HomeMy WebLinkAboutKivalina Wind Intertie App
2009
Alaska Village
Electric Cooperative
11/03/2009
Renewable Energy Fund Round 3
Kivalina Wind Grant Application
Tab 1
Grant Application
Renewable Energy Fund Round 3
Grant Application
AEA 10-015 Application Page 1 of 21 11/05/2009
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal)
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Type of Entity:
Electric Utility
Mailing Address
4831 Eagle Street
Anchorage, AK 99503
Physical Address
Telephone
(907) 565-5531
Fax
(907) 562-4086
Email
1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT
Name
Brent Petrie
Title
Manager, Community Development Key Accounts
Mailing Address
4831 Eagle Street
Anchorage, AK 99503
Telephone
(907)565-5531
Fax
(907)562-4086
Email
BPetrie@avec.org
1.2 APPLICANT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
Please check as appropriate. If you do not to meet the minimum applicant requirements, your
application will be rejected.
1.2.1 As an Applicant, we are: (put an X in the appropriate box)
X An electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS
42.05, or
An independent power producer in accordance with 3 AAC 107.695 (a) (1), or
A local government, or
A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities);
Yes
1.2.2. Attached to this application is formal approval and endorsement for its project by
its board of directors, executive management, or other governing authority. If the
applicant is a collaborative grouping, a formal approval from each participant’s
governing authority is necessary. (Indicate Yes or No in the box )
Yes
1.2.3. As an applicant, we have administrative and financial management systems and
follow procurement standards that comply with the standards set forth in the grant
agreement.
Yes
1.2.4. If awarded the grant, we can comply with all terms and conditions of the attached
grant form. (Any exceptions should be clearly noted and submitted with the
application.)
Yes
1.2.5 We intend to own and operate any project that may be constructed with grant
funds for the benefit of the general public.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 2 of 21 10/7/2009
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)
Kivalina Wind-Intertie Feasibility Analysis and Conceptual Design
2.2 Project Location
Include the physical location of your project and name(s) of the community or communities that will
benefit from your project.
Kivalina (with a population of 406) is at the tip of an 8-mile barrier reef located between the
Chukchi Sea and Kivalina River. Kivalina is 17 miles northwest of the Delong Mountain
Transportation System (DMTS) port facility serving the Red Dog Mine.
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 X 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.
To determine the feasibility of installing wind towers in the vicinity of Kivalina, AVEC proposes
to complete a wind power study and conceptual design. To this end, AVEC will install a wind
meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work. AVEC also proposes to conduct a
feasibility study and conceptual design to examine the extension of a power intertie from
Kivalina to the power system at the AIDEA-owned DMTS Port, 17 miles to the southwest, with
the addition of wind power generation along the intertie. AVEC will analyze and report findings
about both areas to partners and community members. AVEC This total project concept, with
wind generation and an intertie, could be segmented into the following phases:
• Phase 1. Feasibility study & conceptual design.
• Phase 2. Financing and negotiation of power purchase agreement.
• Phase 3. Design and engineering.
• Phase 4. Installation of transmission and wind energy.
• Phase 5. Operations and maintenance.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 3 of 21 10/7/2009
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 financial benefits of the project include the following:
• Reduced Cost of Electricity. AVEC customers in Kivalina will see reduced electricity
costs through lower bulk fuel costs at the Red Dog Port. Operations and maintenance
(O&M) costs will be reduced in Kivalina with no prime power generators to service,
repair, and replace. Through the diesel fuel purchasing power of Teck and a transmission
line to Kivalina, the possibility of lowering the cost of energy and power in Kivalina is
significant.
• Avoided Cost of Rural Power System (RPS) Upgrade and Bulk Fuel Upgrade. The
need to replace the RPS/Bulk Fuel facility is imminent, but has been delayed due to
uncertainty about relocation and land availability.
• Wind Energy Development to Displace Diesel Fuel. An intertie linking the DMTS Port
and Kivalina provides access to prime wind power locations along the route. Geographic
and FAA airspace constraints preclude wind generation in the immediate vicinity of
Kivalina. In order to deliver wind power to Kivalina a power line would need to extend to
the east 3-8 miles to satisfy FAA requirements and be on suitable ground. Larger scale
wind power generation could be located along the intertie in the DMTS Port vicinity as
well. A preliminary HOMER analysis has been done; the analysis indicated that
significant fuel savings can be achieved.
• Reduced Construction Costs. Reduced project construction costs can be achieved with
the use of the DMTS Port housing facilities, Teck construction equipment, and bulk
shipment facilities in place.
The public benefits
• Increased Power Reliability. The prospect of tapping into an industrial power supply
has the potential to increase both quality and reliability of power in Kivalina. Moreover,
if Kivalina does relocate to a site further inland, which will have no barge access, the
intertie could be branched to the new location to supply electric power. A tank farm,
prime power plant and a lengthy, bulk fuel line may not be needed for the new site.
of the project include the following:
• Reduced Pollution and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Reduced air, noise and ground
pollution from the diesel exhaust, power plant and tank farm fuel system, respectively.
Due to the sizing of the power plant, there are increased regulatory requirements. The
potential of reducing pollution through wind energy is an appealing option.
Other Benefits to the Alaskan public will also exist. An important benefit of installing the
proposed wind turbines would be to reduce the direct and indirect costs of using fossil fuels in
the region. 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 may help avert rural to urban migration. This project would have many
environmental benefits resulting from a reduction of hydrocarbon use. These benefits include:
• 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; and
• Decreased coastal erosion due to climate change.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 4 of 21 10/7/2009
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 feasibility analysis, wind resource assessment, and conceptual design phase is estimated at
$193,000, of which $183,350 is requested in grant funds. The remaining $9,650 will be matched
in cash by AVEC. The entire project, through the construction phase, is estimated to cost
approximately $22,193,000, in the following 4 phases with potential sources of funding or
financing:
1) Feasibility analysis, resource assessment, and conceptual design $193,000 (AEA-R3)
2) Planning, permitting, and design $2M (Denali Commission)
3) Intertie and substations construction $14M (AIDEA)
4) Wind power construction $6M (AIDEA)
The project has two areas of concentration: power intertie and wind generation.
