HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGSD GrantApplication FINALRenewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA 13-006 Application Page 1 of 42 7/3/2011
Application Forms and Instructions
This instruction page and the following grant application constitutes the Grant Application Form
for Round 6 of the Renewable Energy Fund. An electronic version of the Request for
Applications (RFA) and this form are available online at:
http://www.akenergyauthority.org/RE_Fund-6.html
If you need technical assistance filling out this application, please contact Shawn Calfa,
the Alaska Energy Authority Grant Administrator at (907) 771-3031 or at
scalfa@aidea.org.
If you are applying for grants for more than one project, provide separate application
forms for each project.
Multiple phases for the same project may be submitted as one application.
If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project, provide
milestones and grant budget for each phase of the project.
In order to ensure that grants provide sufficient benefit to the public, AEA may limit
recommendations for grants to preliminary development phases in accordance with 3
ACC 107.605(1).
If some work has already been completed on your project and you are requesting
funding for an advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the
preceding phases are satisfied and funding for an advanced phase is warranted.
If you have additional information or reports you would like the Authority to consider in
reviewing your application, either provide an electronic version of the document with
your submission or reference a web link where it can be downloaded or reviewed.
REMINDER:
Alaska Energy Authority is subject to the Public Records Act AS 40.25, and materials
submitted to the Authority may be subject to disclosure requirements under the act if no
statutory exemptions apply.
All applications received will be posted on the Authority web site after final
recommendations are made to the legislature.
In accordance with 3 AAC 107.630 (b) Applicants may request trade secrets or
proprietary company data be kept confidential subject to review and approval by the
Authority. If you want information is to be kept confidential the applicant must:
o Request the information be kept confidential.
o Clearly identify the information that is the trade secret or proprietary in their
application.
o Receive concurrence from the Authority that the information will be kept
confidential. If the Authority determines it is not confidential it will be treated as a
public record in accordance with AS 40.25 or returned to the applicant upon
request.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 2 of 42 7/3//2012
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal)
Alaska Gateway School District
Type of Entity: K-12 Public School Fiscal Year End: June 30
Tax ID: 92-0058369 Tax Status: For-profit or X non-profit ( check one)
Mailing Address
P.O. Box 226
Tok, AK 99780
Physical Address
Mile 1313.5 Alaska Highway
Tok, Alaska
Telephone
907-883-5151
Fax
907-883-5154
Email
smacmanus@agsd.us
1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT / GRANTS MANAGER
Name
Scott MacManus
Title
Assistant Superintendent
Mailing Address
P.O. Box 226
Tok, AK 99780
Telephone
907-883-5151
Fax
907-883-5154
Email
smacmanus@agsd.us
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)
An electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS
42.05, or
X An independent power producer in accordance with 3 AAC 107.695 (a) (1), or
A local government, or
X 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
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 3 of 42 7/3//2012
SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY
This is intended to be no more than a 1-2 page overview of your project.
2.1 Project Title – (Provide a 4 to 5 word title for your project)
AGSD District Heat Loop 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.
Tok, Alaska with six (6) other small communities.
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.
The Project is in Tok, Alaska, located in the Upper Tanana Valley, at Mile 1313.5 Alaska
Highway, on the Tok School Campus, at coordinates 63.175433,-143.258972.
2.2.2 Community benefiting – Name(s) of the community or communities that will be the
beneficiaries of the project.
The primary beneficiary of the project is the community of Tok. All buildings to be connected to
the proposed heat loop are located in the community of Tok. There are six (6) other
communities that are part of the Alaska Gateway School District that will also benefit from the
reduced operating costs at the Tok School Campus; this includes Dot Lake, Eagle, Tetlin,
Tanacross, Mentasta Lake, and Northway. The project will also benefit communities in the
region who are considering waste heat recovery in the Interior region.
2.3 PROJECT TYPE
Put X in boxes as appropriate
2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type
Wind X Biomass or Biofuels
Hydro, including run of river Transmission of Renewable Energy
Geothermal, including Heat Pumps Small Natural Gas
X 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 X Design and Permitting
Feasibility X Construction and Commissioning
Conceptual Design
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 4 of 42 7/3//2012
2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Provide a brief one paragraph description of your proposed project.
The Alaska Gateway School District (AGSD) Heat Loop Project request is for Phase III Design
and Phase IV Construction of a waste heat recovery application for AGSD’s existing 5.5
MMBTU woody biomass energy facility. The project will recover waste heat which would
otherwise be rejected and distribute it to ten (10) State-owned and Community building-clusters.
The district heat loop will directly replace heat from the existing fossil fuel heating systems,
offsetting the equivalent of 49,100 gallons of fuel oil #1 per year. Heat customers will be
charged for heat on a cost-based rate, and the hydronic heat sales are exempt from RCA
regulations. Over the 18-month project period, AGSD plans to explore various collaborative
business structures with the local utility, Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T) and other potential
contractors to operate and maintain the heat loop. AGSD is prepared to independently operate
and maintain the district heat loop.
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.)
Financial benefits for AGSD
The AGSD District Heat Loop would greatly reduce operating cost per usable MMBTU for the
Tok School. The existing Tok School Biomass Plant is designed to produce high-pressure
steam, and has a low turn-down ratio. This means that the Plant operates best at full capacity
(5.5 MMBTU), and struggles to operate efficiently at lower outputs. Therefore, the Plant
operates near capacity, regardless of actual heat demand by the School, resulting in significant
amounts of rejected heat. The AGSD District Heat Loop Project will drastically reduce the
plant’s operating cost by creating a market for heat that would otherwise be rejected. O&M costs
per usable BTU are expected to drop by 50 -- 100%.
The project also greatly reduces the operating costs of two (2) the Tok School’s buildings, the
MPF and Zamboni Garage. One of AGSD’s primary impetuses in preparing this grant
application was reducing the costs of heating these two buildings, which are both currently
heated with fuel oil. AGSD applied for AEA’s Round V Renewable Energy Fund, which was
recommended for full-funding by AEA but did not make it into the Governor’s approved grant
funding budget. AGSD would like to request that funding the heat loop extension of these two
(2) project buildings be prioritized in the consideration of this grant application.
Financial benefits for public agencies and non-profit community organizations
There are three (3) State agencies and two (2) private non-profit community organizations that
will benefit from heat utility savings associated with the AGSD District Heat Loop Project: Alaska
Department of Transportation, Alaska Division of Forestry, and Alaska Gateway School District;
and the Tok Clinic and Tok Volunteer Fire Department. Each of these energy customers will
benefit from the significantly reduced cost of heat. Cost savings are estimated to be 50 -- 100%
over fossil fuel oil1 in Year 1. These savings escalate as the price of fossil fuel oil increases,
according to fuel oil price projections from the Alaska Energy Authority.
1 AGSD Heat Loop heat anticipated to be $15 -- $26/MMBTU, while existing fuel oil energy is calculated to be
$32.93/ MMBTU.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 5 of 42 7/3//2012
State agencies, using an estimated 74% of the Loop’s heat load, will benefit from 74% of the
total heat customer heat savings associated with the project. Private non-profit organization will
benefit from the remaining 26% of the total heat customer savings associated with the project.
Several of the heat customers have demonstrated great motivation to reduce heat utility costs
through changing building use, increased weatherization, and fuel source diversification.
The Community non-profit organizations served by this project, the Tok Clinic and the
Volunteer Fire Department, provide immense value to the community of Tok. The Tok
Clinic houses medical providers, which provide mid-level medical service, Advanced Life
Support Ambulance, and dental services to the Upper Tanana Valley and to the travelling
public. EMS Ambulance Service and operations training is also based at the Tok Clinic. There is
no comparable medical service in the region. The Clinic’s Letter of Support for the project,
included with this application, states, “Our income sources are limited and with the escalating
cost of heating fuel and electricity our expenses have exceeded our income for several years.
We strongly depend on our community for financial and volunteer support. We have spoken with
Legislators, AP&T and other businesses about available help and ways to reduce our operating
cost.” Reducing or eliminating medical services at the Clinic for any reason, including
unaffordable utility cost, would be drastically detrimental to the community of Tok.
The Volunteer Fire Department would also benefit greatly from lower utility costs. The Volunteer
Fire Department offers fire protection for the community of Tok and the surrounding area. They
also play a very important role in assisting DNR-Forestry Tok area office in fighting wildfire.
