Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStebbins Wind AppAlaska Village Electric Cooperative Application for Renewable Energy Fund Grant Alaska Energy Authority Stebbins, Alaska Wind Feasibility Analysis & Conceptual Design Project November 11, 2008 Table of Contents Application 1 Resumes 2 Cost Worksheet 3 Budget Form 4 Authority 5 Supplemental Materials 6 Tab 1 Grant Application Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 1 of 11 10/8/2008 SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal) Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC)  Type of Entity:   Utility Mailing Address   4831 Eagle Street, Anchorage, AK 99503 Physical Address   Same Telephone 907‐565‐5358  Fax 907‐562‐4086  Email   BPetrie@avec.org 1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT Name   Brent Petrie  Title   Manager, Community Development Key Accounts Mailing Address   4831 Eagle Street, Anchorage, AK 99503 Telephone   907‐565‐5358 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, 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 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.) Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 2 of 11 10/8/2008 SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY Provide a brief 1-2 page overview of your project. 2.1 PROJECT TYPE Describe the type of project you are proposing, (Reconnaissance; Resource Assessment/ Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; and/or Construction) as well as the kind of renewable energy you intend to use. Refer to Section 1.5 of RFA. The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) is proposing a Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment,  and Conceptual Design (Phase II) project to determine the wind potential in Stebbins.    2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Provide a one paragraph description of your project. At a minimum include the project location, communities to be served, and who will be involved in the grant project. AVEC proposes to install a wind meteorological (met) tower and complete geotechnical work to  determine the possibility of installing wind towers in Stebbins.  The work will involve obtaining a letter  of non‐objection for placement of the wind tower and geotechnical fieldwork, permitting, transporting  and installing a met tower at this location, 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.  2.3 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. Include a project cost summary that includes an estimated total cost through construction. The total project cost for the project is $108,700 of which $103,256 is requested in grant funds.  The  remaining $5,435 will be matched in cash by AVEC.  A detail of the costs is:   The total project costs through construction depend on the outcome of the wind resource study and  geotechnical report; however, an estimate can be made:  Estimated Final Design and Permitting:  $280,000.  Estimated Construction and Commissioning: $5,470,000.  Estimated Project Total (including this phase):  $5,750,000.  Task  Total  Obtain Site Control/Right of Entry/Permits $7,000  Erect, Monitor, Dismantle Met Tower $20,700  Complete Geotech Work $65,000  Complete Wind Resource Report $6,000  Complete Conceptual Design $10,000  Total $108,700  2.4 PROJECT BENEFIT Briefly discuss the financial benefits that will result from this project, including an estimate of economic benefits (such as reduced fuel costs) and a description of other benefits to the Alaskan public. The primary financial benefit from this project would be to determine whether the wind resources are  suited to provide power to the community and to prepare a conceptual design of a wind facility.    The possible displacement of diesel fuel used for village power generation in Stebbins and St Michaels  currently totals over 207,581 gallons per year at a cost of over $930,918 in 2008.  If the conditions are  Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 3 of 11 10/8/2008 suitable and wind turbines are installed, the residents of Stebbins would benefit from reduced power  costs.    Other Benefits to the Alaskan Public:   The anticipated benefits of installation of the wind turbines would be reducing the negative impact of  the cost of energy by providing a renewable energy alternative. This project could help stabilize energy  costs and provide long‐term socio‐economic benefits to village households. Locally produced, affordable  energy will empower community residents and could help avert rural to urban migration. 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   Decreased coastal erosion due to climate change  2.5 PROJECT COST AND BENEFIT SUMARY Include a summary of your project’s total costs and benefits below. 2.5.1 Total Project Cost (Including estimates through construction.) $5,750,000  2.5.2 Grant Funds Requested in this application. $103,256  2.5.3 Other Funds to be provided (Project match) $5,435  2.5.4 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.5.2 and 2.5.3) $108,700  2.5.5 Estimated Benefit (Savings) To be determined  2.5.6 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.) 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. AVEC will provide overall project management and oversight.  AVEC is the electric utility serving  Stebbins.   Brent Petrie, AVEC Project Manager: Brent Petrie will be the primary contact for AVEC.  He will work  with selected contractor to provide overall project management and oversight.  Please see resumes in Section 2 of this proposal for details regarding the staff.  