considered. While some vandalism concerns and shading concerns would be alleviated at
this location,installation on top of the tanks would require adequate ballast or weight to secure the
panels and tanks when the tanks are not full and winds are strong. Adding ballast could require
excavation and the construction of a concrete and steel foundation. The soils in this location are
seasonally frozen, resulting in movement throughout the year,which causes additional complications.
Due to these factors, this option was not investigated in more detail.
Installing PV panels on top of the AVEC generators modules was considered. To avoid the shading
associated with the generator exhaust,the PV panels would only be suited on the southernmost
modules.Large tracking arrays could not be installed because they could not turn without encountering
the exhaust stacks. Because of these issues, an array on top of the power plant was not considered
further.
Table 1.Summary Photovoltaic Options in Ambler
Option Summary
Description
Annual
Power
Estimate
(kWh)
Annual
Fuel
Savings
(gallons)
Annual
Cost
Savings A
Installation
Cost
Years to
Payback
Ambler Option #1 31.5 kW array
across road from
AVEC power plant
28,032 1,850 $7,012 $346,500-
$378,000
Simple:
49-54
Ambler Option #2 50.4 kW array at the
old sewage lagoon
49,840 3,305 $12,526 $503,600-
$554,000
Simple:
40-44
Ambler Option #3 10.kW array on the
northwest side of
tanks on AVEC
property
8,942 562 $2,130 $115,500-
$126,000
Simple:
54-59
Ambler Option #4 PV array sited atop
AVEC fuel tanks or
power plant
Not pursued further due to wind, foundation, and generator
exhaust issues
A Using 2009 average cost of fuel delivered to Ambler=$3.79/gallon
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 8
Shungnak Solar Project Options
Two solar project options were investigated in Shungnak as described below.Table 2 summarizes the
findings.
Shungnak Option #1 (North of AVEC Site-52 o Tilt )
Shungnak Option #1 would be located on the lot leased by AVEC just northwest of the Shungnak power
plant (Figure 4). The lot consists of permafrost soils with scattered black spruce. This option includes
installing a 50.4 kW array of 288 PV modules. The array would face true south.
Power Estimate/Fuel Savings
The annual power production of Shungnak Option #1, estimated on the installation of a 50.4 kW array
and some shading, would be approximately 46,588 kWh, and the estimated fuel savings would be
approximately 3,451 gallons annually.8 At the average 2008 delivered fuel cost to Shungnak
($5.55/gallon), the annual savings associated with this option would be approximately $19,169.At the
average 2009 delivered fuel cost to Shungnak ($4.35/gallon), the annual savings associated with this
option would be approximately $15,012.
Installation Cost
Shungnak Option #1 would cost between $554,400 and $604,800 (assuming $11-12/watt).These costs
do not include fencing or connection into the existing power system.
Payback Period
Based on a cost of between $554,400 and $604,800 and Shungnak’s 2009 average delivered fuel costs, it
is expected that it would take between 37 and 40 years to pay for Shungnak PV Option #1. At 2008 fuel
costs, it would take between 29 and 32 years to pay for the Shungnak PV Option #1.9
8 Based on 13.5 kWh/gallon
9 Simple payback calculation Payback Period=Initial Cost/Annual Cost Savings
Figure 4. Shungnak PV Option #1 and #2 locations.
Proposed
Solar Site
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 9
Option Analysis
Although this option is close to the AVEC power plan and the cost associated with connecting to the
local system would be low,this option was dismissed from further consideration primarily because of
high installation cost.In addition,buildings and other obstructions in the vicinity of this option could
lower power output during the winter months.
Shungnak Option #2 (North of AVEC Site-34 o Tilt)
Shungnak Option #2 is identical to Shungnak Option #1 (a 50.4 kW array of 288 PV modules located just
northwest of the AVEC power plant, Figure 4),except that that the tilt of the array is different.Option
#2 tilt angle of the array would be 34 degrees from May through September and 90 degrees the
remainder of the year.10
Power Estimate/Fuel Savings
Changing the summer tilt angle to 34 degrees shows approximately a 2.5% increase in power production
compared to the 90/52 tilt scenario.The annual power production of Shungnak Option #2 would be
approximately 47,731 kWh, and the estimated fuel savings would be approximately 3,536 gallons
annually.11 At the average 2008 delivered fuel cost to Shungnak, the annual savings associated with this
option would be approximately $19,641.At the average 2009 delivered fuel costs to Shungnak, the
annual savings associated with this option would be approximately $15,382.