However, this crucial community non-profit has no funding mechanisms other than fighting
wildfires. This funding source is undependable: in 2012, for instance, the Volunteer Fire
Department obtained no revenues from wildfire. In a Letter of Support for the project, included
with this application, Fire Chief Dave Bergstrom writes, “the escalating costs of heating fuel
needed to keep our engines and equipment operational in extreme weather, makes renewable
energy options increasingly attractive to our organization, and because we are volunteer, our
funding is extremely limited.”
Public benefits through local collaboration and community energy planning
The project will benefit the public by engaging a long-term energy strategy for the community of
Tok. This strategy will demonstrate collaboration among AGSD and the local utility, AP&T.
AP&T is currently assessing the viability of a 2 MW biomass CHP facility. In August 2012,
AGSD Superintendent Todd Poage and AGSD Asst. Superintendent Scott MacManus met with,
AP&T CEO Bob Grimm (by telephone), AP&T staff Tom Irvin, AP&T Public Relations Consultant
Dave Stancliff, AEA Director Sara Fischer-Goad, AEA Deputy Director Sean Skaling, and staff
from Dalson Energy. AGSD and AP&T proposed collaborating on the operations and
maintenance of the proposed heat loop. It was decided to consider integration of AP&T’s
potential future heat loop in the design of the AGSD District Heat Loop, and to further explore
collaboration among the entities in the design phase of the project. The collaboration
complements many of AEA’s goals to support projects, which engage a long term energy vision,
community collaboration, and provide multiple economic benefits.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 6 of 42 7/3//2012
Economic localization through retained energy dollars
By replacing the heat from fossil fuels with waste heat, the project will retain cash flows within
the community of Tok that otherwise would have left the community to purchase fossil fuels. In
the first year of the project, the value of the fossil fuel oil that will be offset is $221,630
(49,100 gallons at $4.51/gal). Most of this money immediately exits the community of Tok
because the fossil fuels are sourced, refined, and transported outside the community of Tok.
Replacing these fuel oil dollars with renewable energy dollars that recirculate, serving state and
community buildings, with state grant monies would greatly benefit the local economy in Tok.
Fuel price stability
Fluctuations in fuel oil prices cause immense challenges for managing budgets. Since 2009, the
fuel oil price has increased 42%2. Uncertainty creates aversion to program expansion. Locally
sourced, renewable fuel provides greater price stability to benefit building and business.
Additionally, other communities have seen the biomass fuel price per ton decrease as the local
industry evolves.
Job creation
Local jobs will be created for construction, operations, and maintenance of the new district heat
loop. AGSD has already been able to create jobs within the School District using savings from
operating the Tok School biomass facility. Retaining these jobs will be vital to the stable and
efficient operation of the Tok School Biomass Facility, so it is anticipated that these benefits will
be enhanced by the extension of the heat loop.
Reduced risk of oil spills.
There are over 2,300 contaminated sites in the state, including military, privately owned, and
state-owned sites, rural bulk fuel storage facilities, leaking underground storage tank sites, and
"orphan" sites (where the responsible party is unknown or unable to perform adequate
remediation). These sites are addressed by Alaska DEC division of Spill and Response. These
sites cost Alaskans millions of taxpayer dollars for remediation every year.
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.
This Round 6 grant request for $2,848,939 will combine both Phase III and Phase IV to
complete the District Heat Loop Project. The total anticipated cost including match contributions
is $95,575 for the eighteen (18) month project. Cash and In-Kind match commitments include
administrative, development, and operations support from the District Administrators.
Phase III: $382,681 for Final Design and Permitting:
Phase IV: $2,466,257 for Construction, Commissioning, and Reporting
Contingency costs: $191,072 (10%) is included for Phase IV construction, including
equipment costs.
2 In Tok, the price for fuel oil in 2009 was estimated at $2.87/ gallon; the current September 2012 price is
estimated $4.07 per gallon.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 7 of 42 7/3//2012
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. $2,753,364
2.7.2 Cash match to be provided $0
2.7.3 In-kind match to be provided $95,575
2.7.4 Other grant applications not yet approved $0
2.7.5 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.7.1 through 2.7.3) $2,848,939
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)
$2,848,939
2.7.7 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings) $2,827,804 (present value)
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.)
$ One immediate public benefit
that the School District to spend
fewer dollars on facilities and
utilities, and more dollars in the
classroom teaching children.
Additionally, the project will
improve the viability of utilizing
hazardous fuels from the Tok area.
Finally, the project promotes long-
term energy planning and
collaborative strategy.
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.
Alaska Gateway School District (AGSD) is the lead applicant for the grant and will provide
overall project oversight and will provide an onsite construction manager. A competitive RFP
process will identify the contractor for project management, engineering, technical guidance,
and construction administration. The main point of contact for AGSD will be Scott MacManus,
who is also the Project Manager of this application. Resumes are attached for project team
listed below.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 8 of 42 7/3//2012
Scott MacManus, Owner’s Project Manager, Alaska Gateway School District
Scott has had experience in project management for both construction and education programs.
He will provide oversight for all of the stages of the project between the School District and
construction companies and with the Alaska Energy Authority. Mr. MacManus will be performing
the AEA contract oversight to ensuring timely completion of the project and adherence to AEA
regulations.
Todd Poage, Superintendent of AGSD.
Mr. Poage oversees all district operations, including supervision of seven (7) rural schools. He
completes district fiscal budgeting, capital improvement projects, and strategic planning for
AGSD.
Dan Teague, Construction Project Manager, AGSD.
Mr. Teague operates and maintains the District’s existing wood energy system. He will oversee
construction as an owner’s representative for AGSD.
Jeffrey D. Hermanns, Tok Area Forester
As the Tok Area Forester, Jeffrey manages over 8.5 million acres of land in Eastern Alaska,
supervises twelve (12) full time employees and 250 emergency fire fighters. He is responsible
for timber and resource planning for the area. He served on the project team for AGSD’s Tok
School Biomass Heat Project, which was awarded under AEA’s Renewable Energy Fund
Round I. Jeffrey has been a key player in drafting the Tok Community Wildfire Protection Plan,
the Preliminary Feasibility Assessment for Heating with Wood in Tok, Alaska, and ongoing fuel
reduction efforts.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 9 of 42 7/3//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.
Please fill out form provided below. You may add additional rows as needed.
PHASE III MILESTONES TASKS START
DATE
END
DATE
1. Project scoping and contractor
solicitation for planning and
design
Update project data to confirm that all
resources are still available; develop
solicitations for planning and design
contractors.
Month 1 Month 3
2. Permit applications (as needed) Apply for permits, as needed. Month 1 Month 2
3. Final environmental assessment
and mitigation plans (as needed)
Resolve any known environmental issues
and finalize environmental and mitigation
plans.
N/A N/A
4. Resolution of land use, right of
way issues
Obtain final land use authorizations;
implement go/no go decision process. Month 1 Month 3
5. Permit approvals Obtain all necessary permits. Month 1 Month 3
6. Final system design
Finalize engineered and approved system
design, integration design, and
interconnection study.
Month 1 Month 6
7. Engineers cost estimate Work with engineer to finalize the project
cost estimate. Month 1 Month 5
8. Updated economic and financial
analysis
Complete detailed financial analysis based
on chosen business structure and
applicable costs, revenues, and incentives.
Month 1 Month 5
9. Negotiated power sales
agreements with approved rates Execute the heat energy sales agreements. Month 1 Month 5
10. Final business and operational
plan Finalize the operational and business plan. Month 1 Month 6
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 10 of 42 7/3//2012
MILESTONES – PHASE IV TASKS START
DATE
END
DATE
1. Confirmation that all design
and feasibility requirements
are complete.
Create and schedule construction plan. Month 1 Month 7
2. Completion of bid documents
Develop solicitations for construction
contractors; Create and schedule
commissioning plan.
Month 1 Month 5
3. Contractor/vendor selection
and award
Select contractors and vendors for
construction. Month 1 Month 5
4. Construction Phases
Continuously monitor for verify and update
projections and system’s efficiency;
Complete modifications as needed to final
design during construction; environmental
monitoring as needed; update business
plans and power purchase agreements to
account for actual construction costs.
Month 11 Month 15
5. Integration and testing
Actively track project costs against the
project budget; Propose budget
modifications as needed; Manage cost
overruns; Environmental monitoring as
needed.