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.) Grant Award Announcement:    July 1, 2009  Authorization to Proceed:    July 15, 2009  Obtain Site Control/Right of Entry/Permits:    September 1, 2009  Erect Met Tower:    September 7, 2009  Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 11 10/8/2008 Monitor Met Tower Data:    September 2009‐September 2010  Dismantle Met Tower:    September 2010  Select Engineering Contractor:    August 3, 2009  Complete Geotech Field Work:    September 1, 2009  Complete Geotech Report:    November 2, 2009  Complete Wind Resource Report:    October 17, 2010  Complete Conceptual Design:    November 30, 2010  3.3 Project Milestones Define key tasks and decision points in your project and a schedule for achieving them. Obtain Site Control/Right of Entry/Permits:  AVEC proposes to get as much completed in the first year  (2009) of this project as possible.  AVEC would work with the current land owner to obtain permission  for placing the met tower and conducting geotechnical work immediately following AEA’s authorization  to proceed.  AVEC would also immediately seek approvals from permitting agencies.   Erect Met Tower:  The earlier the met tower is collecting data, the earlier AVEC will have the wind  resource data to ascertain the suitability of using this renewable resource.  AVEC proposes to erect the  tower immediately following approvals from the landowner and permitting agencies.     Complete Geotech Field Work:  In order to understand site conditions early in the process, geotechnical  field work would be conducted immediately following gaining approvals from the land owner and  permitting agencies.  The geotechnical report would be completed 60 days later.  Complete Wind Resource Report:  The met tower would be monitored to ensure that the wind tower is  functioning properly and that bird diverters are intact.  Wind data would be collected for one year.  Complete Conceptual Design:  It is likely that preliminary data from the met tower could allow for  conceptual design to be drafted.  The final concept design would be completed as soon as possible  following completion of the Wind Resource Report.     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 project management approach that has been used to successfully install met towers  throughout rural Alaska: A team of AVEC staff and external consultants.    AVEC staff and their role on this project includes:    Meera Kohler, President and Chief Executive Officer, 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.    Debbie Bullock, manager of administrative services, will provide support in accounting,  payables, financial reporting, and capitalization of assets in accordance with AEA guidelines.   An AVEC project manager will lead this project.  The project manager will be responsible for:   Obtaining site control/access and permits for the installation of the met tower and geotechnical  work  Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 5 of 11 10/8/2008  Selecting, coordinating, and managing the engineering consultant    Communicating with Stebbins residents to ensure that the community is informed   Contractors for this project would include:   Wind Resource Consultant.  AVEC will employ a wind resource consultant who will:  o Supervise the installation of the met tower  o Consult on the operation and maintenance of the tower  o Draft the wind resource report   Engineering consultant.  AVEC will employ an engineering consultant who will:  o Select, coordinate, and manage the geotechnical contractor  o Create the wind turbine facility conceptual design   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.  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. The project manager will work closely with the  engineering consultant to ensure adherence to the project schedule and budget.  Weekly and monthly  project coordination meetings will be held during the first season to track progress of installation of the  met tower and geotechnical work and address issues as they arise.  After the met tower is installed,  monthly communication with the project team will be sufficient.  The project manager will provide  quarterly reports to AVEC for finalization and submission to the AEA.   3.6 Project Risk Discuss potential problems and how you would address them. Logistics.  Transport geotechnical investigation equipment into Stebbins is complicated.  (The met tower  is already in the community.)  There is no dock in Stebbins. Typically, equipment is flown into the  community, or the lighterage of goods to shore is provided out of Nome.  These issues are not  insurmountable, but will require careful coordination and management.    Site Control/Access and Permitting.  In the past, the City of Stebbins signed a resolution in support of  seeking funding for a met tower (Attachment 6‐Supplemental Materials).  It is expected that the  community would support erection of the met tower and geotechnical field work.  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, would be selected.  It unlikely that a delay in the total project schedule  would occur if the field work is delayed.  The met tower would be installed to handle the Stebbins’  winter weather conditions.  The met tower would be monitored to ensure the met tower is up and  functioning.  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 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 for completion of each phase. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 6 of 11 10/8/2008 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, Stebbins is rated as a class 4 to 5 wind  regime. Correlating AVEC’s meteorlogic data from Shaktoolik, which is also in a 4 to 5 wind regime, we  expect the annual wind resource to be 30% of installed wind turbine capacity. Multiple wind turbines  totaling 400 to 600 kW can be expected to produce in the range of 1,000,000 to 1,500,000 kWh per  year.  