Installation Cost
It is assumed that the Shungnak Option #2 would cost the same as the Shungnak Option #1;between
$554,400 and $604,800 (assuming $11-12/watt).These costs do not include fencing or connection into
the existing power system.
Payback Period
At 2009 average Shungnak delivered fuel costs,is expected that it would take between 36 and 39 years
to pay for Shungnak PV Option #2; about 1 year less than the Shungnak Option #1.At 2008 fuel costs, it
would take between 28 and 31 years to pay for the Shungnak PV Option #2.12
Option Analysis
Shungnak Option #2 is a better solar alternative than Option #1. Changing the tilt of the array to 34
degrees May through September would result in about 2.5% more energy production and additional
annual fuel use savings compared to Option #1. This option was dismissed from further consideration,
however,due to the high installation costs compared to the relatively low output.
Another option investigated at this site included mounting the array 16 feet above ground level.
Although the probability of any shading from obstructions would be minimized by this option, the
additional cost and technical issues of raising the array indicate that this option should not be
considered further.
10 The modeling feature that allowed angle and azimuth optimization was not available during the Ambler and
Noatak site visits.
11 Based on 13.5 kWh/gallon
12 Simple payback calculation Payback Period=Initial Cost/Annual Cost Savings
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 10
Shungnak Option #3 (AVEC Tank Top/Power Plant Roof Option)
Shungnak Option #3 includes installing PV panels either on top of the AVEC fuel tanks or power plant
modules. Although this option alleviates security and vandalism issues, it would not be a feasible
solution for lowering or maintaining energy costs in Shungnak. Additional costs and technical issues
associated with wind and exhaust shading indicate that this option should not be considered further.
Table 2. Summary Photovoltaic Options in Shungnak
Option Summary
Description
Annual
Power
Estimate
(kWh)
Annual
Fuel
Savings
(gallons)
Annual
Cost
Savings
A
Installation
Cost
Years to
Payback
Shungnak Option #1 50.4 kW array just
northeast of the
AVEC facility with
a 90/52 tilt
46,588 3,451 $15,012 $554,400-
$604,800
Simple:
37-40
Shungnak Option #2 50.4 kW array just
northeast of the
AVEC facility with
a 90/34 tilt
47,731 3,536 $15,382 $554,400-
$604,800
Simple:
36-39
Shungnak Option #3 PV array sited atop
AVEC fuel tanks or
power plant
Not pursued further due to wind, foundation, and generator
exhaust issues
A Using 2009 average cost of fuel delivered to Shungnak=$4.35/gallon
Noatak Solar Project Options
Two solar project options were investigated in Noatak as described below.Table 3 summarizes the
findings.
Noatak PV Option #1 (Riverbank Option)
Noatak Option #1 would be located on a gravel all-terrain vehicle trail between the existing AVEC power
plant and the Noatak River (Figure 5). This option includes installing a 50.4 kW array of 288 modules.
Because of site constraints (the tank farm is located to the west and the river is located to the east), the
array would face east toward the river.
Power Estimate/Fuel Savings
The annual power production of Noatak Option #1, estimated on the installation of a 50.4 kW array and
some shading, would be approximately 33,144 kWh, and the estimated fuel savings would be
approximately 2,455 gallons annually.13 At the 2008 average fuel delivery costs to Noatak
($6.22/gallon), the annual savings associated with this option would be about $15,282.At 2009 average
fuel delivery costs to Noatak ($6.41/gallon), the annual savings associated with this option would be
about $15,737.
13 Based on 13.5 kWh/gallon
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 11
Installation Cost
Noatak Option #1 would cost between $554,400 and $604,800 (assuming $11-12/watt).These costs do
not include fencing or connection into the existing power system.
Payback Period
Based on a cost of between $554,400 and $604,800 and Noatak’s 2009 average delivered fuel costs, it is
expected that it would take between 35-38 years to pay for Noatak PV Option #1.At 2008 fuel costs, it
would take between 36 and 40 years to pay for the Noatak PV Option #1.14
Option Analysis
Noatak Option #1 was dismissed from further consideration because the riverfront site has significant
shading from the western sun, which significantly impacts the production of the system , fuel savings,
and system payback.In addition,although this location is near the existing AVEC facility,AVEC is
planning to move the power plant and tank farm away from the Noatak River, which is prone to erosion
in this area.
Another 50.4 kW PV array option considered at this site included installing 16 separate pole mounted
sub-arrays in a row along the riverfront. Each subarray would face south (instead of east) and would be
separated by 20 feet.Because this configuration would result in most of the sub-arrays being
significantly shaded by another subarray part of the day, this option would produce less power than an
east-facing array.This option was omitted from further consideration because shading significantly
limited power production.