Intertie
The intertie between Kivalina and DMTS Port will be evaluated by looking at land use,
permitting, and cost. A business model will look at the ownership and operational aspects of an
intertie. AC and DC power transmission systems will be considered for cost estimating and
O&M purposes. A business model will explore the relationship between Teck (current DMTS
operator) and AVEC.
Wind Generation
The work will involve obtaining a letter of non-objection for placement of the wind tower and
geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, purchasing, 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.
The entire area from Kivalina to the DMTS Port is considered to be an excellent wind resource.
The wind resource at the DMTS Port has been evaluated and is a Class 6/7. An intertie between
Kivalina and the DMTS Port would provide access to prime wind generation locations with
regard to low turbulence near the DMTS Port and away from geographic and FAA airspace
restrictions near Kivalina. A business model will look at wind generation on both ends of the
intertie and the financial considerations for both.
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. $ 183,350
2.7.2 Other Funds to be provided (Project match) $ 9,650
2.7.3 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.7.1 and 2.7.2) $ 193,000
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 $ 22,193,000
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 5 of 21 10/7/2009
including estimates through construction)
2.7.5 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings) To be determined
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, based on
avoided fuel costs.
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 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 Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), the electric utility serving Kivalina, will provide
overall project management and oversight.
Brent Petrie, Manager, Community Development and Key Accounts, will take the lead role as
project manager. He has worked for Alaska Village Electric Cooperative since 1998, where he
manages the development of alternatives to diesel generation for AVEC such as using hydro,
wind, or 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 been employed in the energy and resource field for more than thirty years, having
worked for 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.)
The project’s ten key milestones or tasks, and their subtasks, are listed below with
estimated completion dates (by task or subtask if subtasks are spread over more than one
month):
1. Project scoping and contractor solicitation: September 15, 2010
Authorization to proceed
Engineering contractor selection
2. Detailed energy resource analysis: September 2010-September 2011
Obtain site control/right of entry/permits: September 2010
Ship and erect met tower: September 2010
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 6 of 21 10/7/2009
Complete monitor met tower data: September 2011
3. Identification of land and regulatory issues: January 31, 2011
Land and Regulatory Issues Memorandum
4. Permitting and environmental analysis: January 31, 2011
Environmental and Permitting Memorandum
5. Detailed analysis of existing/ future energy costs and markets: March 30, 2011
6. Conceptual business and operations plans: June 30, 2011
Conceptual Business Plan
Conceptual Operating Plan
7. Assessment of alternatives: August 30, 2011
Geotech Field Work: June 2011
Draft Wind Resource Report: July 2011
Geotech Report: August 2011
Alternatives Assessment: August 2011
8. Detailed economic and financial analysis: October 31, 2011
Dismantle met tower: September 2011
Analyze data: October 2011
9. Conceptual design analysis and cost estimate: November 30, 2011
Wind Resource Report
Conceptual Design and Cost Estimate
10. Final project report and recommendations: December 31, 2011
Final Combined Report
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.)
Coastal erosion has limited the development and improvement of infrastructure in Kivalina,
Alaska for the past 20-30 years. Erosion has recently caused AVEC to relocate their fuel tank
farm in Kivalina as a temporary solution. The AVEC power plant in Kivalina has also reached its
service life and needs to be replaced. Due to the natural setting of Kivalina and limited land
availability options, there are few options available to AVEC for improved reliability and
efficiency. The DMTS Port, AVEC, Teck Alaska and NANA Regional Corporation represent a
unique opportunity for a public private partnership (PPP) for providing lower-cost energy and
power to the community of Kivalina. This could be done through a 17 mile transmission line
between the port site and Kivalina; development of a power purchase agreement between Teck
and AVEC; and development of wind energy along the transmission/intertie line. To determine
the viability of the wind-intertie concepts, the project will implement the following milestones:
1. Project scoping and contractor solicitation (September 1-September 15, 2010)
AVEC will select a contractor for the wind feasibility, geotechnical analysis, and conceptual
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 7 of 21 10/7/2009
design immediately following AEA’s authorization to proceed.
2. Detailed energy resource analysis (September 1-September 30, 2010)
To initiate the wind resource analysis before winter, AVEC will ship and erect the met tower in
September 2010. AVEC will 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 will have the wind resource data to
ascertain the suitability of use of this renewable resource.
3. Identification of land and regulatory issues (November 1, 2010-January 31, 2011)
AVEC will conduct site control discussions with the land owner and detail site control needs in a
memorandum.
4. Permitting and environmental analysis (November 1, 2010-January 31, 2011)
AVEC will discuss the project with regulatory agencies to determine permitting requirements.
Needed permits and any studies (i.e., bird studies) will be documented in a memorandum.
5. Detailed analysis of existing/future energy costs and markets (February 1-March 30,
2011)
AVEC will draft a memorandum documenting the existing and future energy costs and markets
in Kivalina. The information will be based on AVEC records and community plans. A
community meeting will be held to determine future energy markets.
6. Conceptual business and operations plans (April 1-June 30, 2011)
Draft business and operational plans will be developed working with Teck, NANA Regional
Corporation, and AIDEA.
7. Assessment of alternatives (June 1, 2011-August 30, 2011)
A draft wind resource report will be written using the first three quarters of collected met tower
data. Geotechnical field work will be completed and a report would be written during this time.