The appropriate total rating will be determined by this feasibility study.  Solar power from photovoltaic solar arrays is a potential alternative, but has higher capital cost and  lower resource availability than wind in Stebbins.   The production of energy using ocean tidal motion is a newly developing possibility.  Technology to  make use of tidal motion is under development. Even after initial development activities have been  completed, the sub‐arctic maritime environment may provide additional challenges to the use of this  developing technology.   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 communities of Stebbins and St Michaels with diesel generators.  The Stebbins power plant includes three CMS generator sets with a combined capacity of 871 kW (one  each 271 kW, 250 kW and 350 kW generator sets).  All three generator sets were installed in the early  1990s.  There is a new 499 kW generator set on site that will be installed in the near future. The St  Michaels power plant has a capacity of 1020 kW consisting of a 499 kW, 314 kW and a 207 kW, installed  in 2005, 2000 and 1995 respectively.  The data indicates that peak demands in Stebbins have remained relatively constant over the past five  years with a maximum one‐minute average peak of 328 kW occurring in 2002.  Average demand over  the same period was approximately 165 kW. Similarly, St Michaels demands have remained constant  with an average peak of 329 kW and an average demand of 173 kW.   According to the 2007 Statistical Report of the Power Cost Equalization Program Report, the Stebbins  plant generated 13.22 kWh for each gallon of fuel consumed in 2007. The St Michaels plant generated  13.89 kWh per gallon in 2007.  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. Stebbins and St Michaels uses diesel and heating oil as primary energy resources. Diesel fuel  consumption for power generation in Stebbins in FY2007 was 103,720 gallons; in St. Michaels diesel fuel  consumption was 103,853 gallons.  If this study finds the wind resource suitable, installation of wind turbines in the community would  decrease the amount of diesel fuel used for power generation.  Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 7 of 11 10/8/2008 4.2.3 Existing Energy Market Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy customers. Stebbins is located on St Michael Island, about 120 miles southeast of Nome.  Average summer  temperatures range from 40 to 60° F; winter temperatures average ‐4 to 16 F°. St. Michaels is located on  the east coast of St. Michael Island in Norton Sound. It lies 125 miles southeast of Nome and 48 miles  southwest of Unalakleet.   Summer temperatures average 40 to 60; winters average ‐4 to 16. Extremes  from ‐55 to 70 have been recorded.  In Stebbins, 42 percent of the population is below the poverty line, and the median household income is  $23,125—less than half of the State’s median household income of $59,036.  In St. Michaels, the median  household income is $33,036, per capita income is $10,692, and 22.88 percent of residents live below  the poverty level in St. Michael.  The electricity consumption in Stebbins in 2007 was 1,371,190 kW while the consumption in St Michaels  was 1,518,449 kW.  The load of is highest during the winter months, with the bulk of electricity  consumed by residences and the school.  If this study finds that winds are suitable, the addition of wind  turbines to the electric generation system could reduce the amount of diesel fuel used for power  generation and for heating.    Like all of Alaska, Stebbins and St Michaels are 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. Residents rely on subsistence resources including fish, seal, walrus,  reindeer, and beluga whale.  Subsistence food is gathered and harvested and stored in refrigerators and  freezers.  Refrigeration is essential for the extended storage of perishable food stuffs, and reliable  electric service is essential for proper freeze storage of food.  Sources: Alaska Community Database.  4.3 Proposed System Include information necessary to describe the system you are intending to develop and address potential system design, land ownership, permits, and environmental issues. 4.3.1 System Design Provide the following information for the proposed renewable energy system:  A description of renewable energy technology specific to project location  Optimum installed capacity  Anticipated capacity factor  Anticipated annual generation  Anticipated barriers  Basic integration concept  Delivery methods Alternative Energy Technology.  AVEC plans to conduct a Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment,  and Conceptual Design to assess the possibility of using wind power in Stebbins.  If the wind resource  proves suitable, wind turbines would be installed.    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 logistics, site access and  permitting, and weather.  The barriers are minor and do not pose a threat to the completion of this  project, tasks which must be accomplished.    Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 8 of 11 10/8/2008 Basic integration concept/Delivery methods.  Conceptual design, to be completed as a part of this  project, would detail how power from a wind turbine would be integrated and delivered into the  intertied Stebbins and St Michaels system.  If the wind is suitable for development, the turbines will  interconnect with a new intertie and power plant in Stebbins.  It is expected that wind‐generated  electrical energy will be delivered via the existing electrical distribution grids in Stebbins and St  Michaels.  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 would occur at a location between  Stebbins and St. Michael.  In the past, the City of Stebbins signed a resolution in support of seeking  funding for a met tower (Attachment 6‐Supplemental Materials).  It is expected that the community  would support erection of the met tower and geotechnical field work in this area.    To obtain permission to place met towers and complete geotech work, AVEC would travel to community  immediately following the Authorization to Proceed from AEA.  AVEC would discuss the project with  community members and representatives from the Cities, Community Associations (IRA), and the Native  Corporations of Stebbins and St Michaels.    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 geotech 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.)  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.  A met  tower would be installed, and geotechnical field work would be completed.  As stated above,  compliance with the Endangered Species Act would be needed.  Also a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers  Wetlands Nationwide Permit could be needed to conduct geotechnical work, depending on if the work  Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 9 of 11 10/8/2008 is 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 wind resource is suitable for moving forward with the installation of turbines.  AVEC would 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 would be  needed if the study finds that the wind turbines are feasible.   4.4 Proposed New System Costs (Total Estimated Costs and proposed 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, Resources Assessment, and Conceptual Design to assess the  possibility of using wind power near Stebbins.  This work will cost $108,700.  AVEC requests $103,265  from AEA.  AVEC will provide $5,435 as an in‐kind contribution.  If the wind resource proves suitable, the next phase of this project would be Final Design and Permitting  (Phase III).  Although it is difficult to determine without an assessment of the resource and what type,  size, and number of turbine would be needed, AVEC expects that Final Design and Permitting would cost  $280,000.  AVEC would provide a 5% in‐kind match ($14,000).  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 (Phase IV).  AVEC estimates  that this phase could cost $5,750,000, assuming installation of four 100 kW wind turbines or two 300 kW  wind turbines.  AVEC would provide a 10% cash match ($547,000).  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.  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.  Total anticipated project cost for this phase  Requested grant funding The met tower would 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 Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 10 of 11 10/8/2008  Proposed rate of return from grant-funded project AVEC, the existing electric utility serving Stebbins, is a member owned cooperative electric utility and  typically owns and maintains the generation, fuel storage, and distribution facilities in the villages it  serves.    Stebbins includes 86 households and community facilities, including a health clinic, city office, tribal  council office, and water treatment plant, which would purchase power from AVEC.  At this point in project development, the potential power price and rate of return on the project is  unknown.  4.4.4 Cost Worksheet Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered in evaluating the project. Please see attachment.   4.4.5 Business Plan 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. The wind turbines, 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.   4.4.6 Analysis and Recommendations Provide information about the economic analysis and the proposed project. Discuss your recommendation for additional project development work. According to the AEA Alaska high resolution wind resource map, Stebbins is rated as a class 4 to 5 wind  regime.  This designation indicates that the potential for beneficial use of wind as an energy resource in  the community is good.  Possible community growth, along with significant increases in the delivered  cost of diesel fuel, makes this local resource a timely candidate for evaluation for a feasibility analysis  and conceptual design.   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 avoided cost of ownership)  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 Stebbins and St Michaels currently totals over 207,581 gallons per year at a cost of over $939,000.   Much greater amounts of displaced fuel are possible if electric heating is used to displace 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 and $4.53 per gallon for  the fuel for power generation in Stebbins and St Michaels, respectively.  If the wind resource proves  suitable and turbines are installed, the residents of Stebbins would benefit from decreased fuel use;  Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 11 of 11 10/8/2008 however, at this point in the project the exact  amount of fuel displacement is unknown  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 is feasible in Stebbins and wind turbines are installed in  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.  SECTION 6 – GRANT BUDGET Tell us how much your total project costs. Include any investments to date and funding sources, how much is requested in grant funds, and additional investments you will make as an applicant. Include an estimate of budget costs by tasks using the form - GrantBudget.xls The total project costs through construction depend on the outcome of the wind resource study and  geotechnical report as well as construction year and market conditions; however, an estimate can be  made:  Feasibility Analysis, Resources Assessment, and Conceptual Design (this phase):  $108,700  Estimated Final Design and Permitting:  $210,000.  Estimated Construction and Commissioning: $5,470,000.  Estimated Project Total:  $5,750,000.  The total project cost for the project is $108,700 of which $103,256 is requested in grant funds.  The  remaining $5,435 will be matched in cash by AVEC.  A detail of the costs is:   Task State Funds AVEC In‐Kind Match Total  Obtain Site Control/Right of Entry/Permits $6,650 $350 $7,000  Erect, Monitor, and Dismantal Met Tower $19,665 $1,035 $20,700  Complete Geotech Work $61,750 $3,250 $65,000  Complete Wind Resource Report $5,700 $300 $6,000  Complete Conceptual Design $9,500 $500 $10,000  TOTALS $103,265 $5,435 $108,700  AVEC expects to following future funding scenario for future project phases.     Future Phases  Alternative  Funds  AVEC In‐Kind  Match Total  Estimated Final Design and Permitting $252,000 $28,000 $280,000  Estimated Construction and  Commissioning  $4,923,000 $547,000 $5,470,000  Total $5,175,000 $575,000 $5,750,000    Tab 2 Resumes Tab 3 Cost Worksheet  Renewable Energy Fund   Application Cost Worksheet Please note that some fields might not be applicable for all technologies or all project phases. 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. 1,000,000 to 1,500,000 kWh Unit depends on project type (e.g. windspeed, hydropower output, biomasss fuel) 2. Existing Energy Generation a) Basic configuration (if system is part of the Railbelt 1 grid, leave this section blank) i. Number of generators/boilers/other 6 generators in Stebbins and St Michaels  ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other Diesel fired generators  iii. Generator/boilers/other type 271 kW, 350 kW, 250 kW, 499 kW, 314 kW and  207 kW.  iv. Age of generators/boilers/other 16, 16, 18, 3, 8, and 13 years respectively.   v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other Average efficiency for both villages: 13.92 kW/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 ii. Annual O&M cost for non-labor $170,000 total (labor and non-labor combined) 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] 2,889,638    ii. Fuel usage  Diesel [gal] 207,581 gal  Other   iii. Peak Load 657 kW (from August 2002‐2007)  iv. Average Load 338 kW (from August 2002‐2007)  v. Minimum Load   vi. Efficiency 13.76 kW/gal (from August 2002‐2007)/13.92 kW/gal (from 2007)  vii. Future trends   d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable) i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu]                                                              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.  RFA AEA 09-004 Application Cost Worksheet revised 9/26/08 Page 1  Renewable Energy Fund   ii. Electricity [kWh] iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu] iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu] v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] vi. Other 3. Proposed System Design a) Installed capacity 400 to 600 kW b) Annual renewable electricity generation i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu] ii. Electricity [kWh] 1,000,000 to 1,500,000 iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu] iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu] v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] vi. Other 4. Project Cost a) Total capital cost of new system Estimated: $5,470,000  b) Development cost Estimated (including this phase): $220,800  c) Annual O&M cost of new system d) Annual fuel cost 5. Project Benefits a) Amount of fuel displaced for i. Electricity 71,839 to 107,759 gal ii. Heat iii. Transportation b) Price of displaced fuel $318,246 to $477,370 c) Other economic benefits d) Amount of Alaska public benefits 6. Power Purchase/Sales Price a) Price for power purchase/sale 7. Project Analysis a) Basic Economic Analysis Project benefit/cost ratio 1.16 to 1.75 (assuming 20 year life) Payback 11.46 to 17.19 years (simple) RFA AEA 09-004 Application Cost Worksheet revised 9/26/08 Page 2 Tab 4 Grant Budget Form Alaska Energy Authority ‐ Renewable Energy FundMilestone or TaskFederal Funds State FundsLocal Match Funds (Cash)Local Match Funds (In‐Kind)Other FundsTOTALS1. Obtain Site Control/Right of Entry/Permits$6,650.00$350.00$7,000.002. Erect, Monitor, and Dismantal Met Tower$19,665.00$1,035.00$20,700.003. Complete Geotech Work$61,750.00$3,250.00$65,000.004. Complete Wind Resource Report$5,700.00$300.00$6,000.005. Complete Conceptual Design$9,500.00$500.00$10,000.00TOTALS$103,265.00$5,435.00$108,700.00Milestone # or Task #BUDGET CATAGORIES:12345TOTALSDirect Labor and Benefits$350.00 $1,035.00 $3,250.00 $300.00 $500.00$5,435.00Travel, Meals, or Per Diem$0.00Equipment$0.00Supplies$0.00Contractual Services$6,650.00 $19,665.00 $61,750.00 $5,700.00 $9,500.00$103,265.00Construction Services$0.00Other Direct Costs$0.00TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES$7,000.00 $20,700.00 $65,000.00 $6,000.00 $10,000.00$108,700.00RFA AEA09-004 Budget Form Tab 5 Delegation of Authority Tab 6 Supplemental Materials Stebbins IRA Letter of Support City of Stebbins Resolution of Support Stebbins Wind Resource Figure Stebbins Conceptual Design Report Addendum: Bulk Fuel and Power Systems Upgrades Pacific Ocean Nome Sitka Kenai Homer Craig Juneau Palmer Barrow Haines Kodiak Valdez Seward Bethel Cordova Kotzebue Sterling Wrangell Unalaska Fairbanks Anchorage Ketchikan North Pole Dillingham Petersburg Metlakatla 170°0'0"W175°0'0"W 165°0'0"W 165°0'0"W 160°0'0"W 160°0'0"W 155°0'0"W 155°0'0"W 150°0'0"W 150°0'0"W 145°0'0"W 145°0'0"W 140°0'0"W 140°0'0"W 135°0'0"W 130°0'0"W 125°0'0"W 120°0'0"W 48°0'0"N50°0'0"N50°0'0"N66°0'0"N68°0'0"N70°0'0"N52°0'0"N52°0'0"N54°0'0"N54°0'0"N56°0'0"N56°0'0"N58°0'0"N58°0'0"N60°0'0"N60°0'0"N62°0'0"N62°0'0"N64°0'0"N64°0'0"N72°0'0"N74°0'0"N46°0'0"N205000 205000 455000 455000 705000 705000 955000 955000 1205000 1205000 1455000 1455000 1705000 1705000 1955000 1955000 2205000 22050005455000 54550005705000570500059550005955000620500062050006455000645500067050006705000695500069550007205000720500074550007455000770500077050007955000795500082050008205000Projection: UTM, Zone 4N, WGS84 Spatial Resolution of Wind Resource Data: 200m This map was created by TrueWind Solutions using the MesoMap system and historical weather data. Although it is believed to represent an accurate overall picture of the wind energy resource, estimates at any location should be confirmed by measurement. Key to Features !(City Road Railroad River / Stream Federal Land State / Local Park Borough / Census Boundary Urban Area Waterbody State Background Canadian Province Wind Resource of AlaskaWind Resource of Alaska Power Density at 50 m NREL Class W/m2 1- < 100 1+ 100 - 200 2 200 - 300 3 300 - 400 4 400 - 500 5 500 - 600 6 600 - 800 7 > 800 ± 0 170 340 510 68085 Kilometers 0 90 180 270 36045 Miles Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................1 1.1 Purpose ...........................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Site Visits........................................................................................................................................1 1.3 Project Participants.........................................................................................................................1 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................2 2.1 Existing Tank Storage Capacity.....................................................................................................2 2.2 Existing Power Generation Capacity..............................................................................................2 3.0 FUEL STORAGE AND ELECTRICAL GENERATION CAPACITY RECOMMENDATIONS 3 3.1 Historical Fuel Usage .....................................................................................................................3 3.2 Historical Electric Demand.............................................................................................................3 3.3 Planned Infrastructure Improvements.............................................................................................3 3.3.1 Intertie to Saint Michael ..............................................................................................................3 3.3.2 Water and Sewer Improvements..................................................................................................3 3.3.3 Airport Improvements ................................................................................................................4 3.3.4 School Improvements.................................................................................................................4 3.3.5 Alternative Energy......................................................................................................................4 3.4 Projected Community Growth........................................................................................................5 3.5 Projected Electrical Demand at Design (2016) ..............................................................................5 3.6 Projected Fuel Demand at Design ..................................................................................................6 3.7 Recommended Fuel Storage Capacity............................................................................................7 4.0 FACILITY SITING AND DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS.........................................................9 4.1 Site Control.....................................................................................................................................9 4.2 Geotechnical Conditions.................................................................................................................9 4.3 Borrow Sources ..............................................................................................................................9 4.4 Community Flood Data ..................................................................................................................9 4.5 Snow Drifting...............................................................................................................................10 5.0 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS.....................................................................................................11 5.1 Scope of Work..............................................................................................................................11 . i Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 . ii TABLES Table 1  Contact Information ..................................................................................................... 1 Table 2  Existing Bulk Fuel Storage ........................................................................................... 2 Table 3  Estimated Current Annual Fuel Consumption ................................................................. 3 Table 4A – Historical Demand Data Based on PCE Records, Stebbins Alaska .................................. 5 Table 4B – Historical Demand Data Based on AVEC Records, St. Michael Alaska........................... 6 Table 6  Projected Fuel Consumption Increases ........................................................................... 7 Table 7  Estimated Fuel Consumption Year 2016 ........................................................................ 7 Table 8 - Recommended Fuel Storage Capacity............................................................................. 