14 Simple payback calculation Simple payback calculation
Figure 5. Noatak Option #1 location
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 12
Noatak PV Option #2 (Near School Option)
Noatak Option #2 would be located on property west of the village and adjacent to the newly
constructed school. The lot consists of permafrost soils with occasional scrub spruce trees among the
tussocks (Figure 6).The array would be installed at a new AVEC power plant and bulk fuel facility, which
is being planned by AVEC and would be constructed once funding is acquired. Although the array was
originally proposed on the north side of the future AVEC compound, Option #2 would place the array on
the south side of the compound (Figure 7).This option includes installing a 50.4 kW array of 288
modules.
Power Estimate/Fuel Savings
The annual power production of Noatak Option #2, estimated on the installation of a 50.4 kW array and
some shading, would be approximately 46,588 kWh and the estimated fuel savings would be
approximately 3,573 gallons annually.At 2008 average fuel delivery costs to Noatak, the annual savings
would be approximately $22,241.At 2009 average fuel delivery costs to Noatak, the annual savings
would be about $22,903.
Installation Cost
Noatak Option #2 would cost between $554,400 and $604,800 (assuming $11-12/watt).These costs do
not include fencing or connection into the existing power system.
Payback PeriodBased on a cost of between $554,400 and $604,800 and Noatak’s 2009 average delivered
fuel costs, it is expected that it would take between 24 to 26 years to pay for Noatak PV Option #2.At
2008 fuel costs, it would take between 25 and 27 years to pay for the Noatak PV Option #2.15
Option Analysis
Out of all the options studied in this report, Noatak Option #2 has the highest power estimate and fuel
savings. Using both 2008 and 2009 average delivered fuel costs to Noatak, this option has the best
annual savings and payback. However, this option is not feasible until the new AVEC facility is installed
in Noatak. It is recommended that this option be considered in the future, once funding has been
obtained for the new power plant and tank farm.
15 Simple payback calculation Simple payback calculation
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 13
Figure 7. Noatak PV Option #2 layout
Figure 6. Noatak Option #2 location
Noatak Option #2
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 14
Noatak PV Option #3 (Existing AVEC Tank Top/Power Plant Roof Option)
A PV array was considered on top of fuel storage tanks and on top of the power plant modules within
the currently existing AVEC facility.Mounting arrays on the fuel storage tanks was determined to be
impractical because the tanks are close to eroding into the Noatak River and will likely be moved in the
near future. Generator exhaust stacks would keep PV tracking systems mounted on the power plant
from working correctly. In addition, exhaust could shade the panels and limit power production. This
option was not investigated in more detail because it is likely that the power plant and tank farm will be
moved in the future, and it would be difficult and expensive to move solar arrays after they have been
installed.
Noatak PV Option #4 (New AVEC Tank Top/Power Plant Roof Option)
Noatak Option #4 consists of incorporating a PV array into the planned new power plant modules. This
option would be designed in detail once funding is acquired for the new facility near the school. The
overall design and placement of the power plant would consider the solar opportunities at this site.A
south facing array on the side of the modules, instead of the top, could be incorporated into the design.
Although no detailed analysis of this option was completed, it is likely that a 17 kWh (a 95 panel array)
could be installed. It is recommended that this option be considered in the future, once funding has
been obtained for the new power plant and tank farm.
Table 2. Summary Photovoltaic Options in Noatak
Option Summary
Description
Annual
Power
Estimate
(kWh)
Annual
Fuel
Savings
(gallons)
Annual
Cost
Savings A
Installation
Cost
Years to
Payback
Noatak Option #1 50.4 kW east-
facing array along
the Noatak
riverbank
33,144 2,455 $15,737 $554,400-
$604,800
35-38
Noatak Option #2 50.4 kW array at
the planned AVEC
facility near the
new school
46,588 3,573 $22,903 $554,400-
$604,800
24-26
Noatak Option #3 PV array sited atop
existing AVEC fuel
tanks or power
plant
Not pursued further due to wind, foundation, and generator
exhaust issues
Noatak Option #4 PV array sited atop
new AVEC fuel
tanks or power
plant
Recommend option be considered in the future, once funding
has been obtained for the a power plant and tank farm
A Using 2009 average cost of fuel delivered to Noatak=$6.41/gallon
Conclusions
The cost of delivered fuel in Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak is higher than in any other AVEC community.