A draft Alternatives Assessment Memorandum will be written detailing the reasonable
alternatives and the preferred alternative using the wind and geotechnical data. It is expected that
alternatives will vary in number and size of wind turbines and their configuration. A final
Alternatives Assessment will incorporate the last three months of the wind monitoring findings
and specify the alternative to bring forward to conceptual design. This assessment will be
included in the final report described in Milestones 9 and 10 below.
8. Detailed economic and financial analysis (September 1-October 31, 2011)
An economic and financial analysis which examines potential final design and construction
costs, operating and maintenance costs, user rates, and other funding mechanisms will be
developed.
9. Conceptual design analysis and cost estimate (October 1-December 31, 2011)
The met tower will be dismantled and the Final Wind Resource Report will be finalized by
incorporating the last three months of data. A conceptual design and cost estimate will be
prepared for the preferred alternative.
10. Final report and recommendations (December 31, 2011)
All of the memoranda and reports written for the project will be combined in a final report and
submitted to AEA. The Final Report will include final drafts of the following:
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 8 of 21 10/7/2009
• Land and Regulatory Issues Memorandum
• Environmental and Permitting Memorandum
• Existing and Future Energy Costs and Markets Memorandum
• Transmission/Intertie Feasibility and Conceptual Design
• Conceptual Business Plan
• Conceptual Operating Plan
• Wind Resource Report
• Geotechnical Report
• Alternatives Assessment
• Economic and Financial Analysis
• Conceptual Design Analysis and Cost Estimate
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 will use a team of AVEC staff and external consultants--a project management approach
that has been used to successfully design and construct wind turbines throughout rural Alaska.
AVEC staff and their role on this project includes the following:
• Meera Kohler, President and Chief Executive Officer, will act as Project Executive and
will maintain ultimate authority programmatically and financially.
• Brent Petrie, Manager of the Community Development Group, will be the project
manager. Together with his group, Brent will provide coordination of the installation of
the met tower, geotechnical work, and conceptual design. The group’s resources include
a project coordinator, contracts clerk, accountant, engineer, and a community liaison.
Specific duties of the project manager will include the following:
• Obtaining site control/access and permits for the installation of the met tower and
geotechnical work.
• Selecting, coordinating, and managing the engineering consultant.
• Communicating with Kivalina residents to ensure that the community is informed.
• Debbie Bullock, Manager of Administrative Services, will provide support in accounting,
payables, financial reporting, and capitalization of assets in accordance with AEA
guidelines.
Contractors for this project will include the following:
• Engineering consultant. AVEC will employ an engineering consultant who will:
o Provide wind resource assessment services including installation of the met
tower, operation and maintenance of the met tower, and a draft wind resource
report.
o Provide Feasibility Analysis, Wind Resource Assessment, and Conceptual
Design of a Kivalina-DMTS Port intertie and wind generation facilities in the
vicinity of Kivalina.
o Provide business and operational models for Public/Private Partnership (PPP)
relationship.
o Supervise geotechnical investigation and draft the geotechnical report.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 9 of 21 10/7/2009
o Provide final feasibility and conceptual design report.
Selection Process for Contractors: The engineering consultant selection will be based upon
technical competencies, past performance, written proposal quality, cost, and general consensus
from the technical steering committee. The selection of the consultant will occur in strict
conformity with corporate procurement policies, conformance with OMB circulars, and DCAA
principles.
There is interest by all parties to develop wind energy in the general area of the port site for the
benefit of Kivalina. The proposed roles and responsibilities include the following:
• AVEC Role. Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) is the Regulatory
Commission of Alaska recognized power provider in Kivalina. The concept includes
AVEC buying power from Red Dog Mine (DMTS) Port (operator) and then retailing
power to the community of Kivalina through a transmission line from the port to
Kivalina. AVEC would own and operate the transmission line and maintain back-
up/emergency power in Kivalina in the event of power disruption. AVEC would also own
and operate any wind generation in the vicinity of Kivalina.
• TECK Role. Teck Alaska would maintain the existing operating arrangement at the port.
Through a power purchase agreement, Teck would provide power to AVEC.
• NANA Regional Corporation (NRC) Role. NRC will help facilitate the concept,
negotiate the arrangement, and provide technical services as needed. NRC can also
provide land for installation of wind turbines.
3.5 Project Communications
Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status.
AVEC will assign a project manager to the project who will compile periodic progress reports
for use by the Alaska Energy Authority. Weekly and monthly project coordination meetings will
be held with the project team to track progress and address issues as they arise.
3.6 Project Risk
Discuss potential problems and how you would address them.
Site Control/Access and Permitting. In the NANA Region Strategic Energy Plan, community
members expressed support for investigating the potential for wind power. It is expected that the
community would support erection of the met tower. Consultation with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service would be conducted to comply with the Endangered Species Act. AVEC would
work openly with the agency and conduct studies as appropriate.
Weather. Weather could delay geotechnical field work; however, an experienced consultant,
familiar with Alaskan weather conditions, will be selected. It is unlikely that a delay in the total
project schedule would occur if the field work is delayed. The met tower will be installed to
withstand Kivalina’s winter weather conditions. The met tower will be monitored to ensure the
met tower is up and functioning.
Logistics. Transport of the met tower to Kivalina will not be difficult, as there is good barge and
air access to the community.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 10 of 21 10/7/2009
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, Kivalina is rated as a class 6
wind regime. Correlating NANA’s anemometer data from the DMTS Port site, which is in a class
6/7 wind regime, we expect the annual wind resource to be 35% of installed wind turbine
capacity. A 200-300 kW wind turbine project can be expected to produce up to an average of
900,000 kWh per year.
Solar power from photovoltaic solar arrays is a potential alternative, but has higher capital cost
and lower resource availability than wind in Kivalina.
Woody biomass is not readily available in the area.
Hydroelectric potential is low in the area due to geographic and arctic conditions of the area.