8 FIGURES Figure 1 Location Map Figure 2 Community Site Plan PHOTOGRAPHS Photograph 1 – Existing Tapraq Fuel Company Tank Farm Photograph 2 – Existing Tapraq Fuel Company Tank Farm Photograph 3 – Existing Tapraq Fuel Company Dispenser Photograph 4 – Existing Bering Straights School District Tank Farm Photograph 5 – Existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative Tank Farm Photograph 6 – Existing Alaska Village Electric Cooperative Power Plant Photograph 7 – Existing Ferris General Store Tank Farm Photograph 8 – Existing Ferris General Store Dispensers APPENDICES Appendix A Tank Summary Spreadsheet Appendix B Site Control Documents Appendix C Conceptual Design Drawings Appendix D Construction Cost Estimate Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose This addendum to the Stebbins Bulk Fuel Tank Farm and Power Plant Upgrade Conceptual Design Report (CDR) was prepared by CRW Engineering Group, LLC (CRW) for the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC). The purpose of this addendum is to update critical elements of the CDR that will be used for design of the proposed bulk fuel storage and power generation facilities. 1.2 Site Visits Two site visits were conducted during development of this CDR addendum. The first site visit took place September 26-29 and included AVEC Community Liaison Marie Becker and CRW engineers Jeff Stanley and Karl Hulse. During the site visit existing fuel tanks were inspected, the power plant and electrical distribution system components were documented, potential sites were evaluated, and meetings were held with the City Council and school district representatives to discuss project objectives and Denali Commission policies. Marie Becker visited the community a second time on December 7th, 2006 to present a progress report to the community and secure site control documentation for the project. 1.3 Project Participants Project participants identified during the site visit include: AVEC, the City of Stebbins (City), the Bering Strait School District (BSSD), Tapraq Fuel Company, and the Ferris General Store. Table 1  Contact Information Entity Contact Address Phone Number Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) Brent Petrie Manager, Community Development and Key Accounts AVEC 4831 Eagle Street Anchorage, AK 99503 907- 561-1818 907-562-4086 (fax) City of Stebbins Robert Ferris Mayor City of Stebbins P.O. Box 22, Stebbins, AK 99671 907- 934-3451 907-934-3452 (fax) Bering Straits School District Bob Dickens, Facilities Director BSSD P.O. Box 225 Unalakleet, AK 99684 907-624-4249 907-624-3524 (fax) Tapraq Fuel Company Thomas Kirk, Manager General Delivery Stebbins, AK 99671 907-934-3074 907-934-2399 (fax) Ferris General Store Robert Ferris, Owner P.O. Box 1 Stebbins, AK 99671 907-934-3131 . 1 Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 Existing Tank Storage Capacity The following table summarizes the existing fuel storage capacities for the project participant. A more detailed account of existing tankage in the community is provided in Appendix A. Table 2  Existing Bulk Fuel Storage Owner Gasoline (Gallons Gross) Diesel (Gallons Gross) Total Gross Storage (Gallons) AVEC 0 107,900 107,900 BSSD 0 81,900 81,900 City of Stebbins 0 21,000 21,000 Tapraq Fuel Company 52,500 74,300 126,800 Ferris General Store 0 27,000 27,000 Grand Total 364,600 2.2 Existing Power Generation Capacity The Stebbins power plant is owned and operated by AVEC. The plant consists of a 1980’s vintage butler building with separate crew quarters and a storage module constructed on an elevated timber deck supported by wooden posts and pads. Based upon data obtained from Mr. Mark Bryan, AVEC Operations Manager, the Stebbins power plant includes three CMS generator sets with a combined capacity of 871 kW (one each 271 kW, 250 kW and 350 kW generator sets). All three generator sets were installed in the early 1990’s. Reportedly, there is a new 499 kW generator set on site that will be installed in the near future. According to historic AVEC records and PCE data, the power plant generates an average of 13.25 kWh per gallon of diesel consumed. . 2 Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 3.0 FUEL STORAGE AND ELECTRICAL GENERATION CAPACITY RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 Historical Fuel Usage Average annual fuel consumption in Stebbins was calculated based upon information provided by project participants as well as local fuel barge service companies (Delta Western and Crowley). The estimated current annual fuel consumption is presented in Table 3. Table 3  Estimated Current Annual Fuel Consumption Fuel Product AVEC (Power Generation) City of Stebbins BSSD Tapraq (Retail Sales) Ferris (Retail Sales) Totals Unleaded Gas -- -- -- 50,000 -- 50,000 Diesel Fuel 105,000 20,000 56,000 74,000 15,000 270,000 3.2 Historical Electric Demand Historical AVEC and PCE report data was analyzed to determine trends in the community’s energy consumption. The data indicates that peak demands in Stebbins have remained relatively constant over the past five years with a maximum one-minute average peak of 328 kW occurring in 2002. Average demand over the same period was approximately 165 kW. 3.3 Planned Infrastructure Improvements Future infrastructure improvement projects can affect community electrical demands and must be considered when sizing the proposed power plant. The scope and anticipated impact of planned infrastructure improvements are discussed in the following sections. 3.3.1 Intertie to Saint Michael As currently envisioned, the proposed project will include a 10-mile long, 15 kV intertie to Saint Michael and a prime power plant in Stebbins, which will supply power to both communities. The current average electrical demand in St. Michael is approximately 170 kW. Assuming that St Michael’s demand for power will increase linearly with their historical population growth rate (2.3%), it is estimated that the tie line will impose a 217 kW (1,901,000 kWh) average demand in the design year 2016. 