The high costs are associated with having to fly fuel in because the rivers are too low to accommodate
Ambler, Shungnak, and Noatak
PV Location and Feasibility Study Summary
Page 15
barges. Renewable energy options in these communities are limited; however, solar energy may be a
good alternative.Most PV options considered in this study have high installation costs and do not
produce enough power to justify further planning or design. However, based on the expected solar
output,gallons of fuel saved,and the high cost of delivered fuel in Noatak, it is recommended that PV
options associated with the new power plant be studied in more detail. These options should be
investigated once funding for the new power plant and tank farm is obtained.
Although PV has a relatively high first cost on a per kilowatt basis, PV has the lowest maintenance and
repair costs of any power generation scheme.In addition,PV inverters have 10 to 20 year warranties,
and most crystalline PV modules come with a standard 25-year warranty.Considering that there are no
other renewable energy sources in Noatak, PV appears to be the best-suited alternative energy source
for this community.
CULTURAL RESOURCE CONSULTANTS LLC
3504 East 67th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99507 (907) 349-3445
July 19, 2012
Known Archaeological and Historical Sites in the Shungnak Area
Previous Research
J. Louis Giddings conducted the earliest archaeological surveys in the Shungnak area between
the 1940s and early 1960s. He investigated a site (SHU-009) on the left bank of the Kobuk River
opposite the village of Shungnak (see below) and excavated two houses at Pick River, located
4.5 miles to the south-southwest. In 1972, Edwin Hall unsuccessfully searched down river from
Shungnak for the large log cabin that served as U.S. Navy explorer Lt. George Stoney’s base
camp in the winter of 1885-1886.
Several areas in Shungnak were investigated in the 1970s to mid-1980s for U.S. Public Health
Service sanitation projects. Also, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) archaeologists have
surveyed several Native allotments in Shungnak, but have found no cultural resources.
However, in 1989, BIA archaeologists did find the Cleveland Homestead (SHU-028) site
containing a cabin, cache, and depressions about 4.6 miles west of the village.
During a cultural resource survey in 1982 for the proposed Dahl Creek Road, Stephanie Stirling
recorded a circa 1948 reindeer herder’s cabin (SHU-019) approximately 7 miles northeast of
Shungnak and 2 miles west of Dahl Creek.
Wayne Wiersum conducted an intensive survey in Shungnak in1985 for an Alaska Department
of Transportation airport project, finding a flake scatter (SHU-027) near a proposed material
source (see below). Mark Pipkin undertook a cultural resource survey in 2002 for a proposed
project to upgrade about two miles of existing roads around Shungnak. He found nothing other
than modern debris.
In 2006, Cultural Resource Consultants evaluated the Kiana-Selawick-Shungak Trail (SLK-
147/SHU-037) for eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The trail was
recommended eligible under Criterion A for its significant role as both a traditional and historic
transportation and communication route (see bleow).
Clarus Technologies, LLC (2009) conducted a cultural resource survey south and north of
Shungnak in 2009 for the Alaska Army National Guard to determine the location of known sites
CULTURAL RESOURCE CONSULTANTS LLC
3504 East 67th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska 99507 (907) 349-3445
within the boundaries of the Guard’s Local Training Area lands. No new sites were apparently
recorded.
Known Sites in Shungnak listed in the Alaska Heritage Resources Survey
In the 1950s, archaeologist James Giddings excavated one of several shallow pits (SHU-009)
concealed by willow thickets on the left bank of the Kobuk River opposite the village of
Shungnak. The 9.5 by 15.5-foot house pit with a 12-foot entrance tunnel dates from the mid-
1800s, or perhaps a little earlier.
The Shungnak Airport Site (SHU-027) was formerly on a knoll on the right bank of the Kobuk
River at the Shungnak airport. Reported by archaeologist Wayne Wiersum in 1978, the site was
destroyed by construction of the airport. Wiersum recovered a number of flakes and received
reports of other artifacts being collected by villagers.
The 105-mile long Kiana-Selawik-Shungnak Trail (SHU-037) runs from Kiana, southeast
through the Hockley Hills, up Portage Creek, and across Shogvik Lake to Selawik. It then turns
east and continues along the Selawik River to the Kugarak River, where it proceeds northeasterly
to and across Egaupak Lake. From Egaupak Lake, the route follows Kerchurak Creek to its
headwaters and then proceeds east across Black River to Shungnak. The Kiana to Selawik part of
the trail was a prehistoric traditional winter trail between two existing winter villages. The
Selawik to Shungnak section was constructed as a mail route, probably after the village was
moved to its current location in the 1920s. In 1932, the Alaska Road Commission formalized the
Kiana to Selawik section as a mail trail and staked the open sections. The Selawik to Shungnak
portion of the trail is listed as Route 41AA in ARC documents. A 2006 Determination of
Eligibility is pending consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer.