Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011 AVEC R5 App; Shishmaref Wind Feasibility __________________________________________________________________________________________ 4831 EAGLE STREET * ANCHORAGE, ALASKA * PHONE (907) 561 -1818 * FAX (907) 562-4086 August 26, 2011 Alaska Energy Authority 813 West Northern Lights Boulevard Anchorage, Alaska 99503-2495 Attn: Renewable Energy Fund Grant Program Round 5: Shishmaref Wind Feasibility Dear Review Panel: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) respectfully submits the enclosed application for grant funds available through the Renewable Energy Fund Grant Program. The project would involve completing a wind feasibility analysis, resource assessment, conceptual design, and obtaining permits for a wind energy project in Shishmaref. With funding obtained through AEA’s program, AVEC would install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work. The work will involve obtaining a letter of non-objection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting, and installing a met tower, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. Environmental permits and site control would be obtained, if the project is determined to be feasible. The project requires $150,000; AVEC is seeking $142,500 from AEA and would provide a 5% cash match of $7,500 for this work. Please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Petrie of my staff if you have questions. Sincerely, Meera Kohler President and CEO cc: Brent Petrie, AVEC enclosures Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Energy Feasibility Renewable Energy Fund-Round V Grant Application Submitted by: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Submitted to: Alaska Energy Authority 813 West Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage, AK 99503 August 26, 2011 Renewable Energy Fund Round 5 Grant Application AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 1 of 18 8/26/2011 Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility 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 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. Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 2 of 18 8/26/2011 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) Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility 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. Shishmaref (pop.563) is located on Sarichef Island, in the Chukchi Sea, just north of the Bering Strait. Shishmaref is 5 miles from the mainland, 126 miles north of Nome, and 100 miles southwest of Kotzebue. It lies at approximately 66.26 North Latitude and 166.07 West Longitude. (Sec. 23, T010N, R035W, Kateel River Meridian.) 2.3 PROJECT TYPE Put X in boxes as appropriate 2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type X Wind Biomass or Biofuels Hydro, including run of river Transmission of Renewable Energy Geothermal, including Heat Pumps Small Natural Gas Heat Recovery from existing sources Hydrokinetic Solar Storage of Renewable Other (Describe) 2.3.2 Proposed Grant Funded Phase(s) for this Request (Check all that apply) Reconnaissance Design and Permitting X Feasibility Construction and Commissioning X Conceptual Design 2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Provide a brief one paragraph description of your proposed project. AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to determine the feasibility of installing wind turbines in Shishmaref. The work will involve obtaining a letter of non-objection from the landowner for the placement of the met tower, geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting and installing a met tower at this location, studying the wind resource for one year, and conducting a reconnaissance-level geotechnical investigation to determine the soil conditions and needed engineering at the site. A conceptual design will be created based on the outcome of the met tower recordings and geotechnical investigation. This project will also consider other turbines that can be relocated, if the village decides to move to another location. Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 3 of 18 8/26/2011 2.5 PROJECT BENEFIT Briefly discuss the financial and public benefits that will result from this project, (such as reduced fuel costs, lower energy costs, etc.) The primary financial benefit from this project would be to determine whether the wind resources are suitable for providing power to the community and to prepare a conceptual design of a wind facility. Assuming installation of two NW 100 turbines and a Class 6 wind regime, the project could decrease diesel use by 38,573 gal/yr (based on preliminary numbers and 80% turbine availability) and 771,400 gallons over the lifetime of the project. Based on ISER’s estimated fuel costs, this project could save approximately $176,000 year during its first full year of operation (planned to be 2015). See the detailed project benefits in Section 5.0. 2.6 PROJECT BUDGET OVERVIEW Briefly discuss the amount of funds needed, the anticipated sources of funds, and the nature and source of other contributions to the project. The total feasibility cost for the project is $150,000 of which $142,500 is requested in grant funds from AEA. The remaining $7,500 (5%) would be matched in cash by AVEC. 2.7 COST AND BENEFIT SUMARY Include a summary of grant request and your project’s total costs and benefits below. Grant Costs (Summary of funds requested) 2.7.1 Grant Funds Requested in this application.$142,500 2.7.2 Other Funds to be provided (Project match)$7,500 2.7.3 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.7.1 and 2.7.2)$150,000 Project Costs & Benefits (Summary of total project costs including work to date and future cost estimates to get to a fully operational project) 2.7.4 Total Project Cost (Summary from Cost Worksheet including estimates through construction) $2,500,000 2.7.5 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings)$ 176,000 (year 1), $4,258,000 (lifetime benefits) 2.7.6 Other Public Benefit (If you can calculate the benefit in terms of dollars please provide that number here and explain how you calculated that number in your application (Section 5.) $to be determined 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 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 4 of 18 8/26/2011 resume and references for the manager(s). If the applicant does not have a project manager indicate how you intend to solicit project management support. If the applicant expects project management assistance from AEA or another government entity, state that in this section. AVEC would provide overall project management and oversight. AVEC is the electric utility serving Shishmaref. To further support the AVEC team in project delivery, wind resource, engineering, and environmental consultants would be selected. Brent Petrie, Manager, Community Development and Key Accounts, would lead the project management team consisting of AVEC staff, consultants, and contractors. He has worked for AVEC since 1998, where he manages the development of alternatives to diesel generation for AVEC such as using wind, hydropower, and heat recovery. He also manages relationships with AVEC’s largest customers and is the project manager for AVEC’s many construction projects as an energy partner of the federally funded Denali Commission. Mr. Petrie has worked in the energy and resource field for more than thirty years, having worked for the federal and state governments as consultant, planner, and project manager. He has been a utility manager or management consultant since 1993. As General Manager of Iliamna-Newhalen-Nondalton Electric Cooperative from 1994 to 1998, he reported to a seven member, elected board of directors, and served as project manager on its hydroelectric project development. He is an elected member of the Board of Directors of the Utility Wind Interest Group representing rural electric cooperatives and serves on the Power Supply Task force of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association. Mr. Petrie has a Master’s Degree in Water Resource Management and a Bachelor's degree in Geography. His resume is attached. 3.2 Project Schedule Include a schedule for the proposed work that will be funded by this grant. (You may include a chart or table attachment with a summary of dates below.) Authorization to Proceed:August 1, 2012 Obtain Site Control/Right of Entry/Permits:September 2012 Ship Met Tower:September 2012 Erect Met Tower:September 2012 Complete Monitor Met Tower Data:October 2012-September 2013 Geotech Field Work:October 2012 Geotech Report:December 2012 Dismantle Met Tower:September 2013 Wind Resource Report:October 2013 Conceptual Design and Cost Estimate:November 2013 3.3 Project Milestones Define key tasks and decision points in your project and a schedule for achieving them. The Milestones must also be included on your budget worksheet to demonstrate how you propose to manage the project cash flow. (See Section 2 of the RFA or the Budget Form.) 1.Project scoping and contractor solicitation (August 1-15, 2012) AVEC would select a contractor for the wind feasibility, geotechnical analysis, conceptual Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 5 of 18 8/26/2011 design, and permitting immediately following AEA’s authorization to proceed. 2.Detailed energy resource analysis (September 15, 2012-October 31, 2013) To initiate the Wind Resource Analysis before winter, AVEC would purchase (if necessary), ship, and erect the met tower in September 2012. AVEC would immediately seek approvals from permitting agencies, starting the process before the grant is awarded to ensure that the met tower can be installed in the late fall. The earlier the met tower is collecting data, the earlier AVEC would have the wind resource data to ascertain the suitability of use this renewable resource. Monitoring of the met tower would continue until September 2013, when the met tower would be dismantled. The wind resource report would be drafted by the end of October 2013. 3.Identification and resolution of land issues (September 1, 2012- June 1, 2013) AVEC would work with the Shishmaref Native Corporation, to obtain a letter of non-objection for the placement of the met tower and geotechnical work, prior to the work. AVEC would initiate negotiations of permanent site control to place turbines. 4.Detailed analysis of current cost of energy and future market (February 1-March 30, 2013) AVEC would analyze the existing and future energy costs and markets in Shishmaref. The information would be based on AVEC records and community plans. A community meeting would be held to determine future energy markets. Information regarding energy markets would be incorporated into the CDR. 5.Detailed economic and financial analyses (June 1-August 30, 2013) An economic and financial analysis, which examines potential final design and construction costs, operating and maintenance costs, user rates, and other funding mechanisms, would be developed and included in the CDR. 6.Conceptual business & operations plan (June 1-October 31, 2013) Draft business and operational plans would be developed working with the City of Shishmaref and the Shishmaref Native Corporation. The conceptual plan would include draft recovered heat agreements. 7.Conceptual design and costs estimate (September 1-November 1, 2013) Various wind turbines would be examined to determine which would be best suited to fit the lower energy demand and single phase electric system in Shishmaref. A reconnaissance level geotechnical study would be completed. A conceptual design and cost estimate would be prepared using information gathered from the wind study and geotechnical fieldwork. 8.Permitting and environmental analysis (September 15-December 15, 2013) Research would be completed to determine needed environmental permits for the project. 9.Final report and recommendations (December 31, 2013) All of the memoranda and reports written for the project would be combined in a final report and submitted to AEA. The Final CDR would include the following information: Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 6 of 18 8/26/2011 Wind Resource Site Control Existing and Future Energy Costs and Markets Economic and Financial Analysis Conceptual Business and Operating Plan Geotechnical Report Conceptual Design Analysis and Cost Estimate, including an turbines analysis Environmental Permits 3.4 Project Resources Describe the personnel, contractors, 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 would use a project management approach that has been used to successfully design and construct wind turbines throughout rural Alaska: A team of AVEC staff and external consultants. AVEC staff and their role on this project includes: Meera Kohler, President and Chief Executive Officer, would act as Project Executive and will maintain ultimate authority programmatically and financially. Brent Petrie, Manager, Community Development and Key Accounts, would lead the project management team consisting of AVEC staff, consultants, and contractors. Together with his group, Brent would provide coordination of the installation of the met tower, geotechnical work, conceptual design, and permitting. The group’s resources include a project coordinator, contracts clerk, accountant, engineer, and a community liaison. Brent would be responsible for reporting directly to AEA on the status of the project. Mark Teitzel, Vice President/Manager of Engineering, would provide technical assistance and information on the existing power system and possible issues and project study needs. Debbie Bullock, manager of administrative services, would provide support in accounting, payables, financial reporting, and capitalization of assets in accordance with AEA guidelines. Anna Sattler, community liaison, would lead development of the Existing and Future Energy Costs and Markets Memorandum and the Conceptual Business and Operating Plan. Ms. Sattler would also communicate directly with Shishmaref residents to ensure that the community is informed. An AVEC project manager would lead this project. It is likely that one of AVEC’s in-house contractors would lead the work. The project manager would be responsible for: Obtaining site control/access and permits for the installation of the met tower and geotechnical work Selecting, coordinating, and managing the wind resource, geotechnical, engineering, and permitting consultants and ensuring that their deliverables are on time and within Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 7 of 18 8/26/2011 budget Working with AVEC’s Community Liaison to develop the Existing and Future Energy Costs and Markets Memorandum and the Conceptual Business and Operating Plan Working to develop the Economic and Financial Analysis Contractors for this project would include: Wind Resource Consultant.AVEC currently has an on-call contract with V3 Energy, LLC for wind resource studies and reports. It is likely that V3 would work on this project. Doug Vaught’s (V3’s owner) resume is attached. V3 would: Supervise the installation of the met tower Consult on the operation and maintenance of the tower Draft the wind resource report Geotechnical consultant.AVEC would select and employ an experienced geotechnical consultant who would: Conduct a reconnaissance level geotechnical and natural hazards field study and report of the project area Engineering consultant.AVEC would select and employ an engineering consultant who would: Provide conceptual design and engineering specifications for the wind turbines Environmental Consultant.AVEC currently has an on-call contract with Solstice Alaska Consulting, Inc. for environmental permitting. It is likely that Solstice would work on this project. Robin Reich’s (Solstice’s president) resume is attached. Solstice would: Consult with agencies Develop and submit permit applications for the met tower Document permit needs for future wind project Selection Process for Contractors:The geotechnical and engineering consultant selection would be based upon technical competencies, past performance, written proposal quality, cost, and general consensus from the technical steering committee. The selection of the consultant would occur in strict conformity with corporate procurement policies, conformance with OMB circulars, and DCAA principles. 3.5 Project Communications Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status. AVEC would require that monthly written progress reports be provided with each invoice submitted from contractors. The progress reports would include a summary of tasks completed, issues or problems experienced, upcoming tasks, and contractor’s needs from AVEC. Project progress reports would be collected and forwarded as one package to the AEA project manager each quarter. Semi-annual face-to-face meetings would occur between AVEC and AEA to discuss the status of all wind projects funded through the AEA Renewable Energy Grants program. Individual project meetings would be held, as required or requested by AEA. Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 8 of 18 8/26/2011 3.6 Project Risk Discuss potential problems and how you would address them. Site Control/Access.Because the community of Shishmaref supports the project (letters of support have been received from all community entities), it is not expected that gaining site control would be difficult. Weather.Weather could delay geotechnical fieldwork and/or the erection of the met tower; however, an experienced consultant, familiar with Alaskan weather conditions, would be selected. It unlikely that a delay in the total project schedule would occur if the fieldwork or erection of the met tower is delayed. It is possible to erect the met tower during winter months. The met tower would be installed to handle the Shishmaref coastal Alaska winter weather conditions. The met tower would be monitored by local AVEC personnel to ensure the met tower is up and functioning properly throughout the year. Construction Funding.By having the project designed and permitted, AVEC would be prepared to capitalize on many funding opportunities. Permitting.Permits for the met tower would be would be acquired, including approvals for the Federal Aviation Administration and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. AVEC would hire an environmental consultant familiar with permitting wind projects in Alaska. Early consultation with agencies would occur in order to flesh out location, natural and social environment, specific species, and mitigation issues. The consultant would work openly with the agencies and conduct studies as appropriate. SECTION 4 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TASKS Tell us what the project is and how you will meet the requirements outlined in Section 2 of the RFA. The level of information will vary according to phase(s) of the project you propose to undertake with grant funds. If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project provide a plan and grant budget form for completion of each phase. 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. According to the AEA Alaska high-resolution wind resource map developed in coordination with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and True Wind Solutions, Shishmaref is rated as a class 6 wind regime. For this application, AVEC used Point Hope wind data as a surrogate for Shishmaref as both villages are similarly exposed to the Chukchi Sea. 4.2 Existing Energy System 4.2.1 Basic configuration of Existing Energy System Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 9 of 18 8/26/2011 Briefly discuss the basic configuration of the existing energy system. Include information about the number, size, age, efficiency, and type of generation. The existing power generation system in Shishmaref consists of 4 diesel generators: Detroit Diesel S60D4 (the last overhaul was completed in 2010), Caterpillar D353, Cummins K19G2 1800, and Cummins QSX15 G9. These generators were installed in 2004, 1976, 2002, and 2006, respectively. Individual generator efficiency is not tracked, but the aggregate diesel generator efficiency in 2010 was 13.62 kWh/gallon. The data indicates that average loads in Shishmaref have remained relatively constant over the past five years at about 188 kW with a maximum average peak of 362 kW occurring in 2009. 4.2.2 Existing Energy Resources Used Briefly discuss your understanding of the existing energy resources. Include a brief discussion of any impact the project may have on existing energy infrastructure and resources. Existing energy infrastructure in Shishmaref is primary diesel fuel for electrical power generation, heating oil for boiler (thermal) and home heating, thermal heat recovery from the diesel engines at the power plant, and diesel and gasoline fuel for transportation needs. Between January and December 2010, 121,042 gallons of diesel fuel was consumed to generate 1,648,603 kWh. The anticipated effects are less usage of diesel fuel for electrical power generation and less usage of heating fuel for boiler operations (due to injection of excess wind power to the thermal heat recovery loop). The diesel generator use in Shishmaref would be decreased, thereby decreasing generator operations and maintenance costs and enabling generators to last longer and need fewer overhauls. 4.2.3 Existing Energy Market Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy customers. According to a 2005-2009 American Community Survey (ACS), twenty nine percent of the population of Shishmaref is below the poverty line and the median household income is $33,382—about 49% of the State’s median household income of $66,712. At present, Shishmaref has a stand-alone electric power system with no intertie or connection beyond the village itself. The electricity consumption (sold) in Shishmaref in 2010 was 1,597,656 kWh. The load of is highest during the winter months, with the bulk of electricity consumed by residences and the school. If this study finds that winds are suitable, the addition of a wind turbine to the electric generation system could reduce the amount of diesel fuel used for power generation and for heating. Shishmaref is an isolated village that relies on air transportation. Reliable electric service is essential to maintaining vital navigation aids for the safe operation of aircraft. Runway lights, automated weather observation stations, VASI lights, DME’s and VOR’s are all powered by electricity. Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 10 of 18 8/26/2011 Emergency medical service is provided in a health clinic by a health aide and the City Volunteer Fire Department/Emergency Services. Medical problems and emergencies must be relayed by telephone or by some other communication means for outside assistance. Operation of the telephone system requires electricity. Reliable telephone service requires reliable electric service. Like all of Alaska, Shishmaref is subject to long periods of darkness. Reliable electric service is essential for the operation of home lighting, streetlights, and security lighting. Outside lighting greatly improves the safety of village residents. Shishmaref is a traditional Inupiat village with a fishing and subsistence lifestyle. Villagers rely on fish, walrus, seal, polar bear, rabbit, and other subsistence foods. Refrigeration is essential for the extended storage of perishable food stuffs, and reliable electric service is essential for proper freeze storage of food. The construction of the proposed project would augment and improve the existing power generation system by incorporating a locally available renewable resource. Sources: Alaska Community Database. 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:Wind power is the renewable energy option of choice for Shishmaref. Of the wind turbine options available on the market, the Northwind 100 is considered most appropriate for Shishmaref’s load profile and estimated wind resource. AVEC will determine the suitability of turbines that could be relocated if the community decides to move. Optimum installed capacity/Anticipated capacity factor/Anticipated annual generation.The purpose of this work is to gather background information to plan a future alternative energy facility. Anticipated capacity and generation would be examined for a number of turbine types to determine the best option for the community. Anticipated barriers.Because the geographic future of Shishmaref is undetermined, it could be difficult to determine the best turbine for the community. AVEC will work with residents to Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 11 of 18 8/26/2011 assess whether “relocate-able” turbines would be a good option. In addition, weather, permitting, site control, and construction funding could be barriers to project success. Weather is a minor barrier and does not pose a threat to the completion of this project. Permitting, based on an initial investigation, does not appear to be a significant hurdle to completing this phase of the project. Construction funding would be easier to obtain with design and permits in hand. Site control should not be difficult to obtain, since the City, Tribe, and the Shishmaref Native Corporation support the project (See Section 8 and Tab D). Basic integration concept/Delivery methods.The wind turbines would need to interconnect with the existing diesel power plant. Secondary load control would be studied to determine whether dispatch boilers could be installed to use excess wind energy while allowing the diesel generators to continue running at efficient levels. Conceptual design, to be completed as a part of this project, would detail how power from a wind turbine would be integrated and delivered into the existing system in Shishmaref. The delivery method would be examined. 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. Currently, AVEC is anticipating placing the met tower at one of two locations shown in the figure on the next page. Further investigation to determine the best location for the met tower and possibly future turbines would be completed prior to grant award. AVEC has not obtained site control for the placement of the met tower or conducting geotechnical fieldwork. A letter of non-objection would be sought from the corporation or city, depending on location, after project funding is assured. Starting with a community meeting to announce that the project has been funded, AVEC’s community liaison would lead the effort to gain site control. Since the major landholders support the project (See Section 8 and Tab D), site control will not be an issue for the placement of the met tower and conduction geotechnical fieldwork. Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 12 of 18 8/26/2011 4.3.3 Permits Provide the following information as it may relate to permitting and how you intend to address outstanding permit issues. List of applicable permits Anticipated permitting timeline Identify and discussion of potential barriers FAA Air Navigation Hazard Permitting.Met tower #2’s location nearest to the community would exceed FAA’s Notice Criteria (See Tab G-Additional Materials); therefore a no-hazard determination would be sought from the FAA if this site is selected, as soon as possible. It is expected that this determination would be issued within one month, since the location would be selected based on airspace availability and limitations. Met tower #1 would not exceed FAA’s Notice Criteria and would not need FAA approval (See Tab G-Additional Materials). After the turbine location and type have been selected, AVEC would seek a no-hazard determination from FAA for the potential turbines. AVEC would do this early in the process to ensure that adequate time and resources are allocated to this effort. It is expected to take about 3 months to obtain the determination for the turbines. Endangered Species Act/Migratory Bird Treaty Act Consultation:Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in compliance with the Endangered Species Act and Migratory Bird Treaty Act would be required to install the met tower. A finding letter stating that the project would not be expected to impact threatened or endangered species or birds would be drafted and submitted to the USFWS once AVEC is assured this project is funded. It is expected that AVEC would receive concurrence from the Service within one month. The authorization would be issued prior to initiating met tower work in September 2012. Clean Water Act (Section 401) Permit:If the met tower is erected within wetlands, a Corps Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 13 of 18 8/26/2011 authorization would be required.Because of the limited footprint of the met tower and geotechnical work, a “Nationwide Permit” would be sought. The application/preconstruction notice would be submitted to the Corps once funding is assured, and the permit would be issued prior to initiating met tower work in September 2012. 4.3.4 Environmental Address whether the following environmental and land use issues apply, and if so how they will be addressed: Threatened or Endangered species Habitat issues Wetlands and other protected areas Archaeological and historical resources Land development constraints Telecommunications interference Aviation considerations Visual, aesthetics impacts Identify and discuss other potential barriers Threatened or endangered species.The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would be consulted to ensure that installation of a met tower and the construction of the wind turbines would have no effect on threatened or endangered species, particularly spectacled eiders. Construction would be timed to avoid impacts to migratory birds in compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Habitat issues.During permitting, the project team would work with agencies to ensure that the project would not impact any State refuges, sanctuaries, or critical habitat areas, federal refuges or wilderness areas, or national parks. Wetlands and other protected areas.If the met tower is placed in wetlands, a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ wetlands permit would be needed. Archaeological and historical resources.Compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act and consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer would be conducted prior to construction of the wind turbines. 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 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 14 of 18 8/26/2011 Projected capital cost of proposed renewable energy system Projected development cost of proposed renewable energy system Total anticipated project cost, and cost for this phase/requested grant funding/matching funds.AVEC plans to conduct a Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment, and Conceptual Design to assess the possibility of using wind power in Shishmaref. This work would cost $150,000. AVEC requests $142,500 from AEA. AVEC would provide $7,500 as a matching cash contribution. Identification of other funding sources.Once the turbine type is determined, the next phase of this project would be final design and construction. Although it is difficult to determine without an assessment of the resource and what type, size, and number of turbines would be needed, AVEC expects that final design and construction of two Northwind 100 turbines would cost $2.5 million. It is possible that the funding for this work could come from future AEA funding, USDA Rural Utility Service, or another grant program. Projected capital cost of proposed renewable energy system/projected development cost of proposed renewable energy system.The final phase of this project would be Design and Construction and Commissioning (Phase IV). AVEC estimates that this phase could cost $2,500,000. AVEC would provide a 10% cash match for the construction project. 4.4.2 Project Operating and Maintenance Costs Include anticipated O&M costs for new facilities constructed and how these would be funded by the applicant. (Note: Operational costs are not eligible for grant funds however grantees are required to meet ongoing reporting requirements for the purpose of reporting impacts of projects on the communities they serve.) The met tower would require monthly monitoring and data management. It is expected that this would cost $700 total for the year that the met tower is erected. The cost would be funded by this grant award. 4.4.3 Power Purchase/Sale The power purchase/sale information should include the following: Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s) Potential power purchase/sales price - at a minimum indicate a price range Proposed rate of return from grant-funded project Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s).AVEC, the existing electric utility serving Shishmaref, is a member-owned cooperative electric utility and typically owns and maintains the generation, fuel storage, and distribution facilities in the villages it serves. Shishmaref has 141 households and a health clinic, city office, tribal council office, and water treatment plant/washeteria, which purchase power from AVEC. At this point in project development, the potential power price and rate of return on the project is unknown. Potential power purchase/sales price/ Proposed rate of return from grant-funded project.At this point in project development, the potential power price and rate of return on the project is unknown. Work done under this grant would determine this. Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 15 of 18 8/26/2011 4.4.4 Project Cost Worksheet Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered in evaluating the project. Please see cost/benefit sheet under Tab C. 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 (gal and $) 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:Assuming that two NW 100 turbines are installed, the project could decrease diesel use by 38,700 gal/yr (based on preliminary numbers and 80% turbine availability) and 774,000 gallons over the anticipated 20-year lifetime of the installation. Based on ISER’s estimated fuel costs, this project could save approximately $178,000 year during its first full year of operation (planned to be 2015). Anticipated annual revenue/Potential additional annual incentives/Potential additional annual revenue streams.Because this project is in the concept design stage, revenue and incentives are unknown. Non-economic public benefits.The anticipated benefits of installation of the wind turbines would be reducing the negative impact of the cost of energy by providing a renewable energy alternative. This project could help stabilize energy costs and provide long-term socio-economic benefits to village households. Locally produced, affordable energy will empower community residents and could help avert rural to urban migration. Shishmaref will be a pilot project for communities with smaller populations and lower electric demand. While larger villages have mostly been evaluated for wind resources, studying Shishmaref will enable AVEC to discover ways to economically integrate wind power into the diesel-generating plants in smaller villages. The lessons learned from this project could be used in other small villages throughout the State. This project would help AVEC to determine potential locations to be served by recovered heat. If determined feasible, the terms of recovered heat agreements would be negotiated with entities to be served. Once the wind project is constructed and heat recovery systems are in place, the costs to operate important facilities in Shishmaref including the water treatment plant and school, could be decreased, enabling managing entities (City of Shishmaref, Native Village of Shishmaref, Shishmaref Native Corporation, and Bering Straits School District) to Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 16 of 18 8/26/2011 operate more economically. Stabilized energy costs would also allow community entities to plan and budget for important community infrastructure listed in the Shishmaref Local Economic Development Plan (Kawerak 2004), including improvements to water and sewer system, development of vocational training and scholarship programs, an elder/disabled services and clinic van, trash hauling program, housing, and road improvements. Stabilized energy costs would also help the small business opportunities listed Economic Development Plan including bed and breakfasts, hotels, and restaurants. Shishmaref residents health and safety would benefit from the environmental benefits resulting from a reduction of hydrocarbon use, including: Reduced potential for fuel spills or contamination during transport, storage, or use (thus protecting vital water and subsistence food sources) Improved air quality Decreased contribution to global climate change from fossil fuel use AVEC may be interested in investigating turbines other than the Northwind 100s to install in the community. The investigation of other turbines not currently used at other AVEC facilities or in rural Alaska would help other communities to understand whether a different turbine is suitable for their community. This project would help with the understanding of the wind resource in northwest Alaska. Data acquired from this study could assist nearby communities to understand their wind resource. SECTION 6– SUSTAINABILITY Discuss your plan for operating the completed project so that it will be sustainable. Include at a minimum: Proposed business structure(s) and concepts that may be considered. How you propose to finance the maintenance and operations for the life of the project Identification of operational issues that could arise. A description of operational costs including on-going support for any back-up or existing systems that may be require to continue operation Commitment to reporting the savings and benefits As a local utility that has been in operation since 1968, AVEC is completely able to finance, operate, and maintain this project for the design life. AVEC has capacity and experience to operate this project. AVEC has operating wind projects throughout the state and is very familiar with planning, constructing, operating, and maintaining wind systems. Business Plan Structures and Concepts which may be considered:The wind turbines would be incorporated into AVEC’s power plant operation. Local plant operators provide daily servicing. AVEC technicians provide periodic preventative or corrective maintenance and are supported by AVEC headquarters staff, purchasing, and warehousing. Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 17 of 18 8/26/2011 How O&M will be financed for the life of the project:The costs of operations and maintenance would be funded through ongoing energy sales to the villages that AVEC serves. Operational issues which could arise:There are no known met tower operational issues. Operational issues of the proposed turbines would be determined. Operating costs:Different turbines have different operating costs; however, AEA estimates O&M would cost $0.005/kWh or approximately $2,600 annually. Commitment to reporting the savings and benefits:AVEC is fully committed to sharing the savings and benefits accrued from this project information with their shareholders and AEA. SECTION 7 – READINESS & COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER GRANTS Discuss what you have done to prepare for this award and how quickly you intend to proceed with work once your grant is approved. Tell us what you may have already accomplished on the project to date and identify other grants that may have been previously awarded for this project and the degree you have been able to meet the requirements of previous grants. Once funding is known to be secured and the met tower site is identified, AVEC would seek a non-objection letter from either the City of Shishmaref or the Shishmaref Corporation and begin the FAA and USFWS permitting process. AVEC would seek contractors to install the met tower and complete the geotechnical work once the grant agreement is in place. Met tower installation and geotechnical work would occur before winter. Work that can be completed before the wind study is completed would occur over the winter, including analysis of current cost of energy and future market and the economic and financial analyses. Once the wind study is completed, the conceptual design and permitting would occur. No other grants have been secured for this work in the past. SECTION 8– LOCAL SUPORT Discuss what local support or possible opposition there may be regarding your project. Include letters of support from the community that would benefit from this project. The community is very committed to moving this project forward and fully supports this project. Letters of support for this project have been received the City of Shishmaref, the Native Village of Shishmaref, and Shishmaref Native Corporation. (See Tab D.) 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. Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. Shishmaref Wind Phase II Feasibility Project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application Round 5 AEA 12-001 Grant Application Page 18 of 18 8/26/2011 Include an estimate of budget costs by milestones using the form – GrantBudget5.doc AVEC plans to conduct a feasibility analysis, resources assessment, conceptual design, and permitting to assess the possibility of using wind power in Shishmaref. This work will cost $150,000. AVEC requests $142,500 from AEA. AVEC will provide $7,500 as cash contribution. A detail of the grant budget follows. Also see Tab C. Milestone or Task Grant Funds AVEC Cash Match TOTALS 1.Meteorological Tower $23,750 $1,250 $25,000 2.Reconnaissance Geotechnical Study $14,250 $750 $15,000 3.Wind Resource Study $9,500 $500 $10,000 4.Concept Design Report $95,000 $5,000 $100,000 Totals $142,500 $7,500 $150,000 *If a met toweris available without purchase, there would be cost savings to the project. To date, no funds have been obtained for this project. If the wind resource proves to be suitable, AVEC would seek funding to construct turbines in Shishmaref. AVEC would provide a 10% cash match to any obtained funding. Tab A Resumes V3 Energy, LLC Douglas Vaught, P.E. 19211 Babrof Drive Eagle River, AK 99577 USA tel 907.350.5047 email dvaught@mtaonline.net Consulting Services : • Wind resource analysis and assessment, including IEC 61400-1 3 rd ed. protocols • Wind turbine siting, FAA permitting, and power generation prediction • Wind-diesel power plant modeling and configuration design • Cold climate and rime icing environment analysis of wind turbine operations • Met tower/sensor/logger installation and removal (tubular towers 10 to 60 meters in height) Partial List of Clients: • Alaska Village Electric Cooperative • NANA Pacific, LLC • enXco Development Corp. • Bristol Bay Native Corp. • Naknek Electric Association • Kodiak Electric Association • Barrick Gold • Alaska Energy Authority • North Slope Borough • Manokotak Natives Ltd. Representative Projects: • Alaska Village Electric Cooperative. Site selection, FAA permitting, met tower installation, data analysis/wind resource assessment, turbine energy recovery analysis, rime icing/turbine effects analysis, powerplant system modeling. Contact information: Brent Petrie, Key Accounts Mgr, 907-565-5358 • Kodiak Electric Association. Met tower installation, data analysis and modeling for Alaska’s first utility scale turbines (GE 1.5sle) on -line July 2009. Contact information: Darron Scott, CEO, 907 -486-7690. • NANA Pacific, LLC. Site reconnaissance and selection, permitting, met tower installation, wind resource assessment and preliminary power system modeling for Northwest Arctic Borough villages and Red Dog Mine. Contact information: Jay Hermanson, Program Manager, 907-339-6514 • enXco Development Corp. Met tower installation documentation, site reconnaissance , analysis equipment management for utility-sca le wind projects, including Fire Island near Anchorage. Contact information: Steve Gilbert, Alaska Projects Manager, 907-333-0810. • Naknek Electric Association. Long -term wind resource assessment at two sites (sequentially), including site selection, met tower installation, data analysis, turbine research, performance modeling, and project economic analysis. Contact information: Donna Vukich, General Manager, 907-246-4261 • North Slope Borough (with Powercorp Alaska, LLC). Power system modeling, site reconnaissance and selection, FAA permitting, wind turbine cold climate and icing effects white paper. Contact information: Kent Grinage, Public Works Dept., 907-852-0285 Recent Presentations: • Wind Power Icing Challenges in Alaska: a Case Study of the Native Village of Saint Mary’s, presented at Winterwind 2008, Norrköping, Sweden, Dec. 8, 2008. Tab B Cost Worksheet Renewable Energy Fund Round 5 Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet RFA AEA12-001 Application Cost Worksheet Page 1 8-26-11 Please note that some fields might not be applicable for all technologies or all project phases. The level of information detail varies according to phase requirements. Shishmaref Wind Feasibility 1. Renewable Energy Source The Applicant should demonstrate that the renewable energy resource is available on a sustainable basis. Annual average resource availability.Class 6 (Point Hope numbers) Unit depends on project type (e.g. windspeed, hydropower output, biomasss fuel) 2. Existing Energy Generation and Usage a) Basic configuration (if system is part of the Railbelt1 grid, leave this section blank) i. Number of generators/boilers/other 4 generators ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other 314 kW/ 350 kW/ 397 kW/ 499 kW iii. Generator/boilers/other type diesel engine generators iv. Age of generators/boilers/other 7 yrs/ 35 yrs/ 9 yrs/ 5 yrs v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other 13.00 kWh/gallon (2010) b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank) i. Annual O&M cost for labor ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor c) Annual electricity production and fuel usage (fill in as applicable) (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank) i. Electricity [kWh]1,648,603 kWh (2010) ii. Fuel usage Diesel [gal]121,042 gallons (2010) Other iii. Peak Load 285 kW (2010) iv. Average Load 188 kW (2010) v. Minimum Load vi. Efficiency 13.62 kWh/gallon (2010) vii. Future trends d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable) i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu] ii. Electricity [kWh] iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu] iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu] v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] vi. Other 1 The Railbelt grid connects all customers of Chugach Electric Association, Homer Electric Association, Golden Valley Electric Association, the City of Seward Electric Department, Matanuska Electric Association and Anchorage Municipal Light and Power. Renewable Energy Fund Round 5 Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet RFA AEA12-001 Application Cost Worksheet Page 2 8-26-11 3. 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] 200 kW b) Proposed annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable) i.Electricity [kWh]527,300 kWh (assume Two NW100 B turbines, 37 m hub, 80% turbine availability, Point Hope wind data used as surrogate for Shishmaref due to similar coastal exposure to Chukchi Sea) 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 $2,500,000 b) Development cost c) Annual O&M cost of new system 2,600/year ($.005 kWh X 527300) d) Annual fuel cost 5. Project Benefits a) Amount of fuel displaced for i. Electricity 38,700 gallons/year ii. Heat iii. Transportation b) Current price of displaced fuel $4.56/gallon (2011-ISER spreadsheet) c) Other economic benefits d) Alaska public benefits 6. Power Purchase/Sales Price a) Price for power purchase/sale 7. Project Analysis a) Basic Economic Analysis Project benefit/cost ratio 1.25 Payback (years)14 years Tab C Budget Form Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round V Grant Budget Form 8-26-11 Shishmaref Wind Feasibility Milestone or Task Anticipated Completion Date RE- Fund Grant Funds Grantee Matching Funds Source of Matching Funds: Cash/In-kind/Federal Grants/Other State Grants/Other TOTALS 1.Meteorological Tower September 2012 -October2013 $23,750 $1,250 Cash $25,000 2.Reconnaissance Geotechnical Study December 2012 $14,250 $750 Cash $$15,000 3.Wind Resource Study October 2013 $9,500 $500 Cash $10,000 4.Concept Design Report November 2013 $95,000 $5,000 Cash $100,000 $$$ $ $ TOTALS $142,500 $7,500 $150,000 Budget Categories: Direct Labor & Benefits $4,750 $250 Cash $5,000 Travel & Per Diem $1,900 $100 Cash $2,000 Equipment $9,025 $475 Cash $9,500 Materials & Supplies Contractual Services $126,825 $6,675 Cash $133,500 Construction Services $ Other $ TOTALS $142,500 $7,500 $150,000 Tab D Letters of Support Tab E Authorized Signers Form Tab F Authority Tab G Additional Materials Notice Criteria Tool file:///C|/Users/Doug/Documents/AVEC/Shishmaref/Shishmaref,%20met%20tower%20site%201,%20Notice%20Criteria%20Tool.htm[8/15/2011 3:24:47 PM] « OE/AAA Obstruction Evaluation Version 2011.2.2 Home FAA OE/AAA Offices View Determined Cases View Interim Cases View Proposed Cases View Supplemental Notices (Form 7460-2) View Circularized Cases Search Archives Download Archives Circle Search for Cases Circle Search for Airports General FAQs Wind Turbine FAQs Discretionary Review FAQs Notice Criteria Tool DoD Preliminary Screening Tool Wind Turbine Build Out Distance Calculation Tool OE/AAA Account Login New User Registration Information Resources FAA Acronyms Forms Regulatory Policy Relevent Advisory Circulars Survey Accuracy Light Outage Reporting Useful Links State Aviation Contacts Airports Regional Contacts Notice Criteria Tool faa.gov Tools:Print this page The requirements for filing with the Federal Aviation Administration for proposed structures vary based on a number of factors: height, proximity to an airport, location, and frequencies emitted from the structure, etc. For more details, please reference CFR Title 14 Part 77.9 . You must file with the FAA at least 45 days prior to construction if: If you require additional information regarding the filing requirements for your structure, please identify and contact the appropriate FAA representative using the Air Traffic Areas of Responsibility map for Off Airport construction, or contact the FAA Airports Region / District Office for On Airport construction. The tool below will assist in applying Part 77 Notice Criteria. Latitude: Deg M S N Longitude: Deg M S W Horizontal Datum:NAD83 Site Elevation (SE): (nearest foot) Structure Height (AGL): (nearest foot) Traverseway:No Traverseway (Additional height is added to certain structures under 77.9(c)) Is structure on airport: No Yes Results You do not exceed Notice Criteria. your structure will exceed 200ft above ground level your structure will be in proximity to an airport and will exceed the slope ratio your structure involves construction of a traverseway (i.e. highway, railroad, waterway etc...) your structure will emit frequencies, and does not meet the conditions of the FAA Co-location Policy your structure will be in an instrument approach area and might exceed part 77 Subpart C your structure will be on an airport or heliport Notice Criteria Tool file:///C|/Users/Doug/Documents/AVEC/Shishmaref/Shishmaref,%20met%20tower%20site%201,%20Notice%20Criteria%20Tool.htm[8/15/2011 3:24:47 PM] Air Traffic Areas of Responsibility FAA.gov Home | Privacy Policy | Web Policies & Notices | Contact Us | Help Readers & Viewers: PDF Reader | MS Word Viewer | MS PowerPoint Viewer | MS Excel Viewer | WinZip Notice Criteria Tool file:///C|/Users/Doug/Documents/AVEC/Shishmaref/Shishmaref%20Matt's%20site%20Notice%20Criteria%20Tool.htm[8/15/2011 3:23:59 PM] « OE/AAA Obstruction Evaluation Version 2011.2.2 Home FAA OE/AAA Offices View Determined Cases View Interim Cases View Proposed Cases View Supplemental Notices (Form 7460-2) View Circularized Cases Search Archives Download Archives Circle Search for Cases Circle Search for Airports General FAQs Wind Turbine FAQs Discretionary Review FAQs Notice Criteria Tool DoD Preliminary Screening Tool Wind Turbine Build Out Distance Calculation Tool OE/AAA Account Login New User Registration Information Resources FAA Acronyms Forms Regulatory Policy Relevent Advisory Circulars Survey Accuracy Light Outage Reporting Useful Links State Aviation Contacts Airports Regional Contacts Notice Criteria Tool faa.gov Tools:Print this page The requirements for filing with the Federal Aviation Administration for proposed structures vary based on a number of factors: height, proximity to an airport, location, and frequencies emitted from the structure, etc. For more details, please reference CFR Title 14 Part 77.9 . You must file with the FAA at least 45 days prior to construction if: If you require additional information regarding the filing requirements for your structure, please identify and contact the appropriate FAA representative using the Air Traffic Areas of Responsibility map for Off Airport construction, or contact the FAA Airports Region / District Office for On Airport construction. The tool below will assist in applying Part 77 Notice Criteria. Latitude: Deg M S N Longitude: Deg M S W Horizontal Datum:NAD83 Site Elevation (SE): (nearest foot) Structure Height (AGL): (nearest foot) Traverseway:No Traverseway (Additional height is added to certain structures under 77.9(c)) Is structure on airport: No Yes Results You exceed the following Notice Criteria: Your proposed structure is in proximity to a navigation facility and may impact the assurance of navigation signal reception. The FAA, in accordance with 77.9, requests that you file. 77.9(b) by 98 ft. The nearest airport is SHH, and the nearest runway is 05/23. The FAA requests that you file your structure will exceed 200ft above ground level your structure will be in proximity to an airport and will exceed the slope ratio your structure involves construction of a traverseway (i.e. highway, railroad, waterway etc...) your structure will emit frequencies, and does not meet the conditions of the FAA Co-location Policy your structure will be in an instrument approach area and might exceed part 77 Subpart C your structure will be on an airport or heliport Notice Criteria Tool file:///C|/Users/Doug/Documents/AVEC/Shishmaref/Shishmaref%20Matt's%20site%20Notice%20Criteria%20Tool.htm[8/15/2011 3:23:59 PM] Air Traffic Areas of Responsibility FAA.gov Home | Privacy Policy | Web Policies & Notices | Contact Us | Help Readers & Viewers: PDF Reader | MS Word Viewer | MS PowerPoint Viewer | MS Excel Viewer | WinZip