Hydrokinetic power generation is possible in the Wulik River, but has not been explored.
Anemometer equipment for measuring the wind resource was installed at the Red Dog Mine Port
(“Site 5”) in September of 2008. In March of 2009, a preliminary analysis of the wind data was
undertaken.
Site 5 is an existing 35 meter communication tower located approximately 3.5 kilometers from
the Chukchi Sea at the DMTS Port of the Red Dog Mine. The general area of the tower was
selected during a reconnaissance visit in August 2008 as a potential wind power site for the port
facility and potentially for Red Dog Mine itself someday. Data collected to date (5.4 months of
data) indicates superb potential for wind power development at this site. The following data
points were taken:
• Wind power class: Class 7 (predicted, to date)
• Wind speed average: (33 meters) 7.76 m/s (to date)
• Maximum two second wind gust: 23.1 m/s (October 2008)
• Wind power density: (33 meters) 1,247 W/m2
• Weibull distribution parameters: (k = 1.13, c = 8.10 m/s)
• Roughness Class: 1.18 (description: fallow field)
• Power law exponent: 0.152 (moderate wind shear)
• Frequency of calms: (4 m/s threshold) 39%
• Representative Turbulence Intensity: 0.090 (IEC 3rd ed. turbulence category C-)
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 11 of 21 10/7/2009
Port of Red Dog (DMTS Port) Site 5 winds during the measurement periods were highly
directional northeast and southeast (refer to the frequency rose). Interestingly though, the
southeast winds are much stronger than the northeast winds (refer to the mean value rose),
resulting in a power density wind rose that is dominated by southeast winds.
4.2 Existing Energy System
4.2.1 Basic configuration of Existing Energy System
Briefly discuss the basic configuration of the existing energy system. Include information about
the number, size, age, efficiency, and type of generation.
AVEC currently provides power to the community of Kivalina with a diesel generator. The power
plant includes three generator sets with a combined capacity of 950 kW. Detail of each generator
follows:
Type kW Age
DD 363 1 year
Cat 337 32 years
CMS 250 2 years
AVEC data indicates that the peak demand in Kivalina in 2007 was 283 kW. Average demand
over the same period was approximately 145 kW. The power plant generated 13.04 kWh for each
gallon of fuel consumed in 2007. Note that the DD 363kW unit was installed in 2009 which
replaced an older unit operating in FY2007.
Both the DMTS Port and the community of Kivalina use diesel fuel for power generation. Both
Kivalina and the DMTS generating systems are due for major upgrades. The DMTS power plant
could be upgraded; however, the Kivalina powerplant cannot be upgraded for additional power
output due to the age and space available in the facility.
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.
Kivalina and the DMTS Port use diesel and heating oil as the primary energy resources. If this
study finds the construction of an intertie and wind generation suitable, installation of wind
turbines in the vicinity of Kivalina and at the DMTS Port would decrease the amount of diesel
fuel used for power generation and lower costs of electricity for both locations.
The existing power plants in both Kivalina and Red Dog Mine port produce electrical energy by
burning diesel fuel in engine-driven generators. By adding wind turbines to the existing system,
we expect the project to provide the same amount of electrical energy using substantially less
diesel fuel than is true today. In addition to offsetting much of the diesel-generated electricity, we
also expect to use whatever wind-generated energy that exceeds electrical demand to heat water,
further displacing diesel fuel that is presently burned in boilers.
4.2.3 Existing Energy Market
Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy
customers.
Kivalina Energy Market
Kivalina is located in Northwest Alaska on the Chukchi Sea. Average temperatures range from 15
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 12 of 21 10/7/2009
to 57°F. 26.4 percent of the population is below the poverty line; the median household income is
$30,833 which is half of the State’s average of $59,036. The community has been designated a
“distressed community” by the Denali Commission.
The electricity consumption in Kivalina in 2008 was 1,158,987 kWh. The load 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 wind turbines to the electric generation system
could reduce the amount of diesel fuel used for power generation and for heating. The study will
also determine if an intertie to the DMTS Port with wind generation could substantially reduce
the cost of electricity in Kivalina.
Kivalina is an isolated village, relying on air transportation for delivery of medical goods and
transport of sick or injured individuals. Reliable electric service is essential to maintaining vital
navigation aids and runway lights for the safe operation of aircraft. Emergency medical service is
provided in a health clinic by a health aide. Medical problems and emergencies must be relayed
by telephone or by some other communication means for outside assistance. Operation of the
telephone system requires electricity. Reliable telephone service requires reliable electric service.
In Kivalina, water is obtained from the Wulik River, then treated and stored in a large insulated
tank. Only the school is connected to a piped water and sewer system, and reliable electric service
is required to ensure that pipes do not freeze in the winter. A washeteria and water dispenser are
available to Kivalina residents.
Like all of Alaska, Kivalina is subject to long periods of darkness. Reliable electric service is
essential for the operation of home lighting, streetlights, and security lighting. Outside lighting
ensures the safety of children.
Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Opportunity
Kivalina is located 17 miles northwest of the DMTS Port which is operated by Teck Alaska and
services the Red Dog Mine. The DMTS Port power system has a diesel power plant which burns
fuel purchased at a large bulk discount due to the high annual fuel consumption of the Red Dog
Mine. The excellent wind resource in the area can decrease the cost of energy for both entities.
The creation of a PPP between AVEC and Teck Alaska can be beneficial to both parties with
regard to reducing electricity costs and creating possible tax credits, “green tags,” and “CREB”s
(Clean Renewable Energy Bonds). This study will further explore the PPP opportunity.
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
Alternative Energy Technology and Renewable Energy Transmission. AVEC plans to conduct a
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 13 of 21 10/7/2009
Feasibility Analysis, Wind Resource Assessment, and Conceptual Design to assess the possibility
of an intertie with the DMTS Port and wind generation along the intertie.
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. The capacity is unknown at this time.
Anticipated barriers. The potential barriers to success of this project include site access,
permitting, and weather. The barriers are minor and do not pose a threat to the completion of this
project or tasks which must be accomplished.
Basic integration concept/Delivery methods. Conceptual design, to be completed as a part of
this project, will detail how power from a wind turbine would be integrated and delivered into the
existing system. If the wind is suitable for development, the turbines will interconnect with the
power plant. It is expected that wind-generated electrical energy will be delivered via a
transmission line of intertie with the DMTS Port.
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 proposed location of the met tower and geotechnical work and routing of the intertie will be
determined during this study.
To obtain permission to place met towers and complete geotech work, AVEC will travel to the
community immediately following the Authorization to Proceed from AEA. AVEC will discuss
the project with community members and representatives from the City of Kivalina and the
Native Village of Kivalina.
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
Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in compliance with the Endangered Species
Act will be required to install the met tower. AVEC will work with the agency to ensure that the
requirements of the Act are met, while allowing for the success of the project.
An U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Permit may be needed for the geotechnical work.
The Corps has a “Nationwide Permit” for survey work, including geotechnical field work. This
permit usually takes no more than three weeks to obtain.
(Because a Corps’ Nationwide Permit exists, a State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources,
Division of Coastal and Ocean Management Coastal Project Questionnaire and Enforceable
Policies Consistency Determination is not needed.)
The DMTS intertie component of the project will need to comply with any National Park Service
National Monument permits which are unknown at this time. The DMTS Port lies within the
Cape Krusenstern National Monument. This project will identify what the procedures would be to
construct an intertie on Cape Krusenstern National Monument lands to connect to the Port.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 14 of 21 10/7/2009
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
The purpose of this work is to gather background information to plan for future wind turbines and
a renewable energy transmission line/intertie. A met tower will be installed, and geotechnical
field work will be completed. As stated above, compliance with the Endangered Species Act will
be needed. Also a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Nationwide Permit may be needed to
conduct geotechnical work, depending on if the work is located within wetlands. Further work to
comply with other environmental laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act (if
federal funding is sought for construction), the Clean Water Act (for work in wetlands), and the
National Historic Preservation Act, would be conducted during the next stage of development, if
the economics and wind resource are suitable for moving forward with the installation of an
intertie and turbines.
AVEC will obtain permission to place the met tower and conduct geotechnical fieldwork from the
land owner as a part of this project. The community has supported this project in the past, and it is
not expected that a right of entry will problematic. Further work to obtain a long term lease will
be needed if the study finds that the wind turbines are feasible.
Environmental Review and Due Diligence Approach. AVEC’s consultant will organize a pre-
application meeting to be coordinated with the ADNR, OC&OM office for the project. All
agencies, including federal agencies, will be asked to participate. The meeting will identify and
discuss appropriate permit issues and provide agency perspective on the proposed development.
Discussions will include actions to avoid, minimize, and mitigate wetlands impacts. Possible
compensation for wetlands loss will also be discussed. Preliminary concerns for impacts to the
National Preserve and possible cultural sites will be identified. Results of this agency pre-
application meeting will be a 3-5 page meeting report summarizing agency concerns, issues, and
possible mitigation or compensation proposals. This will be as comprehensive as possible but
may not identify all permits required for project development given the preliminary nature of the
development proposal.
The following permits and/or authorizations will be necessary for installation of a wind farm, at a
minimum, and will be reviewed and discussed in the report:
• USACE Section 404/401 Wetlands Permit and Water Quality Assurance
• ADNR, OC&OM Coastal Zone Consistency Determination
• Title 16 Fish Habitat Permit
• SHPO “No Historic Properties Affected”
• Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
• Alaska Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
• Vegetation Clearing Not Permitted between May 20 and July 20, except for black scoter
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 15 of 21 10/7/2009
habitat where the end of the avoidance period is August 10
4.4 Proposed New System Costs and Projected Revenues
(Total Estimated Costs and Projected Revenues)
The level of cost information provided will vary according to the phase of funding requested and
any previous work the applicant may have done on the project. Applicants must reference the
source of their cost data. For example: Applicants Records or Analysis, Industry Standards,
Consultant or Manufacturer’s estimates.
4.4.1 Project Development Cost
Provide detailed project cost information based on your current knowledge and understanding of
the project. Cost information should include the following:
• Total anticipated project cost, and cost for this phase
• Requested grant funding
• Applicant matching funds – loans, capital contributions, in-kind
• Identification of other funding sources
• Projected capital cost of proposed renewable energy system
• Projected development cost of proposed renewable energy system
AVEC plans to conduct a Feasibility Analysis, Wind Resource Assessment, and Conceptual
Design to assess the possibility of using wind power via transmission/intertie line in Kivalina.
This work will cost $193,000. AVEC requests $183,350 from AEA. AVEC will provide $9,650
as cash contribution.
If the wind resource and intertie prove suitable, the next phase of this project would be Final
Design and Permitting. 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 Permitting would cost $2,000,000. It is possible that the funding for this work could come
from the AEA Renewable Energy Program, the Denali Commission, a USDA Rural Utility
Service program, or another grant program.
The final phase of this project would be Construction and Commissioning. AVEC estimates that
this phase could cost $20,000,000. It is possible that the funding for this work could come from
the AEA Renewable Energy Program, the Denali Commission, AIDEA, a USDA Rural Utility
Service program, or another grant program.
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 will require monthly monitoring and data management. It is expected that this will
cost $700. The cost will 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
AVEC, the existing electric utility serving Kivalina, is a member owned cooperative electric
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 16 of 21 10/7/2009
utility and typically owns and maintains the generation, fuel storage, and distribution facilities in
the villages it serves.
Kivalina includes 93 households and 7 community facilities, including a health clinic, city office,
tribal council office, and water treatment plant, which purchase power from AVEC (source:
FY2008 PCE data).
At this point in project development, the potential power price and rate of return on the project is
unknown.
This project concept is predicated upon a power purchase agreement between Teck Alaska
(current DMTS operator) and AVEC. Teck will be the producer and AVEC will retail the power
and energy to Kivalina and maintain the transmission line.
The power purchase agreement will be based upon the cost to produce energy plus an AVEC
surcharge for retailing power and maintaining the power purchase agreement. The following
scenarios are plausible ranges for the terms of a power purchase agreement.
• Base-case diesel fuel cost scenario ($4.18/gallon): A one-turbine wind-diesel system,
with a total wind generation capacity of 1.65 MW, was modeled for a diesel fuel cost of
$4.18/gallon ($1.10/liter). HOMER estimates a net present cost (NPC) of $40,593,236 for
this wind-diesel configuration, resulting in a cost of energy (COE) of $0.282/kWh. The
diesel-only generation scenario at a fuel cost of $4.18/gallon would result in an NPC of
$51,225,664 and a COE of $0.356/kWh. This cost savings of $0.074/kWh would translate
to an annual cost savings of $832,448 (assuming 11,249,297 kWh of annual
consumption). With an initial capital cost of $4,200,000, these annual cost savings would
result in a simple payback of 5.0 years.
• High diesel fuel cost scenario ($5.70/gallon): At a diesel fuel cost of $5.70/gallon
($1.50/liter), HOMER estimates a NPC of $52,957,984 for a 1.65 MW wind-diesel
configuration, resulting in a COE of $0.368/kWh. The diesel-only generation scenario at a
fuel cost of $5.70/gallon would result in an NPC of $68,925,808 and a COE of
$0.479/kWh. This cost savings of $0.111/kWh would translate to an annual cost savings
of $1,248,672 (assuming 11,249,297 kWh of annual consumption). With an initial capital
cost of $4,200,000, these annual cost savings would result in a simple payback of 3.4
years.
4.4.4 Project Cost Worksheet
Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered
in evaluating the project.
See attached.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 17 of 21 10/7/2009
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 Fuel Displacement: The possible displacement of diesel fuel used for village power
generation in Kivalina will be determined. More displacement of fuel is possible if electric
heating is used instead of heating fuel. The exact amount of fuel displacement at this point in the
project is not known.
Potential annual fuel displacement: In 2008, AVEC spent an average of $4.43 per gallon for
the fuel for power generation. If the wind resource proves suitable and turbines are installed, the
residents of Kivalina would benefit from decreased fuel use; however, at this point in the project
the amount of fuel displacement is unknown. If an intertie proves suitable between Kivalina and
the DMTS Port fuel would only be needed for back up purposes.
Anticipated annual revenue/Potential additional annual incentives/Potential additional
annual revenue streams. Because this project is in the feasibility and concept design stage,
revenue and incentives are unknown.
Non-economic public benefits. If wind energy and an intertie are feasible in Kivalina and wind
turbines are installed in the vicinity of the community, energy costs could stabilize and long-term
socio-economic benefits could result. Wind power would have many environmental benefits
resulting from a reduction of hydrocarbon use, including reduced potential for fuel spills or
contamination, improved air quality, and decreased contribution to global climate change from
fossil fuel use.
The HOMER analysis was redone for DMTS Port the two-turbine wind-diesel system, with the
addition of the electric load of the nearby village of Kivalina (1,247,209 kWh annual load, 260
kW peak). Power generation statistics of Kivalina used for the HOMER model were estimated
from the 2006 end-of-year report by the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC). The
addition of the Kivalina load resulted in no significant difference in the cost of electricity
produced by the wind-diesel system, for each of the three fuel-cost scenarios modeled above
($0.232/kWh, $0.269/kWh, and $0.343/kWh respectively). This is chiefly due to the fact that
Kivalina’s electricity demand peaks in the winter, while the port’s demand peaks in summer.
Therefore, the addition of the village load will have no negative impact on the economics of a
wind-diesel installation of the Red Dog Port, and simply provides a slightly higher overall
capacity factor (and slightly more diesel fuel consumption) for the wind-diesel system, and
slightly balances year-round demand trends. Overall, the annual electric energy consumption of
Kivalina is about 11% that of the port’s annual consumption.
While generation costs at the Red Dog Port will not change significantly with the additional
village load, the cost of a power line between the port and Kivalina (a distance of about 20 miles)
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 18 of 21 10/7/2009
is not included in the HOMER model. According AVEC’s 2007-2008 rate schedules, the pre-
subsidy residential electric rate charged in Kivalina by AVEC was $0.5814/kWh, of which
$0.32/kWh was the “base rate” and $0.2614/kWh was the “cost of fuel.” For a power line from
the port to be economic, the cost of power generated at the Red Dog Port delivered to Kivalina
must be lower than the generation-only cost of power from AVEC’s existing diesel power plant in
the village. If the wind-diesel installation at the port were to sell, via an intertie, 1,200,000 kWh
of electricity per year to Kivalina at cost based on the rates predicted by the HOMER models, the
revenues/simple payback are shown in the table below:
Diesel
cost
($/gallon)
Cost of
electricity
generated
($/kWh)
Annual revenues of power sales
to Kivalina
(at cost, 1,200,000 kWh)
Annual benefit
(savings+revenue)
Simple payback
(of $7,700,000
installation cost)
4.18 0.269 $322,800 $1,372,702 5.6 years
5.70 0.343 $411,600 $2,076,962 3.7 years
As the table above shows, the sales of electricity (generated by both wind and diesel) to Kivalina
would improve the economics of a wind-diesel installation at the port.
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
Business plan structures and concepts which may be considered: The wind turbines and
intertie, if feasible, would be incorporated into AVEC’s power plant operation. Local plant
operators provide daily servicing. AVEC technicians provide periodic preventative or corrective
maintenance and are supported by AVEC headquarters staff, purchasing, and warehousing.
How O&M will be financed for the life of the project: The costs of operations and maintenance
will be funded through ongoing energy sales to the villages.
Operational issues which could arise: There are no known operational issues. TBD.
Operating costs: AVEC’s existing NW100 wind turbines at other sites require two maintenance
visits a year. Those visits currently cost AVEC $3,500 per turbine per year. The new Northwind
100 model requires only one maintenance visit each year. Therefore, two turbines at Kivalina will
require a combined annual maintenance cost of $3,500.
Commitment to reporting the savings and benefits: AVEC is fully committed to sharing the
savings and benefits information accrued from this project with their shareholders and AEA. In
addition, AVEC acknowledges and agrees that if/when the wind-intertie is constructed, it shall be
constructed, owned, and operated for the benefit of the general public and will not deny any
person use and/or benefit of project facilities due to race, religion, color, national origin, age,
physical handicap, sex, marital status, changes in marital status, pregnancy or parenthood.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 19 of 21 10/7/2009
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.
In recent years, AVEC’s investment in Kivalina’s utility infrastructure has been minimal due to
the ongoing coastal erosion and community relocation unknowns. To meet energy needs while
keeping these barriers in mind, AVEC has begun researching alternative energy sources for the
area. Looking at the existing wind maps, we see that both Kivalina and DMTS Port are excellent
wind resources. The wind resources and the large industrial complex nearby (DMTS Port) present
two opportunities for AVEC to reduce the cost of energy in Kivalina. An intertie between
Kivalina and the DMTS Port would provide a means of accessing wind power for Kivalina and a
possibly more economic power supply from the DMTS Port. Recognizing this as a good option
for the area, AVEC has initiated discussions with key organizations that would need to be on
board for this project to be successful: Teck Alaska, AIDEA, NANA Regional Corporation, and
representatives from Kivalina. Because this foundation has been laid, work on this grant can
proceed immediately on this feasibility and conceptual design project.
No other grants have been awarded on this project. AVEC has been awarded several Denali
Commission grants for the feasibility, design and construction of interties and wind generation. A
successful, grant-funded intertie/wind project linking the communities of Toksook Bay,
Nightmute and Tunuunak has afforded AVEC significant project experience that will be
beneficial to Kivalina. This feasibility study and conceptual design will combine the knowledge
gained in AVEC’s other wind/intertie projects to determine the best means of developing the
Kivalina wind resource and an intertie to the DMTS Port.
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.
AVEC has developed a foundation of support for the project. Key supporters are described below:
• AVEC – AVEC seeks to reduce energy costs for its members through the most
economical means. Interties and wind power in other AVEC communities have been
proven to help reduce energy costs. It is the goal of AVEC to explore the feasibility and
the conceptual design of an intertie with the DMTS Port with wind power generation.
• NANA Regional Corporation – NANA supports projects that will help reduce the cost of
energy for their shareholders. NANA is committed to assisting with this project to
determine if the wind –intertie project will provide a viable energy source for Kivalina.
• Teck Alaska- As the operator of the DMTS Port and the Red Dog Mine, Teck Alaska
seeks means of reducing operating costs. The Port has an excellent wind resource
(assessed to be a Class 7) and seeks to utilize it with the right economic conditions.
Generating and retailing power to Kivalina through an intertie could help improve the
economics of a project and benefit both Kivalina and Teck with lower energy costs.
AVEC has not faced any opposition to the project at this stage of resource identification. This
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 20 of 21 10/7/2009
feasibility study and conceptual design project will examine what opposition and support there is
for a constructed project. In addition to working with the partners described above to identify and
address concerns that could lead to opposition, AVEC will also conduct community meetings to
gauge village-level opposition and support of the proposed concept. AVEC is committed to
ensuring a positive process as well as an effective outcome.
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.
Include an estimate of budget costs by milestones using the form – GrantBudget3.doc
AVEC plans to conduct a Feasibility Analysis, Wind Resource Assessment, and Conceptual
Design to assess the possibility of using wind power and a renewable energy transmission
line/intertie. This work will cost $193,000. AVEC requests $183,350 from AEA. AVEC will
provide $9,650 as cash contribution.
A detail of the grant budget follows. Also, please see Tab 4.
Milestone
Grant
Request
AVEC
Cash
Match Total Cost
1. Project scoping and contractor solicitation $1,900 $100 $2,000
2. Detailed energy resource analysis $9,500 $500 $10,000
3. Identification of land and regulatory issues $6,650 $350 $7,000
4. Permitting and environmental analysis $9,500 $500 $10,000
5. Detailed analysis of existing/future energy costs and markets $9,500 $500 $10,000
6. Conceptual business and operations plans $14,250 $750 $15,000
7. Assessment of alternatives $80,750 $4,250 $85,000
8. Detailed economic and financial analysis $14,250 $750 $15,000
9. Conceptual design analysis and cost estimate $34,200 $1,800 $36,000
10. Final report and recommendations $2,850 $150 $3,000
TOTALS $183,350 9,650 $193,000
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 21 of 21 10/7/2009
SECTION 9 – ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION
SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WITH YOUR APPLICATION:
A. Resumes of Applicant’s Project Manager, key staff, partners, consultants, and
suppliers per application form Section 3.1 and 3.4.
B. Cost Worksheet per application form Section 4.4.4.
C. Grant Budget Form per application form Section 9.
D. Letters demonstrating local support per application form Section 8.
E. An electronic version of the entire application on CD per RFA Section 1.6.
F. 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.
F. 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.
Print Name Meera Kohler
Signature
Title President and CEO
Date November 10, 2009
Tab 2
Resumes
Tab 3
Cost Worksheet
Renewable Energy Fund Round 3
Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet
RFA AEA10-015 Application Cost Worksheet Page 1 10-7-09
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.
1. Renewable Energy Source
The Applicant should demonstrate that the renewable energy resource is available on a
sustainable basis.
Annual average resource availability. Wind (Class 6/7)
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 Railbelt 1
i. Number of generators/boilers/other
grid, leave this section blank)
3 diesel generators
ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other 950 kW
iii. Generator/boilers/other type Cat 337kW ; CMS 250kW; DD 363kW
iv. Age of generators/boilers/other 32 years; 2 years; 1 year
v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other Total efficiency: 13.04 kWh/gal
b) Annual O&M cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank)
i. Annual O&M cost for labor See next response
ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor $170,000 Total labor and 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] 1,158,987 kWh (fy08 PCE data)
ii. Fuel usage
Diesel [gal] 99,221 gal (fy08 PCE data)
Other N/A
iii. Peak Load 282.7 kW
iv. Average Load 145 kW
v. Minimum Load N/A
vi. Efficiency 13.04 kWh/gal
vii. Future trends N/A
d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu] N/A
ii. Electricity [kWh] N/A
iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu] N/A
iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu] N/A
v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] N/A
vi. Other N/A
3. Proposed System Design Capacity and Fuel Usage
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 3
Project Cost/Benefit Worksheet
RFA AEA10-015 Application Cost Worksheet Page 2 10-7-09
(Include any projections for continued use of non-renewable fuels)
a) Proposed renewable capacity
(Wind, Hydro, Biomass, other)
[kWh or MMBtu/hr]
Wind - up to 3.3MW at DMTS Port
Wind - up to 300kW near Kivalina
b) Proposed Annual electricity or heat production (fill in as applicable)
i. Electricity [kWh] TBD by this project
ii. Heat [MMBtu] TBD by this project
c) Proposed Annual fuel Usage (fill in as applicable)
i. Propane [gal or MMBtu] N/A
ii. Coal [tons or MMBtu] N/A
iii. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] N/A
iv. Other N/A
4. Project Cost
a) Total capital cost of new system Estimated (wind and intertie): $20,000,000
b) Development cost Estimated (including this phase): $2,193,000
c) Annual O&M cost of new system Estimated $100,000
d) Annual fuel cost N/A
5. Project Benefits
a) Amount of fuel displaced for
i. Electricity TBD by this project
ii. Heat TBD by this project (heat produced w/ med-high penetration system)
iii. Transportation N/A
b) Price of displaced fuel Variable
c) Other economic benefits Production tax credits, “CREB”s, “green tags”
d) Amount of Alaska public benefits Reducing pollution and others benefits TBD by this project
6. Power Purchase/Sales Price
a) Price for power purchase/sale TBD by this project
7. Project Analysis
a) Basic Economic Analysis
Project benefit/cost ratio TBD by this project
Payback TBD by this project
Tab 4
Grant Budget Form
Renewable Energy Fund Grant Round III Grant Budget Form 10-7-09
1. Project scoping and contractor solicitation September 15, 2010 $1,900 $100 Cash $2,000
2. Detailed energy resource analysis September 30, 2011 $9,500 $500 Cash $10,000
3. Identification of land and regulatory issues January 31, 2011 $6,650 $350 Cash $7,000
4. Permitting and environmental analysis January 31, 2011 $9,500 $500 Cash $10,000
5. Detailed analysis of existing/ future energy costs and markets March 30, 2011 $9,500 $500 Cash $10,000
6. Conceptual business and operations plans (details below)June 30, 2011 $14,250 $750 Cash $15,000
7. Assessment of alternatives (details below)August 30, 2011 $80,750 $4,250 Cash $85,000
8. Detailed economic and financial analysis October 31, 2011 $14,250 $750 Cash $15,000
9. Conceptual design analysis and cost estimate (details below)November 30, 2011 $34,200 $1,800 Cash $36,000
10. Final project report and recommendations December 31, 2011 $2,850 $150 Cash $3,000
TOTALS $183,350 $9,650 $193,000
Budget Categories:
Direct Labor & Benefits $6,650 Cash $6,650
Travel & Per Diem $2,000 Cash $2,000
Equipment
Materials & Supplies $1,000 Cash $1,000
Contractual Services $183,350 $183,350
Construction Services
Other
TOTALS $183,350 $9,650 $193,000
Milestone Details
Milestone 6 includes a conceptual business plan ($10,000) and a conceptual operations plan ($5,000)
Milestone 7 includes a Draft Wind Resource Report ($7,000), geotechnical work ($76,000), and Alternatives Assessment Memo ($2,000)
Milestone 9 includes met tower monitoring and dismantling ($20,000), final wind resource report ($1,000), and conceptual design and cost estimate ($15,000)
Kivalina DMTS Port Intertie/Wind Feasibility
Milestone or Task
Anticipated Completion
Date TOTALS
RE- Fund
Grant Funds
Grantee Matching
Funds
Funds: Cash/In-
kind/Federal
Grants/Other State
Milestone Cost
1. Project scoping and contractor solicitation $2,000
2. Detailed energy resource analysis $10,000
3. Identification of land and regulatory issues $7,000
4. Permitting and environmental analysis $10,000
5. Detailed analysis of existing and future energy costs and markets $10,000
6. Conceptual business and operations plans $15,000
7. Assessment of alternatives $85,000
8. Detailed economic and financial analysis $15,000
9. Conceptual design analysis and cost estimate $36,000
10. Final report and recommendations $3,000
TOTALS $193,000
Tab 5
Delegation of Authority
Tab 6
Supplemental Materials
Letter of Support NANA Regional Corporation