HomeMy WebLinkAboutYerrick_Creek_Grant Application Form
Renewable Energy Fund Round 3
Grant Application
AEA 10-015 Application Page 1 of 19 10/7/2009
Application Forms and Instructions
The following forms and instructions are provided to assist you in preparing your application for
a Renewable Energy Fund Grant. An electronic version of the Request for Applications (RFA)
and the forms are available online at: http://www.akenergyauthority.org/RE_Fund-III.html
Grant Application
Form
GrantApp3.doc Application form in MS Word that includes an outline of
information required to submit a complete application.
Applicants should use the form to assure all information is
provided and attach additional information as required.
Application Cost
Worksheet
Costworksheet3
.doc
Summary of Cost information that should be addressed by
applicants in preparing their application.
Grant Budget
Form
GrantBudget3.d
oc
A detailed grant budget that includes a breakdown of costs by
milestone and a summary of funds available and requested to
complete the work for which funds are being requested.
Grant Budget
Form Instructions
GrantBudgetInst
ructions3.pdf
Instructions for completing the above grant budget form.
• If you are applying for grants for more than one project, provide separate application
forms for each project.
• Multiple phases for the same project may be submitted as one application.
• If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project, provide
milestones and grant budget for 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.
• If you have additional information or reports you would like the Authority to consider in
reviewing your application, either provide an electronic version of the document with
your submission or reference a web link where it can be downloaded or reviewed.
REMINDER:
• Alaska Energy Authority is subject to the Public Records Act AS 40.25, and materials
submitted to the Authority may be subject to disclosure requirements under the act if no
statutory exemptions apply.
• All applications received will be posted on the Authority web site after final
recommendations are made to the legislature.
• In accordance with 3 AAC 107.630 (b) Applicants may request trade secrets or
proprietary company data be kept confidential subject to review and approval by the
Authority. If you want information is to be kept confidential the applicant must:
o Request the information be kept confidential.
o Clearly identify the information that is the trade secret or proprietary in their
application.
o Receive concurrence from the Authority that the information will be kept
confidential. If the Authority determines it is not confidential it will be treated as a
public record in accordance with AS 40.25 or returned to the applicant upon
request.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 2 of 19 10/7/2009
SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal)
ALASKA POWER COMPANY (a subsidiary of ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE COMPANY)
Type of Entity:
Utility
Mailing Address
P.O. Box 3222, Port Townsend, WA 98368
Physical Address
193 Otto Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368
Telephone
360-385-1733
Fax
360-385-7538
Email
glen.m@aptalaska.com
1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT
Name
Glen Martin
Title
Permitting & Licensing Manager
Mailing Address
Alaska Power & Telephone Company
P.O. Box 3222
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Telephone
360-385-1733
x122
Fax
360-385-7538
Email
glen.m@aptalaska.com
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 3 of 19 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)
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project
2.2 Project Location –
Include the physical location of your project and name(s) of the community or communities that will
benefit from your project.
This project is located on Yerrick Creek, approximately 20 miles west of Tok, Alaska. The
project would off-set diesel generation in the communities of Tetlin, Tanacross, Dot Lake, and
Tok.
2.3 PROJECT TYPE
Put X in boxes as appropriate
2.3.1 Renewable Resource Type
Wind Biomass or Biofuels
X 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
Feasibility Construction and Commissioning
Conceptual Design
2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Provide a brief one paragraph description of your proposed project.
AP&T proposes to construct the 2.0 MW Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located
on Yerrick Creek, approximately 20 miles west of Tok. The Project would off-set diesel
generation in the communities of Tetlin, Tanacross, Dot Lake, and Tok. The Project will consist
of a small diversion structure, approximately 15,000 feet of penstock, powerhouse with a single
generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and transmission line. The Project operation will be
run-of-river; annual generation is expected to be approximately 4,900 MWh/yr (approximately
40% of the interconnected load). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well
as rate stabilization. The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel
generation.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 4 of 19 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 Project will reduce the cost of generation by AP&T, and the savings would be passed on to
AP&T’s customers in Tetlin, Tok, Tanacross and Dot Lake who presently pay $0.37 per kWh
(excluding PCE). This hydroelectric project will reduce diesel fuel consumption by approximately
340,000 gallons per year, equivalent to about $1,000,000 annually. That savings will be passed on
to AP&T’s customers through lower rates. Lower energy costs would help stimulate both
residential and commercial development.
The environmental impacts of AP&T’s diesel generation, (e.g. air pollution, noise pollution, and
potential for spills, etc.) will be significantly reduced by this Project. During part of the year it is
expected that the entire load can be carried by the Project, and during the winter the use of
diesel generation will supplement the Project.
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 estimated cost of the Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project is $14,500,000. Of that
amount, AP&T has already spent approximately $600,000 for initial reconnaissance, design,
and permitting work. The remaining $13,900,000 needed to complete the Project is allocated as
follows:
• Phase III: Final Design and Permitting ........................................................... $270,000
• Phase IV: Construction ............................................................................... $13,630,000
AP&T has been awarded grants of $100,000 from the Denali Commission and $1,675,000 from
the Rural Utilities Service for the Project. The Denali grant has been used to fund part of the
Phase III. The RUS grant will be applied to the other Phase III work and part of the
construction. The currently unfunded Project cost is then $12,725,000. Therefore, AP&T
requests that AEA provide $4,000,000 in grant funding (the maximum amount according to the
grant instructions). All of the grant will be used for Phase IV (Construction). AP&T will
provide the remaining $8,725,000 of unfunded Project cost through cash contributions, loans, or
future grants. AP&T intends to ultimately seek grants totaling $11,600,000 (80% of the total
Project cost).
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. $ 4,000,000
2.7.2 Other Funds to be provided (Project match) $ 8,725,000 (1)
2.7.3 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.7.1 and 2.7.2) $ 12,725,000
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)
$ 14,500,000
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 5 of 19 10/7/2009
2.7.5 Estimated Direct Financial Benefit (Savings) $ 97,900,000 (2)
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.)
$ 51,900,000 (3)
(1) Net of Total Project Cost ($14,500,000), existing grants ($1,775,000), and proposed grant ($4,000,000).
(2) Net present value of 50 years of savings by AP&T ratepayers in diesel fuel and O&M costs at a 0% discount rate.
(3) Net present value of 50 years of savings by the PCE program.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 6 of 19 10/7/2009
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.
Eric Hannan, AP&T’s Interior Regional Manager, Power, will be the Project Manager for all phases of
the work. Mr. Hannan is located in Tok, and is an electrical engineer with extensive experience in
project management and electrical generation, transmission and distribution.
Rex Goolsby will be the Construction Superintendent, reporting to Mr. Hannan. Mr. Goolsby is a Tok
resident with extensive construction and construction management experience. He will supervise the on-
site construction and installation of fabricated items and equipment, with help as necessary by AP&T’s
electrical and mechanical engineers. Mickey Henton, AP&T’s Safety Director is stationed in Tok, and
will provide safety oversight for the on-site construction.
As noted elsewhere, AP&T’s intent is to pre-fabricate a substantial portion of the intake and powerhouse.
The pre-fabrication work will be located near AP&T’s headquarters in Port Townsend, Washington, and
will be supervised by AP&T’s civil, mechanical, and electrical engineers.
Resumes for Mr. Hannan and Mr. Goolsby are included in Section 10.
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.)
A bar schedule of the expected design and construction sequence is provided in Section 10. The
following summarizes key activities and dates of the schedule. Note that this schedule is for the
entire development sequence; activities funded by this grant will be in Phase IV only.
Phase III: Permitting and Final Design: Present – Spring 2010
Permit applications have already been submitted to DNR for a land lease and for water rights.
A Corp of Engineer Section 404 permit application will be submitted shortly. A habitat permit
from ADF&G has already been received. A f inal penstock and access road alignment has
recently been selected, and final permitting and design work will be completed this winter to
allow beginning construction next spring. Some design work is likely to continue during
construction to respond to unanticipated field conditions.
Phase IV: Construction: 2010 –2011
AP&T expects to begin mobilization of equipment to Tok in the spring of 2010 in anticipation of
a spring 2010 start of construction. Once all permits are received and the grant funds released,
AP&T will place the order for generating equipment and begin on-site construction. Pioneering
a road to the diversion area will be the initial on-site construction activity during spring 2010.
AP&T intends to fabricate much of the intake and powerhouse off-site in modified shipping
containers so that on-site outdoor work is limited to the short April-November construction
season; the off-site fabrication work will begin in 2010. Most of the on-site work will occur in
2011, including installation of the penstock along the access road, construction of the
powerhouse and diversion structure, installation of generating equipment, and
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 7 of 19 10/7/2009
construction/upgrade of the transmission line.
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.)
Key (i.e. critical path) milestones for the Project are:
• Receipt of all necessar y permits and release of RUS grant funds by April 2010
• Award contract for supply of the generating equipment by April 2010
• Completion of access road during the 2010 construction season
• Receipt of penstock materials by April 2011
• Completion of penstock installation by November 2011
• Receipt of major generating equipment by September 2011
• Completion of powerhouse structure by September 2011
• Completion of diversion structure by November 2011 (the diversion structure
construction is scheduled for low flow conditions late in the year)
• Completion of generating equipment installation by November 2011
The schedule described in 3.2 above is consistent with these milestones. It should be noted that
the schedule assumes no on-site outside work during the November -March time period. If
unusually harsh weather conditions extend that period, the entire schedule could slip.
Achievement of this schedule will also require multiple crews working throughout the 2011
construction season; if local labor is not sufficient to provide multiple crews, a 2012
construction season may be required.
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.
Key AP&T involved in the project development and their roles will be:
• Eric Hannan, Project Manager and Transmission Design
• Rex Goolsby, Construction Superintendent
• Bob Berreth, Electrical Design
• Ben Beste, Mechanical Design
• Larry Coupe, Civil Design
• Glen Martin, Resource Assessment and Permits
• Mickey Henton, Safety Director
Phase III: Final Design & Permitting
In 2007, AP&T received a determination that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission would
not have jurisdiction over the Project, therefore a FERC license is not required. Accordingly, in
this phase the following permits will be acquired:
• 404 permit (Corps of Engineers)
• Fish habitat permit (ADF&G)(received)
• Land leases or easements (ADNR & Tanacross, Inc.)
• Water right (ADNR)(won’t be issued until project starts operations)
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 8 of 19 10/7/2009
• SHPO review
AP&T is prepar ing the final design documents in-house using its staff civil, mechanical, and
electrical engineers, who all have extensive experience in hydroelectric development. These
engineers designed AP&T’s South Fork Hydroelectric Project which entered service in 2005, as
well as AP&T’s Kasidaya Creek Hydroelctric Project which enter ed service in October 2008.
Phase IV: Construction
Construction will be by local contractors and AP&T staff, as follows:
• Access road - - local contractor(s)
• Diversion structure fabrications - - Reynold Grey Machining and Services
• Diversion structure installation - - local contractor(s)
• Penstock materials procurement - - AP&T
• Penstock installation - - local contractor(s)
• Generating equipment procurement - - AP&T
• Powerhouse fabrications - - Reynold Grey Machining and Services
• Powerhouse construction - local contractor(s) and AP&T
• Transmission line construction - - local contractor(s) and AP&T
• Testing and start-up - - AP&T
There are several contractors in the Tok area that will be able to help with the construction. With a
project of this size, we would expect to utilize the services of most of these contractors at some point
during the construction. Mr. Hannan and Mr. Goolsby will select contractors for the various items
of work based on their knowledge of the contractor’s capabilities, interest, workload, and rates.
Reynold Grey Machining and Services is a welding and fabrication company in Port Townsend,
Washington that AP&T has used frequently for similar work, including fabrication of container
modules for diesel powerplants recently installed in Slana and Allakaket. Reynold Grey is located
near AP&T’s engineering staff, who thereby can conveniently oversee the proposed fabrication
work.
AP&T already owns all the line trucks and other equipment necessary for the transmission line
construction. AP&T electricians, and mechanics from Tok will install the generating unit and
other mechanical and electrical equipment at the powerhouse and diversion, with supervision by
AP&T engineers. As noted above, the AP&T engineers have supervised the recent startups of
AP&T’s South Fork and Kasidaya Creek hydro projects.
AP&T will negotiate purchase orders for materials and equipment from vendors who have
performed well on AP&T’s recent projects. For the generating equipment, we expect to purchase
the turbine/generator package from Gilkes Inc., using the same design as the Kasidaya Project
equipment.
Resumes for the above-mentioned firms and individuals are included in Section 10.
3.5 Project Communications
Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status.
During Phase IV, AP&T proposes to provide quarterly repor ts to AEA regarding the status of
construction. AP&T has provided similar reports to AEA and other grant funding agencies in
the past several years on other projects, and has established the necessary procedures for
producing the report expeditiously. At the completion of Phase IV, AP&T will provide AEA with
a final report on construction, including final design drawings, budget, photographs, and
description of difficulties and lessons learned.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 9 of 19 10/7/2009
During Phase IV, communications within the team will consist of:
• Bi -weekly conference calls among the Project Manager, Construction
Superintendent, and the Design Engineers.
• Periodic site visits by the Project Manager and Design Engineers.
These internal discussions will form the basis of quarterly reports to AEA. The reports will show
in a clear and concise manner progress made on the various tasks/milestones, the work to be
accomplished in the ensuing quarter, and potential problems and corrective actions to be
considered or implemented. Cost data will also be provided on a quarterly basis. Microsoft
Project or similar software will be used to develop and maintain schedule and budget
information; updating of the management files will be on a monthly basis.
3.6 Project Risk
Discuss potential problems and how you would address them.
Site Control – AP&T does not yet have development rights on land to be occupied by the
powerhouse and part of the penstock and access road. We are working with the land owner
(Tanacross, Inc.) to negotiate a lease, easement, or sale. In the past, Tanacross has been
opposed to project development, but in 2008 they have become more suppor tive. AP&T is
confident that we will be able to secure the necessary access and development rights from
Tanacross.
Seismic – Project components will be designed appropriately for seismic activity, since the
Project will be located in a high-risk seismic zone. The powerhouse has been relocated to avoid
faults near the Alaska Highway that were made known to us in 2008. Structures will be buried
as much as possible to minimize seismic impacts.
Underground Construction – The Project does not include a significant amount of underground
construction, which can be fraught with cost overrun potential. Geotechnical investigations
have been made at the diversion and powerhouse area s and along the penstock alignment to
provide an adequate level of knowledge about ground conditions at those sites.
Inclement Weather – Working conditions in the Project area are very harsh during the winter.
The proposed schedule assumes no on-site outside work during the December -March period. If
unusually harsh winter weather extends that period, the entire schedule could slip. Should that
appear likely, AP&T and its contractor(s) will review various options, including double-shift
work during the long summer days or limited outside work during the winter, such as processing
aggregate in the powerhouse area.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 10 of 19 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.
Proposed Energy Resource: AP&T will develop the Yerrick Creek site to the largest capacity
that is economically feasible, which at this time is estimated to be 2.0 MW. In 2007, a consultant
for AP&T calculated the potential energy of the Project for various installed capacities, based on
a hydrologic record estimated by transposition of data from a stream gage on Berry Creek near
Dot Lake. Information from that report is the basis for the generation values indicated in this
application. It should be noted however that AP&T now has two years of gage data on Yerrick
Creek, which appears to show higher streamflows than determined by AP&T’s consultant, and
Project generation could be significantly greater than indicated herein.
The total energy potential at the site is roughly 5.2 GWh per year, and a 2.0 MW project would
be able to generate approximately 94% of that potential (4.9 GWh/yr).
At this time the only viable alternative to the Project is considered to be continued diesel
generation. A large hydroelectric project at Cathedral Rapids on the Tanana River was studied
many years ago by the Corps of Engineers, but it is not now considered to be economically or
environmentally feasible. The Cathedral Rapids site may have potential for a river turbine
installation, similar to one currently under development by AP&T on a trial basis near Eagle, but
its capacity would likely be quite small and thus not a true alternative to the Project. AP&T is
also considering other creeks in the vicinity of Yerrick Creek for future development, however,
they are not next to the existing Tok grid, and transmission line construction would add
considerable cost.
Pros: Compared to diesel generation, the Project will have the following advantages:
• less expensive to operate than diesel (lower O&M);
• less need to purchase fuel;
• fewer air emissions;
• fewer hazardous substances;
• less particulate matter emissions;
• can come on-line after a power outage almost immediately, but diesel can’t;
• lower and more stable electric rates for customers.
Cons: As with all hydroelectric projects, the initial cost of development is much higher than for
diesel generation.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 11 of 19 10/7/2009
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.
Existing Power Generation
There are 6 gensets in the Tok diesel power plant that supply electricity to all four communities,
as follows:
Unit #3 = CAT Model D3516, 1320 kW, Purchased / Installed 1999
Unit #4 = CAT/KATO Model 3516, 1135 kW, Purchased / Installed 1989
Unit #5 = CAT/KATO Model 3516, 1135 kW, Purchased / Installed 1995
Unit #7 = CAT Model C175-16, 1800 kW, Installed 2007 (is on loan from CAT as a test unit)
Unit #8 = CAT/KATO Model D3508, 440 kW, Purchased / Installed 1985
Unit #9 = CAT/KATO Model 3512C, 1050 kW, Purchased / Installation in progress 2008
The existing transmission system includes 3-phase overhead line from Tok to Tanacross, single-
phase overhead line from Tanacross to Dot Lake, and 3-phase buried cable from Tok to Tetlin.
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.
Diesel generation being the existing energy resource, this hydroelectric project will for part of
the year eliminate the use of diesel generators. At other times only one or more diesel gensets
will be needed in addition to the hydro power. This will reduce the use of diesel and the
frequency of their maintenance, including overhauls and replacement. The diesel generators that
would be impacted are all owned and operated by AP&T in the Tok power plant. The Project
will reduce this area’s reliance on fossil fuels. When hydro provides for 100% of the load, the
diesel generators will be placed on standby to act as a backup to the hydro project. At the other
times, the diesel generators will supplement the hydro generation.
4.2.3 Existing Energy Market
Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy
customers.
The existing energy market is the communities of Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tetlin, and Tok. All four
communities are on the same grid and are therefore supplied by the Tok diesel power plant. Peak
demand is about 1,750 kW. Peak demand is about the same in winter as in summer. Production
by the diesel power plant has averaged about 12,000 MWh for the last ten years, but there has
been a steady decline in the last several years from the maximum generation of about 12,800
MWh in 2003 and 2004. The decline is probably due to the higher cost from the higher diesel
fuel prices.
The Project will allow a decrease in electric rates for AP&T’s customers by reducing the use of
diesel; at this time the savings is estimated to be about $1,000,000 in the first year if the Project
is funded as proposed. AP&T expects that the recent decline in generation will cease or possibly
reverse if lower rates can be achieved. If more renewable energy sources are found for this area,
the rates could continue to fall, but until diesel generation can be eliminated the electric rates
will continue to fluctuate.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 12 of 19 10/7/2009
Many customers supplement their electrical use with wood, kerosene, and oil or gas generators.
Several customers also use propane for cooking, clothes dryers, hot water heaters, etc. If electric
rates come down, use of these other sources may decline, which would help clean the air and
reduce toxic spills.
Energy demand is expected to grow for this area. There are reports of plans to develop gold
mines in the Tok area in the near future. Recently a battery manufacturing company visited Tok
interested in building a plant there, but then didn’t because of the high electric rates. If the
proposed Alaska gas pipeline goes through Tok, it likely would include a compressor station and
tap line in the Tok area, and a significant increase in population could be expected.
4.3 Proposed System
Include information necessary to describe the system you are intending to develop and address
potential system design, land ownership, permits, and environmental issues.
4.3.1 System Design
Provide the following information for the proposed renewable energy system:
• A description of renewable energy technology specific to project location
• Optimum installed capacity
• Anticipated capacity factor
• Anticipated annual generation
• Anticipated barriers
• Basic integration concept
• Delivery methods
Renewable energy technology specific to location – The Project will be a conventional run-of-
river hydroelectric project. Facilities to be constructed include:
• 15,000 feet of single lane access road
• Diversion structure, approx. 60 cfs diversion capacity
• 6,300 feet of 48-inch HDPE penstock and 7,900 feet of 42-inch ductile iron penstock
• Powerhouse with a single 2,000-kW generating unit
• 2,000 feet of buried 35-kV transmission cable
• Upgrade of 22 miles of 35-kV overhead transmission line
Hydroelectric technology is well developed, and provides most of the renewable energy generated
in the world in general, and in Alaska in particular. The Project will utilize the precipitation and
steep topography a fforded by the Yerrick Creek basin to generate renewable energy.
Optimum installed capacity – 2.0 MW.
Anticipated capacity factor – 28%.
Anticipated annual generation – Approximately 4.9 Gwh/yr, which would off-set about 340,000
gallons of diesel generation per year.
Anticipated barriers – No technological barriers.
Basic integration concept – Integration of hydropower is not particularly difficult; AP&T already
operates two independent integrated hydro-diesel systems. For much of the year the hydro
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 13 of 19 10/7/2009
generation will be much less than the load, and therefore the diesel generation will be in lead
position and the hydro in lag position. During high flow periods during the summer, the hydro
generation may be sufficient to supply all of the load, in which case the diesels would not operate
and the hydro would be in lead position. During the transition periods, diesel unit(s) will be
block loaded in lag position, with the hydro in lead position.
Delivery methods – Project generation will be delivered to the interconnected Tok system by
about 1500 feet of buried cable from the powerhouse to the existing Tanacross-Dot Lake
transmission line. A portion of that line will be upgraded from single-phase to three-phase.
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.
Part of the project is on State land and part is on Tanacross, Inc. lands. We are working on an
agreement with Tanacross, Inc. and will get an easement from the state. Doyon, Inc. owns the
subsurface estate on the non-State land, and AP&T will develop an agreement with Doyon for use
of the subsurface estate.
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
Applicable Permits:
• 404 permit (Corps of Engineers)
• Water right (ADNR),
• State land easement(ADNR)
• Fish habitat permit (ADF&G)
• SHPO review.
Permitting Timeline: All permits are expected to be in place by January 2010.
Potential Permitting Barriers: None are known at this time.
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
T&E Species: Data shows they are not found on site and AP&T has not been asked to survey for
them further.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 14 of 19 10/7/2009
Habitat Issues: There is some fish habitat for Dolly Varden and Arctic grayling in Yerrick Creek,
but ADF&G has concluded that instream flows are not necessary. ADF&G has issued a permit
(see Section 10) condition on us providing 1) a screen at the intake with openings no larger than
¼ inch and 2) a roughened channel bypass that would allow fish passage over the diversion when
flows are in excess of the hydraulic capacity of the power plant. AP&T intends to design the
spillway to provide this bypass capability. ADF&G also wants the access road and penstock to
stay a minimum of 66 feet away from the riparian corridor of the creek as much as possible.
Wetlands: Wetlands will be avoided when possible. Wetlands (the creek) will be impacted by
changing flow patterns for part of the year (when most of the water is diverted for power
generation).
Archaeological Issues: An archaeological survey was conducted the first week of September 2008
and again during the summer of 2009. A final report is due soon that will be reviewed by RUS
and SHPO. The Project is being designed to avoid any artifacts.
Land Development Constraints: AP&T is working towards an agreement with Tanacross, Inc.
regarding rights to develop the Project, which will be partly on Tanacross land. AP&T is
confident that an agreement can be reached prior to the anticipated start of construction in 2010.
Telecommunications Interference: The 34.5 kV transmission line will not create interference with
telecommunications. This size of conductor is frequently found on the same pole with telephone
lines, as they are also found to coexist on AP&T’s poles. Higher voltages can cause interference
however.
Aviation Considerations: This project is not near an airport nor typical flight pattern, nor will the
infrastructure be more than 45 feet above ground, well below safe flying elevation. Current
infrastructure has been in place for 40 years and has not been a hazard.
Visual & Aesthetic Impacts: Visual and aesthetics are not an issue here, but there would be
minor impacts related to visible human activity. The powerhouse and appurtenances will be
around a bend in the creek and out of sight of the highway with the transmission line buried to
the highway. The upgraded transmission to Tok will be similar in appearance to the existing line.
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
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 15 of 19 10/7/2009
• Projected development cost of proposed renewable energy system
Anticipated project costs:
• Phases I-III $870,000 (expenses already incurred and projected)
• Phase IV $13,630,000 (AP &T estimate based on experience)
• Total: $14,500,000
Requested grant funding: $4,000,000
Applicant matching funds: $10,500,000 (see below)
Other sources of funding:
• Rural Utility Service grant (2008) $1,675,000
• Denali Commission grant (2008) $100,000
• To be secured $8,275,000
AP&T expects to receive future additional grants of approximately $5,825,000 so that its cash
matching funds ($2,900,000) are 20% of the total Project cost.
Projected capital cost: $13,630,000 (capital cost is assumed to be the cost of Phase IV –
Construction)
Projected development cost: $870,000 (development cost is assumed to be the total cost of Phases I,
II, and III)
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.)
AP&T will operate and maintain the Project with proceeds from sale of power to its customers.
No grant funding is requested for operation and maintenance.
4.4.3 Power Purchase/Sale
The power purchase/sale inf ormation 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
AP&T is developing this Project to supply power to its own interconnected Tok system. This
power ultimately will be sold to AP&T’s customers in Tok, Tetlin, Tanacross, and Dot Lake at a
lesser cost than the current cost of diesel generation.
Rate of Return: Not calculated.
4.4.4 Project Cost Worksheet
Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered
in evaluating the project.
The Cost Worksheet is attached in Section 10 - Appendices.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 16 of 19 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
The people of Alaska will benefit from the Project development as follows:
Potential annual fuel displacement: The Project will displace about 340,000 gallons of diesel
fuel, which equates to an annual savings of $1,020,000 at a fuel price of $3.00 per gallon. Over a
50 year period the Project could potentially save 17,000,000 gallons of diesel fuel valued at
$103,000,000 (average fuel price of $6.06/gallon). Note that this average fuel price is based on
escalation of a 2008 price of $3.00/gal at 3.75% until 2031, constant thereafter. Actual fuel
prices in 2008 were considerably higher than $3.00/gallon, but currently they are lower due to
the global economic slowdown. Fuel prices could easily escalate faster than 3.75% with a more
robust global economy.
Anticipated annual revenue: AP&T would expect to have a new rate tariff for the Tok system
based on the various funding contributions. If funded as proposed herein, the Project is
estimated to result in a decrease in revenue of about $1,000,000 in the first year of operation.
Potential additional annual incentives: Not estimated.
Potential additional revenue streams : Not estimated.
Non-economic public benefits to Alaskans: Reduced air emissions and noise, reduced chance for
oil spills.
Other benefits: The State of Alaska would spend less on the PCE program, since the Project
generation would decrease the amount of diesel generation subject to PCE reimbursement. Over
the 50 year life of the Project, the savings would amount to about $51,900,000 based on the
current PCE rate in the Tok area of $0.1595/kWh escalating at 1% per year.
In the short term the local economy would benefit due to local hire for construction. In the long
term, lower and more stable electric rates could lead to more residential and commercial
development, which in turn would add more income to these communities.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 17 of 19 10/7/2009
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
AP&T will operate the Project to supply power to AP&T’s interconnected Tok system, for
eventual sale to its retail customers. AP&T will maintain the Project as it does with its other
hydroelectric resour ces, which can be expected to have a life of at least 50 years. The Project will
be remotely operated, with continuous monitoring by a SCADA system. O&M personnel will visit
the plant at least once per week for routine checks on the equipment. A routine maintenance
schedule will be established, a brief annual shutdown is likely for maintenance.
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.
AP&T has been conducting environmental and geotechnical surveys of the site from 2008-2009.
AP&T has completed the following studies:
• Wetland delineation
• Fish habitat surveys
• TES Plant survey
• Water quality
• Hydrology
• Archaeological survey
• Geotechnical investigation of substrate at diversion site and along penstock route
AP&T has received grant funds from AEA totaling $100,000 and from RUS totaling $1,675,000.
AP&T has spent the majority of these funds to conduct feasibility analysis and environmental and
geotechnical studies. All of the AEA funds were expended, but RUS has not released their
funding until we complete our permitting and we provide them with an EA. We are currently
completing our permitting and have supplied a draft EA for RUS’s review. Once the RUS funds
are released, they will reimburse our remaining costs to date, fund the remaining design and
permitting work (Phase III) as well as a small part of the construction cost.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 18 of 19 10/7/2009
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.
Included in Section 10 are several letters of support and a petition passed around the community
of Tok in support of this project.
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
Total Project Costs: $14,500,000
Investments to date and funding sources: AP&T has spent approximately $600,000 on Phase I,
II, and III development activities for the Project. Those costs have been paid to date by a Denali
Commission grant ($100,000) and cash outlay by AP&T. The RUS has award AP&T a grant of
$1,675,000, but has not released its funding until completion of an Environmental Review, which
includes procuring permits and issuing an EA. We are currently completing this process. Once
the RUS grant funds are released, they will reimburse our costs to date, fund the remaining
design and permitting work (Phase III) as well as a small part of the construction cost (about
$450,000 for mobilization and $455,000 for pioneer road construction).
Amount requested in grant funds: With this application, AP&T is requesting the maximum
possible grant amount ($4,000,000). The funds will be used for those activities planned in the
2010 construction season ($645,000 for completion of the access road, $2,500,000 for purchase
and delivery of penstock materials, and $855,000 for purchase and delivery of the turbine and
generator).
Additional investment by AP&T: AP&T intends to provide $2,900,000 in cash outlay or loans so
that its investment is 20% of the total Project cost. If the maximum grant amount is awarded
($4,000,000), the unfunded amount to complete construction will be $8,725,000. AP&T would
then need to secure $5,825,000 in future grants so that it matching contribution is $2,900,000.
Renewable Energy Fund
Grant Application Round 3
AEA10-015 Grant Application Page 19 of 19 10/7/2009
SECTION 10 – 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
Signature
Title
Date
SECTION 10
– ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION & CERTIFICATION