Month 15 Month 17
6. Decommissioning old systems No systems will be decommissioned. N/A N/A
7. Final Acceptance,
Commissioning and Start-up
Prepare and submit reports as required by
permitting agencies. Month 16 Month 17
8. Operations Reporting
Update business plans and power purchase
agreements as needed to account for actual
construction costs; Final project report
including as-built specifications and
drawings, final budget, schedule, and
recommendations; Periodic operation and
maintenance reports as required by grant
including actual O&M, fuel, and equipment
costs; O&M measures and schedule;
energy output; project availability;
conversion efficiency; renewable energy
resource; and recommendations.
Month 18 Month 18
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 11 of 42 7/3//2012
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.
Personnel:
Professional design services will be determined through a competitive request for qualifications.
Firms with experience in community district heat systems will be selected.
Contractors:
Contractors will be selected through the District’s competitive bid process and managed by the
Construction Project Manager. The general contractor will be determined through competitive
bid process and managed by the AGSD Construction Manager. The bid will be publicly
advertised. Local and regional capacity to construct heat loops is available; for example, Yukon
Construction Inc., located in Tok, served as the general contractor on the Tok School Biomass
Facility.
Equipment:
The renewable energy technology is a heat recovery unit(s) amounting to an estimated 2.5
MMBTU originating at the existing Tok School Biomass Plant, a heat distribution pipe network,
building integration infrastructure, and ancillary equipment (pumps, controls, and heat meters).
The equipment is proven, commercial, low-risk, low-maintenance, and reliable. Typical building
integration could require a supply and return, brazed plate heat exchanger, and expansion tank.
Services:
Professional design services will be determined through a competitive request for based on
needed qualifications. Firms with experience in integrating wood-fired heating systems into
district heating systems will be selected.
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.
A communications plan will be developed as part of the project, and all engaged parties
(Consultants, Contractors, Engineers, AEA Staff and AGSD Staff) will be briefed on the plan.
Communications will be the primary responsibility the Project Manager, who will work closely
with Engineers and Contractors to ensure that each party understands their role, and what the
time lines are, and will trouble shoot any issues that may arise during design and construction.
Regular teleconferences will be held to ensure all team members are informed and allow for
discussion of any topics that will arise during design and construction. Meeting minutes of the
regular teleconferences will be sent out to the project team and AEA. Telephone, fax, and email
will provide the basic day-to-day communications needed to maintain successful project
delivery.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 12 of 42 7/3//2012
During the design and construction of the Biomass Heating Plant, which was completed using
Round I grant funding, the AEA Staff was fully integrated into the communication chain. They
were invited to attend all meetings, consulted on all major decisions, and were copied on all
meeting minutes. The strong relationship that was forged will be continued.
3.5 Project Risk
Discuss potential problems and how you would address them.
There may be unforeseen problems that come along, however, confirming that realistic planning
timelines and project flowcharts are in place, contingencies are developed, and effective
communication strategies are used, will reduce many of the problems that might otherwise
occur. Some contracting mechanisms, such as installing liquidated damages agreements into
each contract and clearly outlining these at the start of each phase, should reduce delays.
Potential problems have been listed below, with the resolutions that are in place to address
each.
Potential Problems
1. Design/ Build costs that go beyond the Scope of Work described in this proposal.
Resolution to Address the Problem: This risk has been addressed by obtaining estimates of
probable costs from experienced professionals for the key project budget items.
Professionals include people who have worked on projects of similar scale and scope in
similar geographic regions. Additionally, the risk of higher than anticipated project costs will
be reduced by implementing a go/no-go decision process that requires key project
developments and analyses to be completed and re-evaluated before moving on to the next
project phase.
2. Challenges to setting up effective heat sales agreements with customers.
Resolution to Address the Problem: This risk was addressed during Phase II by meeting with
all potential heat customers and discussing their building heating infrastructure. All
customers expressed strong interest and support for any initiative that would lower their heat
costs. All potential customers have provided a letter of commitment for the project. The heat
sales agreement with each potential customer is included in the go/ no-go decision process
for this project. This effort will remain a priority during the project in order to move the project
forward as planned.
As explained earlier, AGSD has committed to provide an energy incentive to its customers
to assist them in adapting their building heating systems to the new district heat loop. AGSD
will provide each customer with free biomass heat until the total value of the heat (when
measured in fuel oil) equals the cost of adapting their system to the District Heat Loop. For
the purpose of this grant, the energy customer incentive has been listed as the value of one
year of free heat from the district heat loop. This energy customer incentive is liste d as a
separate budget line item of $100,901 (6,629 MMBTU at preliminary cost/ MMBTU of
$15.29).
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 13 of 42 7/3//2012
3. Insolvent heat customers.
Resolution to Address the Problem: This risk is reduced because nearly 75% of heat
purchases will be from State agencies. All customers, including non-State agencies, provide
essential community services to Tok (i.e., healthcare services, educational services, fire
control, forest management, and transportation). All customers have been operating for
decades in the community and have established management teams.
4. Challenges for wood fuel procurement at AGSD.
Resolution to Address the Problem: This risk is diminished by the fact that the biomass
resource in the Upper Tanana region is prolific and available, as documented in previous
feasibility work, and that AGSD has been successfully sourcing wood fuel since 2009. Also, a
project partner, Tok Forestry, has partnered with the applicant to facilitate access to wood
fuels from Tok Forestry’s harvest projects, which include hazardous fuels reduction. AGSD
has already completed their wood supply contract for 2012 – 2013.
Additionally, AP&T has been negotiating with Alaska DNR Forestry on a long-term (25-year)
biomass fuel harvest contract from the Tanana Valley State Forest that will provide long-term
access to biomass fuel feedstock for the relatively small tonnage demands of the AGSD project.
5. Construction delays, which include inclement weather, forest fire, or gaining the required
approvals from the Division of Fire and Life Safety.
Resolution to Address the Problem: The District has reduced this risk by working with
experienced professionals who have been active in construction projects in the Tok area, and
by planning a project development timeline that takes account of the short construction
seasons and weather challenges that can impact construction in Tok.
SECTION 4 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TASKS
The level of information will vary according to phase(s) of the project you propose to
undertake with grant funds.
If some work has already been completed on your project and you are requesting funding for
an advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the preceding phases
are satisfied and funding for an advanced phase is warranted.
4.1 Proposed Energy Resource
Describe the potential extent/amount of the energy resource that is available.
Discuss the pros and cons of your proposed energy resource vs. other alternatives that may be
available for the market to be served by your project. For pre-construction applications, describe
the resource to the extent known. For design and permitting or construction projects, please
provide feasibility documents, design documents, and permitting documents (if applicable) as
attachments to this application.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 14 of 42 7/3//2012
“Waste” Heat Energy Resource
The Tok School boiler is 5.5 MMBTU/hr. output. This boiler operates close to capacity regardless
of heat load. Independent analysis suggests that AGSD will be able to meet all loads at the
School and on the AGSD District Heat Loop; additional analysis will be completed in the design
portion of the AGSD Heat Loop Project.
The following chart documents the current annual fuel oil consumption for each building cluster
and estimates the peak load. The peak load was estimated using a heating degree day model,
after each building manager had been consulted about occupancy, type of use, and controls.
Peak load analysis will be refined in the design portion of the AGSD Heat Loop Project.
AGSD’s main school building, which is already served by the Tok School Biomass Facility, has
an estimated peak demand of 3.1 MMBTU. This suggests a peak demand on the AGSD biomass
plant of 5.6 MMBTU. Therefore, the AGSD District Heat Loop may be able to meet all space
demand on the heat line except for a few days in a cold year3. Please see the graph below.
3 Heat records were obtained for 2011- 2012, which was considered to be a cold year.
Building Owner Gallons per year Estimated Peak
Load (MMBTU)Type of Use
AK Department of Transportation DOT A 13,097 0.63 Space heating
AK Department of Transportation 7,981 0.39 Space heating
AK Department of Forestry 2,259 0.11 Space heating
AK Department of Forestry 800 0.04 Space heating + DHW
Alaska Gateway School District 1,800 0.14 Space heating for greenhouse
Alaska Gateway School District Space heating + DHW
Alaska Gateway School District Space heating
Volunteer Fire Department 2,738 0.13 Space heating
Clinic 5,071 0.29 Space heating + DHW
Sr. Center 5,000 0.29 Space heating + DHW
TOTAL 49,096 2.5
Percentage of heat used by Alaska State agencies 74%
Percentage of heat used by private non-profits 26%
Forestry B
VFD
DOT B
Forestry A
Lateral Line
Greenhouse
MPF/ Garage 10,350 0.50
Clinic
Sr. Center
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 15 of 42 7/3//2012
-
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
Tok School Biomass Boiler (School + Heat Loop)
School Heat Load District Heat Loop Load
All information supplied in this section is subject to further refinement in the “Design” portion of
this project.
Biomass Energy Resource
The wood biomass that is available for use in this project is incredible. With the annual
tonnage of biomass required, fuel harvest would only require between fifteen (15) to thirty
(30) acres of the typical forest found within a ten (10) mile radius of the school. The
Project will require approximately 642 green tons of wood fuel (40% moisture content,
10.32 MMBTU/ton). Fuel for 2011 – 2012 was contracted at $56 per green ton, chipped and
delivered.
Available biomass fuel includes:
Trees removed from the hazardous fuels reduction projects in the Tok Area. A Community
Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) was signed off by the community and State of Alaska agencies
in 2008. This is a collaborative effort of community leaders and state and federal agencies to
address the issue of the extreme wildfire hazard that the community faces every summer.
The total amount of high volume hazardous fuels is over 39,000 acres in Tok. By having a value
for the material, it will be possible to sustainably remove this fuel and turn a real liability into a
real value. This is extremely important to the Tok community.
Tok’s two (2) small, longtime sawmill businesses have waste products from their milling
operations. This includes tons of sawdust, planner shavings, and slabs. Land clearing operations
for private land development, highway, road construction also produce fuel for Tok School
Biomass facility.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 16 of 42 7/3//2012
The Tok area’s biomass inventory dwarfs the Tok School demand, as demonstrated by the
implementation of AGSD’s existing biomass energy plant and AP&T’s ongoing investigation into
a utility-scale biomass CHP facility. The most recent Tok area forest inventory, published by
Alaska Department of Forestry, confirms 90,000 acres of pole timber and over 16.4 million tons
of biomass (greater than or equal to 2”). 4
The following list describes fuel supplies that are currently available for the Tok School, at about
2,500 green tons per year:
1. Timber sale with the Division of Forestry, NC–1102 –T. March 24, 2012--December 1, 2022
for all volume from State lands for Fuel Reduction projects in the Tok Area. Currently there
are 15,000 tons of trees harvested, decked, and ready to grind. At 2,500 tons per year, this
material will supply AGSD for six (6) years minimum. Additional fuel reduction projects are
funded and planned for continued harvest every year.
2. Currently, thirty (30) acres a year of biomass are produced from Green timber saw log
timber sales from the State. This volume is currently decked and could be purchased by the
Tok School. This would be the only volume to operate the school facility.
3. Mill residue from Pines Lumber and Young’s Timber is available for purchase.
Current inventories exceed 20,000 green tons.
4. Tok Forestry Bio-bank depot accepts biomass deposits from Tok residents. Currently,
residents deliver material at a rate that would heat the School for
four (4) to twelve (12) months. This material is currently burned because of excess biomass
in the Tok Area.
5. Private Native corporation land in the Tok Area is significant and could fuel additional
biomass projects.
6. The Tok Five Year Schedule of Timber Sales has extensive biomass supply available over
the next five (5) years. This supply is in excess of the Tok School contract.
A number of resource assessments and feasibility studies have been completed regarding
woody biomass in the Upper Tanana Valley. They include:
Hanson, “Biomass Supply Analysis for the Tok Area.” Alaska Department of Forestry.
March 2011.
Upper Tanana Biomass CHP Feasibility Study, Alaska Power & Telephone; ongoing.
4 (Hanson, “Biomass Supply Analysis for the Tok Area,” March 2011).
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 17 of 42 7/3//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.
The existing energy system providing the current waste heat resource is a 5.5 MMBTU biomass
energy facility. The system was installed in 2009 and operates at approximately 83% efficiency.
The system capacity is 5.5 MMBTU.
The existing energy systems of heat energy customers are comprised of separately owned and
operated heating systems. There are approximately ten (10) building clusters that would be
served by the biomass district heat loop. Each of these buildings has a distinct heating system
and would require unique adaptations to draw heat from the heat loop.
Please see the charts documenting the configuration of existing energy systems below.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 18 of 42 7/3//2012
Building Owner Building
Cluster
Heating
Infrastructure
Size, type of heater
Age and
Condition
Gallons per
year Size of heating system Estimated
efficiency
AGSD WOOD HEAT
PLANT
Hurst N65 steam
biomass boiler and
small steam/electric
generator
Installed in
2009
N/A -- this
system uses
woody
biomass too
5.5 MMBTU 74%
AK Department
of Transportation DOT A
Office and shop. Small
boiler for space
heating office. Point
source forced air oil
units for shop. Electric
DHW.
Shop is heated with
forced air units. New
hydronic forced air
units would need to be
installed.
Operational.
Age unknown. 13,097 124,000 BTU/hr. 82%
AK Department
of Transportation DOT B
Small loop connects
warm storage and
facilities building. DHW
use is insignificant.
Shop is heated with
940 BTU/hr. radiant
floor heating..
Facilities building is
heated by hydronic
forced air unit heaters.
No adaptation to
building is necessary.
Operational.
Age unknown. 7,981
Shop -- 940,000 BTU/hr
Facilities -- 4 forced air units
(probably 250,000 BTU/hr)
82%
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 19 of 42 7/3//2012
Building Owner Building
Cluster
Heating
Infrastructure
Size, type of heater
Age and
Condition
Gallons per
year Size of heating system Estimated
efficiency
AK Department
of Forestry Forestry A
Space heating through
forced air furnace
system. Additional
infrastructure needed
for hydronic heating,
such as air to water
heat exchanger or
hydronic heat loop.
Heater, insulation, and
heat distribution
infrastructure is in
good shape.
Operational.
Age unknown.
The
equivalent of
2259 gallons.
This building
uses wood
pellets in
addition to
fuel oil for
heating.
Main office -- est. 210,000 BTU/hr
Also back up --Toyo Monitor Heater
441; Harman Pellet Stove P68
Does not include DHW
fuel oil -- 82%
wood pellets --
82%
AK Department
of Forestry Forestry B
Office, meeting space,
showers, well house.
Most of this space is
used seasonally but
would be used year-
round if lower cost
heat were available.
There are 4
interconnections
needed here. Office
and meeting space
could be served by
point-source heater
(equivalent of
Toyostove). Showers
and well house are
used for water heating.
Simple
interconnections, all
buildings within about
200' of each other.
Operational.
Age unknown. 800
Warehouse office -- Toyo Monitor
Heater 441, est. 40,000 btu/hr
Operations -- Toyo Monitor Heater
441, est. 40,000 btu/hr
Shower House (propane) -- American
Glas, GVF 90-533T
Well house -- unknown
fuel oil -- 82%
propane --
79%
Volunteer Fire
Department VFD
Heat to northernmost
building only. Existing
radiant floor heating.
No domestic hot water
in this building. Space
heating only.
Operational.
Age unknown. 2,738 Crane 73-215 boiler, 187,000 btu/hr 82%
CONTINUED. . .
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 20 of 42 7/3//2012
Building Owner Building
Cluster
Heating
Infrastructure
Size, type of heater
Age and
Condition
Gallons per
year Size of heating system Estimated
efficiency
Clinic Clinic
Existing heat loop
powered serving Clinic
and Sr. Center. Fuel oil
system is operational.
System is
supplemented wtih
cordwood boiler
system.
Prior to the wood
boiler, the facility used
about 5,000 gallons of
fuel oil#1 per year.
Since that time, the
Clinic has not
undertaken any
significant changes in
building infrastructure
or use.
Operational.
Age unknown.
Estimated
5,071 gallons
fuel oil #1
Fuel oil boiler is in place with
additional, redundant capacity from
outdoor cordwood boiler. The
cordwood boiler consumes 50 cords
per year when operating.
This boiler is connected through a
heat loop to the Senior Center.
Fuel oil
estimated at
82%. USFS
forest
products
laboratory
publishes
efficiency of
seasoned
cordwood
boiler at 77%
but Central
Boilers are
not expected
to be that
efficient.
Sr. Center Tok Sr. Cnt.Estimated 5,000 gallons
fuel oil #1.
Operational.
Age unknown.
Estimated
5,000 fuel oil
#1
Fuel oil boiler is in place with
additional, redundant capacity from
outdoor cordwood boiler. The
cordwood boiler consumes 50 cords
per year when operating.
This boiler is connected through a
heat loop to the Tok Clinic.
See Clinic
note.
Alaska Gateway
School District MPF
The shooting range and
restroom are the
heated portions of the
building,
approximately 10,000
sq. ft. These boilers
also provide hot water
for the zamboni and
restrooms.
Operational.
Age unknown. 9,850 Two fuel oil boilers: 346,000 Btu/hr
and 1.52 MMBTU/hr respectively 83%
CONTINUED. . .
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 21 of 42 7/3//2012
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.
Within the Tok School Biomass Plant, the project will have minimal impact on the operations of
the existing energy infrastructure and resources. The Plant will continue to operate in a similar
manner, at a similar capacity, regardless of whether the AGSD District Heat Loop is installed.
The Plant will continue to use a similar volume of wood fuel to produce useable steam
regardless of whether the AGSD District Heat Loop is installed. For these reasons, the project is
considered a “waste heat” project. AGSD has prioritized operating the district heat loop over
the operation of the electric turbine.
Additional infrastructure to recover waste heat and distribute it will be installed within the existing
energy infrastructure. This includes: a heat recovery device, such as a heat exchanger, pumps,
controls, and ancillary devices (valves, variable frequency drives, etc.). Additional project
infrastructure (e.g. pipes) will be installed outside the project building and will have no effect on
the existing energy infrastructure.
Within the heat customer buildings, the existing energy resources are fossil fuel based systems,
almost all fuel oil #1 systems. The systems are detailed in the preceding section, 4.2.1. The
AGSD District Heat Loop will have little impact on the existing energy infrastructure and
resources within these buildings. The AGSD District Heat Loop project will only own, operate,
and maintain the district heat loop connection point.
Heat loop customers have expressed that all existing energy infrastructure will be retained for
back-up and to meet peak demand. No changes are expected to the existing energy
infrastructure, other than new controls that designate heat from the heat loop as the primary
source of heat, while utilizing heat from existing energy infrastructure as back-up.
4.2.3 Existing Energy Market
Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy customers.
Existing energy use and market in Tok
AGSD’s existing energy use (fuel) is woody biomass. More than 2.5 MMBTU of heat is rejected
from the Biomass Plant because it is unavailable to any heat market.
The existing energy use fuels in the Tok Area and Upper Tanana consist of fossil fuel oil,
electricity, propane, cordwood, wood pellets and wood chips. The use of fossil fuel oil over the
last two (2) years has dramatically declined in the residential market to an estimated 5 to 20% of
the total heating energy. Most people have added wood stoves and or outdoor wood boilers and
use oil for backup.
Larger buildings, such as State buildings and commercial businesses, primarily heat with fuel oil
because of the lack of suitable alternatives. Some businesses use wood boilers, but they have
low efficiency and high emissions, and associated high maintenance requirements.
Fuel oil is expensive, currently $4.07 a gallon. Propane is not commonly used for heating, as it
freezes at minus 40 degrees F, although it is a common choice for cooking stoves. Propane is
also expensive, at $79 for a 100 lb. tank.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 22 of 42 7/3//2012
Cordwood is a large market in the area, and is growing rapidly around the Interior for residential
use and for some businesses. Current 2012 cordwood costs are $200 or more, cut and
delivered. The demand for cordwood has created a supply shortage and the price has increased
with demand. Most of the trees in the upper Tanana are not cordwood-size trees (too small).
Wood pellets are becoming increasing popular and are being imported into the area from both
within Alaska and out of state sources, which cost between $300 and $400 a ton.
Project impact on local customers
Energy customers will significantly benefit from the AGSD Heat Loop Project. The Project will
reduce heat utility costs to energy customers by providing a lower cost heating alternative at a
stable price. The cost savings are estimated to be 50 -- 100%. Heat customers will retain energy
savings for use in programs and for personnel. All energy customers provide invaluable services
to the community of Tok, including healthcare, education, fire prevention, road maintenance, and
workforce training.
The project will also have a huge impact on AGSD, which will be able to recoup some costs
associated with generating waste heat.
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 specific to project location
The renewable energy technology is a heat recovery unit amounting to an estimated 2.5 MMBTU
originating at the existing Tok School Biomass Plant , a heat distribution pipe network that has
building integration infrastructure and ancillary equipment (pumps, controls, and heat meters).
Initial conceptual design suggests the heat customers could be served with ten (10) heat
clusters. The proposed location of cluster interconnection is highlighted on the map below. The
technology is all proven, commercial, low-risk, low-maintenance, and reliable. Typical building
integration could require a supply and return, brazed plate heat exchanger, and expansion tank.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 23 of 42 7/3//2012
Optimum installed capacity: The optimum installed capacity is estimated at 2.5 – 3 MMBTU of
recovered heat and heat distribution infrastructure.
Anticipated capacity factor: The heat loop is expected to deliver heat twenty-four (24) hours
per day for the duration of the heating season. This could be considered 100% capacity factor.
However, capacity factor can also be calculated based on what could theoretically be recovered
from a 5.5 MMBTU plant. Calculations for this capacity factor are located on the Benefit Cost
model worksheet, “999-Calc.” The project is expected to recover an additional 6,929 MMBTU
from the Tok School Biomass Boiler facility. This would boost the facility’s capacity factor to 39%.
Anticipated annual generation: The AGSD District Heat Loop is expected to offset 6,629
MMBTU per year by recovering rejected heat from the existing Tok School Biomass Plant.
Anticipated barriers: There are no anticipated barriers. The project will need to obtain
necessary rights of way and easements. Currently, there is no land identified that the project will
need to cross that is not already owned by one of the project’s heat energy customers. These
customers have supplied Letters of Support, included with this application.
Basic integration concept: The basic integration concept at the Tok School Biomass Plant is
heat recovery units to capture all useable heat. Usually this is completed with heat exchangers.
The exact type of heat exchanger or other heat recovery device is subject to the design process.
Typical building integration could require a supply and return, brazed plate heat exchanger, and
expansion tank, according to the following diagram, which was completed as a conceptual
drawing for a customer interconnection to a district heat loop in Tok, AK. Exact integration
infrastructure is subject to the design process.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 24 of 42 7/3//2012
Delivery methods: Heat will be delivered in pipe to heat customers. Arctic Pipe or PEX-Gard
may be used, depending on the final design of the AGSD District Heat Loop. Pumps will be used
to pressurize the pipe.
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 project will be constructed on land owned by the School District, directly adjacent to Tok
School. State Highway 1, the Tok Cutoff Highway, will need to be crossed in order to serve some
of the energy customers. Both trenching and boring cost estimates were obtained. The type of
work is germane to highway construction and utility services, and to State agencies engaging in
easements for these crossings. Providing heat utility service to project customers will require an
easement; obtaining these easements has been identified in the go/ no-go development process
for this project.
The project will need to obtain necessary rights of way and easements. Currently, there is no
land identified that the project will need to cross that is not already owned by o ne of the project’s
heat energy customers. These customers have supplied Letters of Support, included with this
application. No issues with obtaining these easements have been identified.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 25 of 42 7/3//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
List of Applicable Permits:
Approval to Construct, from the State of Alaska Fire Marshall / Division of Fire and Life Safety.
Anticipated Permitting Timeline:
The Construction Documents will be issued to the Division of Fire and Life Safety prior to
releasing the project for bidding. A permit is expected within thirty (30) days of submission.
Identify and Discussion of Potential Barriers:
No significant barriers are anticipated for the building permit. The design team worked
closely with the Division of Fire and Life Safety during the design and construction of the Tok
Biomass Plant and developed an understanding of the process and required communication.
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, habitat issues, wetlands or protected areas,
archaeological and historical resources: There are no known threatened or endangered
species or sensitive areas. The land used for the project piping is very likely to be within existing
right of ways, adjacent to existing roads, or adjacent to existing driveways, gravel roads, and
project buildings. The Tok Area is on a glacial outwash comprised of sand and gravel and there
are no known wetland issues in the area.
There is no permafrost in the immediate area and very limited permafrost within a twenty-five
(25) mile radius of Tok. Most of the ground is suitable for year-round timber harvest operations.
The major habitat issue is the natural cycle of large wildfires in the Tok area. This creates a large
single-aged stand and forest succession that is not ideal for most wildlife. A mosaic of small fires
on the landscape creates favorable wildlife habitat. Through active forest management, and by
breaking up the continuous stands of spruce fuel, there is a reduced risk of large fires on the
landscape. Please see the Geotechnical Survey, which is included with this application.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 26 of 42 7/3//2012
Land development constraints: There are no identified land development constraints. Tok is
an unincorporated city, without specially designated or protected ground. There are limited
archaeological and historical resources in the area; this has not been a restriction to
development or timber harvest activities in the past fifty (50) years in the Tok Area. Those areas
that are identified are largely on Native owned lands, where there are strict controls. The
principal land development constraint is the short construction season in the upper Tanana from
June through September for earth work.
Telecommunications interference: There are no identified existing buried utilities or
telecommunications interference issues.
Aviation considerations: There are no identified aviation considerations for the project or
harvest operations.
Visual, aesthetics impacts: Visual aesthetics impacts are minimal with the harvest of
hazardous fuels and timber in the area. The heat distribution pipe will very likely be buried,
although this is subject to final design. The harvest activities are limited in size and are never
seen from the highway.
Identify and discuss other potential barriers: There are no other potential barriers identified.
Project risks and land ownership issues have been discussed previously. The primary
environmental barrier we have in the Upper Tanana is the extreme cold winter temperatures.
With respect to wood fuel sourcing from State Lands, all issues of concern here are
governed by State regulation under The Forest Land Use Plans. These Plans are reviewed by
the State Agencies prior to Best Interest Findings for timber harvest. Also the Alaska Forest
Practices Act and Regulation are required compliance for all timber harvesting on State Lands.
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 applic ant 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
All project development costs are documented by bid estimates from reliable service providers.
These bid estimates are considered trade secrets In accordance with 3 AAC 107.630 (b).
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 27 of 42 7/3//2012
BUDGET CATEGORY PHASE III PHASE IV MATCH TOTAL
REQUEST
Direct Labor and Benefits $109,209 $576,887 $58,775 $744,871
Travel & Per Diem $0 $0 $0 $0
Equipment $30,000 $1,433,036 $0 $1,463,036
Materials and Supplies $0 $0 $0 $0
Contractual Services $206,412 $101,847 $0 $308,259
Construction Services $0 $0 $36,800 $36,800
Energy Customer Incentive $0 $100,901 $0 $100,901
Contingency: 10% $4,000 $191,072 $0 $195,072
TOTAL $349,621 $2,403,743 $95,575 $2,848,939
Projected building and equipment cost of the proposed system is : $2,145,787
Projected development cost of the system is: $703,152
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.)
The applicant will fund O&M costs through its typical budgeting process, whereby buildings and
equipment are allocated a portion of the District’s budget each year for Operations and
Maintenance. The budget is approved by the School Board. Revenues from each energy
customer will be collected to pay for the ongoing O&M of the AGSD District Heat Loop.
Consistent with grant requirements, no AEA funding will be used for O&M.
O&M Costs from the heat loop include some Pumping costs (electric), scheduled repairs,
Administrative costs, and Heat loop and customer connection O&M.
The following chart documents O&M costs associated with the Base and Proposed Scenarios.
AGSD will allocate a portion Tok Biomass Facility O&M costs (wood fuel and labor) to each heat
customer.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 28 of 42 7/3//2012
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE NOTES
Renewable Heat displaced gal/yr 49,100
Renewable Heat Scheduled Repairs $ per year 14,881$ 1
Renewable Heat O&M $ per year
Heat Pipe O&M 4,960$ 2
Heat Loop Pump Costs 36,767$ 3
Heat Loop Admin 1,152$ 4
Customer Connection O&M 4,650$ 5
subtotal 47,529$
Proposed Heat Cost $ per year 62,410$
Heat Energy Customer Fuel Oil Use gal/yr 49,100
Heat Energy Customer Fuel Cost $/gal 4.26$ 10
Heat Energy Customer Fuel Oil Cost $ per year 209,286$
$ per year 9,000$ 11
Total Energy Customer Base Heating Cost 218,286$
TOTAL MMBTU 6,629 12
Renewable -- BIOMASS -- $ / MMBTU 9.42$
Base -- FUEL OIL -- $ / MMBTU 32.93$
% Savings -- Renewable over Base -- Yr. 1 71%
NOTES
1 1% of capital cost as industry standard; 75% of costs allocated to scheduled repairs
2 1% of capital cost as industry standard; 25% of costs allocated to heat pipe O&M
3 15 HP pump, 75% uptime, 8.5 months of the year; see "Pump Cost Calculation" detail below.
4 From Todd Poage, email 9/14. $48/hr, 2 hours per month
5 PDC Estimate, 9/22. $465 O&M per customer connection, 10 connections.
6 No fuel associated with waste heat recovery
7 From Todd Poage, email 9/14. This is only a share of total plant scheduled repairs
8 See detail, below. This is only a share of total plant O&M attributed to wase heat.
9 6,629 MMBTU of waste heat
10 AEA figure for Tok Community; 2012
11
12 0.135 MMBTU/gal
Provided by Tok Forestry, 9/14 . $1,500 per year for Tok Forestry. Figure applied to 6 organizational entities.
Renewable -- WASTE HEAT
Base -- FUEL OIL
Heat Energy Customer Fuel O&M -- O&M & Scheduled Repairs
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 29 of 42 7/3//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)
The heat customers are:
- Alaska Department of Transportation
- Alaska Department of Forestry
- Tok Volunteer Fire Department
- Tok Clinic
- Tok Senior Center
- Tok School
Potential power purchase/sales price - at a minimum indicate a price range
The heat rate charged will be based on cost. Initial evaluation suggests a price of $10 --
$25 / MMBTU. Sales of hot water heat are currently unregulated by RCA.
Proposed rate of return from grant-funded project
Using AEA’s Renewable Energy Fund Benefit/ Cost model from Round VI, project has a
B-C ratio of 1.13, and a NPV Net Benefit of $2,985,444.
Pump Cost Calculation
11.025 kW consumption of pump
47,628 kWh consumption Est. 75% uptime for 8 months of the year.
0.52$ cost per kWh
24,767$ cost per kWh
12,000$ demand charges (estimate)
36,767$ Estimated pump cost
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 30 of 42 7/3//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. 2.5 – 3.0 MMBTU “waste” heat
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 Railbelt5 grid, leave this section blank)
i. Number of generators/boilers/other 1
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other 5.5 MMBTU
iii. Generator/boilers/other type Boiler
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other 3 years old
v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other 74% -- 80%
b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Annual O&M cost for labor $21,844
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor $40,567
c) Annual electricity production and fuel usage (fill in as applicable) (if system is part of the
Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Electricity [kWh]
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal]
Other
iii. Peak Load
iv. Average Load
v. Minimum Load
vi. Efficiency
vii. Future trends
5 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
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 31 of 42 7/3//2012
d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu] 49,100
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]
Heat recovery
b) Proposed annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable)
i. Electricity [kWh]
ii. Heat [MMBtu] 6,629
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 $2,145,787
b) Development cost $703,152
c) Annual O&M cost of new system $47,529 (does not include scheduled repairs)
d) Annual fuel cost n/a, heat recovery
Project Benefits
a) Amount of fuel displaced for
i. Electricity
ii. Heat 49,100
iii. Transportation
b) Current price of displaced fuel $4.26 (Yr. 2013)
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 32 of 42 7/3//2012
c) Other economic benefits $2,985,644 energy savings retained in Tok over the
project lifetime (NPV)
d) Alaska public benefits Retained energy dollars, workforce training, rural
community services, reduced risk of oil spill,
demonstration project value
Power Purchase/Sales Price
a) Price for power purchase/sale Estimated $10 -- 25/ MMBTU
Project Analysis
a) Basic Economic Analysis
Project benefit/cost ratio 1.13
Payback (years) 18
4.4.5 Proposed Biomass System Information
Please address the following items, if know. (For Biomass Projects Only)
The project is a waste heat recovery application from the Tok School Biomass Facility.
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 (gallons and dollars) over the lifetime of the evaluated
renewable energy project: The project will displace the equivalent of 49,100 gallons of fuel oil
#1. The projected price (2013) is $4.26/gallon. Over the 25-year lifetime of the project, the
project will displace 2,693,800 gallons of fuel oil #1, with a value of over $6.081 million.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 33 of 42 7/3//2012
Anticipated annual revenue (based on i.e. a Proposed Power Purchase Agreement price,
RCA tariff, or cost based rate): Annual revenue is determined by a cost-based rate. As a
hydronic heat loop, the rate is will be exempt from RCA regulations. The anticipated annual
revenue in Year 1 is $104,350 (6,629 MMBTU at $10 -- $25/MMBTU; current estimated price of
$15.74/MMBTU). This includes a cost of fuel of 642 tons at $52 per ton.
Potential additional annual incentives (i.e. tax credits): There are no known additional
annual incentives for this project.
Potential additional annual revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable
energy subsidies or programs that might be available): There are no known additional
annual revenue streams.
Discuss the non-economic public benefits to Alaskans over the lifetime of the project:
The immediate public benefit from this project is the School District will spend fewer dollars on
facilities and utilities, and more dollars in the classroom, teaching children. From the savings
realized from the addition of the Biomass Plant, a music teacher has been added to the school
staff. With additional savings, AGSD potentially plans to expand the Career and Technical
Education program, hiring a district-wide CTE itinerant teacher that would help prepare students
across the District to join the workforce in the State of Alaska.
There is an immense public benefit to improving the viability of operation for the Tok Clinic and
Tok Volunteer Fire Department. These entities provide crucial medical and fire response
services, respectively, to the residents of Tok, the Upper Tanana Valley, and travellers.
Additionally, improving the viability of wood energy in the Tok area will improve the viability of
utilizing hazardous fuels from the Tok area. Removing these fuels makes the community safer,
supplies a sustainable form of low cost heating fuel for buildings, initiates a viable long-term
energy strategy, and is the foundation of an industry that will create long-term viable timber
industry employment for the residents of the Upper Tanana.
The project provides “proof-of-concept” value to other communities in the Interior seeking long-
term strategies for low-cost heat through district heating.
Finally, one of the unique aspects of this project is the long-term energy planning and strategy
among various State, Community, and Business enterprises. Simultaneous to the School’s
investigation of this project, AP&T has been assessing the viability of a biomass combined heat
and power (CHP) plant, sized at 2+ Megawatts. AGSD is committed to designing the system to
complement AP&T’s potential heat loop if possible. Additionally, AP&T and AGSD are both
interested in examining various business models for operations and maintenance that could
benefit both parties. This collaborative project would offer:
- diverse and substantial community benefits
- congruence with the Community’s long-term energy plan
- broad support among stakeholders
Please see the attached Concept Paper for more information.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 34 of 42 7/3//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
Proposed business structure(s) and concepts that may be considered:
Collaboration on O&M: AGSD will own, operate, and maintain the project infrastructure
throughout the project lifetime. AGSD will consider contracting operation and maintenance
services on the AGSD District Heat Loop. One potential contracting partner is the local electric
and telephone utility, Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T). Concurrent with AGSD’s investigation
of a heat loop, AP&T has been assessing the viability of a biomass combined heat and power
(CHP) plant, sized at 2+ Megawatts. The plant would produce enough energy to heat many of the
community buildings in the area, including the buildings being considering by AGSD. In recent
discussions, AGSD and AP&T proposed the following platform for collaboration:
The primary mission of the School is to educate students, rather than to operate as a
utility. Energy projects have been a mechanism to put more dollars into education.
The primary mission of AP&T is to profitably provide utility services –historically electricity
and telephone – to area customers.
An exchange of the value of heat for electricity may be favorable to the School and the
Utility. Heat energy could also be provided at reduced costs to end users. The project
would provide value in three ways:
1. Offset electricity costs to AGSD, which is the value of heat delivered to State and
Community Buildings.
2. Reduced heat costs to 5 State and Community Buildings.
3. Value to AP&T, via the net profit of the value of electricity delivered to AGSD.
The collaboration could take the form of contractual agreements for AP&T to buy heat from
AGSD, and for AP&T to sell heat to the heat customers. A number of alternative business
structures are viable:
AGSD sells heat to customers directly, and performs O&M on heat loop
AGSD hires a third party to perform O&M on the heat loop, including administration
Energy customer incentive: As explained earlier, AGSD has committed to provide an energy
incentive to its customers to assist them in adapting their building heating systems to the new
district heat loop. AGSD will provide each customer with free biomass heat until the total value of
the heat (when measured in fuel oil) equals the cost of adapting their system to the District Heat
Loop. For the purpose of this grant, the energy customer incentive has been listed as the value
of one year of free heat from the district heat loop. This energy customer incentive is listed as a
separate budget line item of $100,901 (6,629 MMBTU at preliminary cost/ MMBTU of $15.29).
This temporary customer incentive will free up the heat utility portion of affected building
managers’ budgets to purchase and install the necessary fixtures for hydronic heating.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 35 of 42 7/3//2012
How you propose to finance the maintenance and operations for the life of the project?
The AGSD Heat Loop Project will be financed through the AGSD School Board budgeting
process. The School Board will ensure designated funds are set-aside for the O&M of the heat
loop. This process is similar to the current process the School Board uses to administer the
existing Tok School Biomass Plant, as well as all other utility budget categories. The AGSD Heat
Loop Project will obtain revenues from heat sales, charged on a cost-based rate.
Identification of operational issues that could arise.
It is possible that waste heat will be unavailable for some duration of time due to downtime at the
Tok School Biomass Plant. In this event, heat customers would revert to backup systems.
The design phase will need to plan for the risk of freezing in heat loop pipes in the event that
waste heat is unavailable. Such mitigation could include access to an alternative heat source,
redundant pumps, the use of antifreeze, and burying pipe below the freeze zone. The risk of
freezing will be addressed in the design phase of the project. Minimal downtime is expected
because the Tok School has three (3) years of experience in operation, along with a designated
and skilled maintenance staff.
Operational risk associated with the AGSD District Heat Loop is low. Heat distribution sys tems,
including recovery units, pipe distribution infrastructure, and heat exchangers are fully
commercial, reliable, and low maintenance. There are few moving parts.
A description of operational costs including on-going support for any back-up or existing
systems that may be require to continue operation.
Operational costs for the waste heat system include a cost per MMBTU “purchased” from the Tok
School, costs associated with the heat loop (electricity pumping costs, scheduled repairs, other
O&M), and administration costs.
Costs associated with maintained the back-up and existing systems are within the budgets of
individual building managers, and excluded in the AGSD Heat Loop Project budget. These costs
include the purchases of fuel oil, costs associated with maintaining the existing heat infrastructure
(filters, fuel nozzles, inspections, other O&M). These costs are already identified in the budget of
the School District and will not change.
Commitment to reporting the savings and benefits.
The Alaska Gateway School District will send annual savings and benefit reports to Alaska
Energy Authority. In addition AGSD has already opened the facility to other School Districts that
are interested in exploring the integration of biomass heating to their facilities.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 36 of 42 7/3//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.
The Tok School Biomass Heating Project, which used AEA Round I Grant Funding, was
completed in the fall of 2010. Through work with AEA representatives, the A/E design team, and
the General Contractor, AGSD completed the Tok School Biomass Facility. The facility has been
fully operational for three (3) years.
Phase II is an extension of the Tok School Biomass Heating Project. The design and planned
integration of the Phase II Bid Alternates is complete and is expect to move forward immediately
with releasing the documents for Bid on the notice from AEA of award of funding. AGSD has
collaborated with Alaska Power & Telephone to incorporate heat loop survey information and
analysis completed under Round IV Renewable Energy Fund, “Upper Tanana Biomass CHP
Project.” Many of the supporting documents, including engineering estimates, are provided.
Additionally, AGSD worked with additional engineering firms to obtain additional engineering
estimates and preliminary designs for this application. An alternative to this application, using
waste heat recovery for heating AGSD’s MFU and Zamboni Garage, was submitted for
Renewable Energy Fund Round V (ID no. 866) and recommended for full funding. Unfortunately
it did not fit within the Governor’s budget.
Additionally, every heat customer has been consulted, in-person, with a one-on-one meeting
about the proposed project. Each customer building has been surveyed for compatibility with the
project. All heat loads have been estimated using a heating degree day model, after each
building manager had been consulted about occupancy, type of use, and controls.
This application includes the following support documents:
Engineering estimates for design/ build of the full district heating system, including trunk
lines, lateral lines, and building integration, PDC Engineers and CTA Architects/
Engineers
Quote for heat meters applicable to the project, Spire Metering
Quote for highway crossing, Alaska Road Boring
Geotechnical Recommendations, CTA Architects Engineers
Letters of commitment from every heat customer
Letter of support from local utility, AP&T
Preliminary Feasibility Assessment for High Efficiency, Low Emission Heating in Tok,
Alaska, Daniel Parrent, USDA Forest Service
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 37 of 42 7/3//2012
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.
During AP&T’s heat loop survey, it was established that the community has strong support for
lowering utility costs, including heat energy. The Tok School Biomass project has no known
opposition, and has increased support following the grand opening and first full year of operation.
The Tok Area Forestry Office remains a strong supporter, and has been working with the school
district on this project from the beginning.
The Tok Umbrella Corporation, the local government organization, has also been a consistent
supporter of the project, and continues to be a partner in the shared equipment, which includes a
Rotochopper grinder, a Case 700 Series loader with a 6-yard biomass bucket and a log grapple.
Letters of commitment from all heat customers, and from a potential collaborator, AP&T, are
included with this application.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 38 of 42 7/3//2012
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.
Provide a narrative summary regarding funding sources and your financial commitment to the project.
Applications should include a separate worksheet for each project phase that was identified in section 2.3.2 of this
application, (Reconnaissance, Feasibility, Conceptual Design, Design and Permitting, and Construction). Please use the
tables provided below to detail your proposed project’s budget. Be sure to use one table f or each phase of your project. If
you have any question regarding how to prepare these tables or if you need assistance preparing the application please feel
free to contact AEA at 907-771-3031 or by emailing the Grant Administrator, Shawn Calfa, at scalfa@aidea.org.
.
MILESTONES
PHASE III
DESIGN AND PERMITTING
Anticipated
Completion
Date
RE- Fund
Grant
Funds
Grantee
Matching
Funds
Source of
Matching
Funds:
Cash/In-
Kind/Federal
Grants/Other
State
Grants/Other
Milestone
or Task
PHASE III
Design and
Permitting
1. Project scoping and
contractor solicitation for
planning and design
Month 3 $15,484 $3,673 AGSD $19,157
2. Permit applications (as
needed) Month 2 $23,818 $3,673 AGSD $27,491
3. Final environmental
assessment and mitigation
plans (as needed)
N/A $0 $0 $0
4. Resolution of land use,
right of way issues Month 3 $16,535 $3,673 AGSD $20,208
5. Permit approvals Month 3 $16,535 $3,673 AGSD $20,208
6. Final system design Month 6 $143,535 $3,673 AGSD $147,208
7. Engineers cost estimate Month 5 $38,535 $3,673 AGSD $42,208
8. Updated economic and
financial analysis Month 5 $27,282 $3,673 AGSD $30,955
9. Negotiated power sales
agreements with approved
rates
Month 5 $33,949 $3,673 AGSD $37,622
10. Final business and
operational plan Month 6 $33,949 $3,673 AGSD $37,622
TOTALS $349,621 $33,061 $382,680
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $109,210 $33,061 AGSD $142,270
Travel & Per Diem $0 $0
Equipment $30,000 $0 $30,000
Materials & Supplies $0 $0
Contractual Services $206,412 $0 $206,412
Construction Services $0 $0
Other $4,000 $0 $4,000
TOTALS $349,621 $33,061 $382,682
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 39 of 42 7/3//2012
MILESTONES
PHASE IV
CONSTRUCTION
Anticipated
Completion
Date
RE- Fund
Grant
Funds
Grantee
Matchin
g Funds
Source of
Matching
Funds:
Cash/In-
Kind/Federal
Grants/Other
State
Grants/Other
TOTALS
1. Confirmation that all
design and feasibility
requirements are
complete.
Month 7 $30,949 $3,673 AGSD $34,623
2. Completion of bid
documents Month 5 $92,532 $3,673 AGSD $96,206
3. Contractor/vendor
selection and award Month 5 $2,000,616 $3,673 AGSD $2,004,289
4. Construction Phases Month 15 $92,132 $40,473 AGSD $132,605
5. Integration and testing Month 17 $91,667 $3,673 AGSD $95,340
6. Decommissioning old
systems N/A $0 $0 $0
7. Final Acceptance,
Commissioning and
Start-up
Month 17 $30,949 $3,673 AGSD $34,623
8. Operations Reporting Month 18 $64,898 $3,673 AGSD $68,572
TOTALS $2,403,743 $62,514 $2,466,257
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $576,887 $25,714 AGSD $602,601
Travel & Per Diem $0 $0 $0
Equipment $1,433,036 $0 $1,433,036
Materials & Supplies $0 $0 $0
Contractual Services $101,847 $0 $101,847
Construction Services $0 $36,800 AGSD $36,800
Customer Heat Incentive $100,901 $0 $100,901
Other - 10% Contingency $191,071.50 $0 $191,072
TOTALS $2,403,743 $62,514 $2,466,257
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 40 of 42 7/3//2012
Project Milestones that should be addressed in Budget Proposal
Reconnaissance Feasibility Design and
Permitting Construction
1. Project scoping and
contractor solicitation.
2. Resource
identification and
analysis
3. Land use, permitting,
and environmental
analysis
4. Preliminary design
analysis and cost
5. Cost of energy and
market analysis
6. Simple economic
analysis
7. Final report and
recommendations
1. Project scoping
and contractor
solicitation.
2. Detailed energy
resource analysis
3. Identification of
land and regulatory
issues,
4. Permitting and
environmental
analysis
5. Detailed analysis of
existing and future
energy costs and
markets
6. Assessment of
alternatives
7. Conceptual design
analysis and cost
estimate
8. Detailed economic
and financial
analysis
9, Conceptual
business and
operations plans
10. Final report and
recommendations
1. Project scoping
and contractor
solicitation for
planning and
design
2. Permit
applications (as
needed)
3. Final
environmental
assessment and
mitigation plans
(as needed)
4. Resolution of
land use, right of
way issues
5. Permit approvals
6. Final system
design
7. Engineers cost
estimate
8. Updated
economic and
financial analysis
9. Negotiated
power sales
agreements with
approved rates
10. Final business
and operational
plan
1. Confirmation that all
design and feasibility
requirements are
complete.
2. Completion of bid
documents
3. Contractor/vendor
selection and award
4. Construction Phases
–
Each project will have
unique construction
phases, limitations,
and schedule
constraints which
should be identified
by the grantee
5. Integration and
testing
6. Decommissioning old
systems
7. Final Acceptance,
Commissioning and
Start-up
8. Operations Reporting
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 41 of 42 7/3//2012
SECTION 10 – AUTHORIZED SIGNERS FORM
Community/Grantee Name: Alaska Gateway School District
Regular Election is held: Every 3 Years
Date: First Week in October
Authorized Grant Signer(s):
Printed Name Title Term Signature
Todd Poage Superintendent N/A
I authorize the above person(s) to sign Grant Documents:
(Highest ranking organization/community/municipal official)
Printed Name Title Term Signature
Lisa Conrad Board President
Grantee Contact Information:
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 226, Tok, AK 99780
Phone Number: 907-883-5151
Fax Number: 907-883-5154
E-mail Address: tpoage@agsd.us
Federal Tax ID #: 92-0058369
Please submit an updated form whenever there is a change to the above information.
Renewable Energy Fund Round 6
Grant Application
AEA13-006 Grant Application Page 42 of 42 7/3//2012
SECTION 11 – ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION
SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WITH YOUR APPLICATION:
A. Contact information, resumes of Applicant’s Project Manager, key staff, partners,
consultants, and suppliers per application form Section 3.1 and 3.4. Applicants
are asked to separate resumes submitted with applications, if the individuals do
not want their resumes posted.
B. Letters demonstrating local support per application form Section 8.
C. An electronic version of the entire application on CD per RFA Section 1.7.
D. Governing Body Resolution or other formal action taken by the applicant’s
governing body or management per RFA Section 1.4 that:
- Commits the organization to provide the matching resources for project at the
match amounts indicated in the application.
- Authorizes the individual who signs the application has the authority to
commit the organization to the obligations under the grant.
- Provides as point of contact to represent the applicant for purposes of this
application.
- Certifies the applicant is in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local,
laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations.
E. CERTIFICATION
The undersigned certifies that this application for a renewable energy grant is truthful
and correct, and that the applicant is in compliance with, and will continue to comply
with, all federal and state laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations and
that they can indeed commit the entity to these obligations.
Print Name Todd Poage
Signature
Title Superintendent
Date