3.3.2 Water and Sewer Improvements The City currently has no piped water or sewer systems; residents haul water from a watering point located at the washeteria and deposit honeybucket waste in bunkers. The City, in conjunction with the Alaska . 3 Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC) has secured funds to construct a new water treatment plant and reservoir. Based on information obtained from the ANTHC design engineer, the new water system infrastructure will impose an additional 30 kW (262,800 kWh) electrical demand and consume approximately 25,000-gallons of additional heating oil in the design year. Long term plans include construction of a piped water and vacuum sewer system to serve the majority of households in the community, and electrical demand is expected to increase incrementally as households are connected to the system. The construction schedule for the piped system is undetermined at this time, and is unlikely to significant impact community electrical demand prior to 2016. 3.3.3 Airport Improvements The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities was contacted regarding planned airport improvements in Stebbins. According to Mr. Roger Maggard, State Airport Development Manager, Stebbins is on the Department’s list to receive a runway extension project but the community’s priority score is low. If and when the extension project does occur it would most likely include additional navigational aids and runway lights. The installation of intermittent (radio controlled) runway lights and a continuous 500W beacon would result in an estimated 3 kW increase in average demand, consuming an estimated 24,000 kWh per year. 3.3.4 School Improvements According to BSSD, there are no scheduled improvements to the school facilities in Stebbins that would have a significant impact on either power or fuel consumption. However, to account for unplanned improvements we recommend that a 10% contingency (6,000-gallons) be added to the school’s current consumption. 3.3.5 Alternative Energy Diesel generator sets are typically considered the simplest and most reliable method of power production in rural communities. However, rising fuel costs and mounting regulatory concern over fuel spills and power plant emissions warrant a close evaluation of potential alternative energy sources. With proper planning, design and management, today’s alternative energy technologies could reduce the region’s dependence upon fossil fuels in the future. Brief discussions of several applicable fuel-saving technologies are provided below. Heat Recovery Heat recovery technology provides a means of reclaiming energy lost to heat during the burning of fossil fuels. Heat recovery systems in rural Alaska typically consist of a heat exchanger connected to the liquid cooling system of power plant diesel generator sets. The exchanger draws heat from the engine cooling system to supplement heat-reliant processes in the power plant and adjacent buildings. Common implementations include pre-heating hydronic system return fluid to reduce boiler firing frequency, and heating raw water to enhance water treatment. Recovered heat from the existing power plant is only used to heat the crew quarters module as there are no other public facilities in close proximity to the power plant. The proposed power plant could potentially supply recovered heat to the school, City-owned water treatment plant and/or the Corporation store and office buildings. Due to the complexity and uncertainties associated with successful implementation of a . 4 Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 heat recovery system (power plant components, piping, heat receptor mechanical upgrades, energy sales agreements, etc.), the potential for diesel avoidance is not included in the tank farm capacity calculations. Wind Turbine Power Generation According to the Wind Energy Resource Atlas published by the U.S. Department of Energy, Stebbins is designated as a Class 4-5 wind zone on a scale of 1 to 7. This designation indicates that the potential for beneficial use of wind as an energy resource in the community is good. As such, the proposed power plant module switchgear should be configured to integrate wind turbines in the future. Due to the uncertain nature of the wind resource, and the potential lag between construction of the tank farm and wind turbine facilities, the potential for diesel avoidance due to wind turbines is not considered in the tank farm capacity calculations. 3.4 Projected Community Growth Historical census data shows that the population of Stebbins has risen steadily over the past six decades (2.8% annually from 98 in 1940 to 596 in 2006). Over the past ten years, the growth rate has averaged just over 3% per year. For the purposes of this CDR, an average population growth rate of 3% was assumed, resulting in a design population of 801 in 2016. Assuming that the average household size remains at 4.45 residents per house, approximately 46 new homes will be constructed by the design year. The resulting increases in electricity and heating oil demand will be approximately 50 kW (438,000 kWh) and 46,000-gallons per year (respectively). Further, assuming a linear relationship between gasoline consumption and population growth, the community will require approximately 17,000-gallons of additional gasoline for motorized transportation in the design year. 3.5 Projected Electrical Demand at Design (2016) A summary of the community’s electrical demands and peak loads during previous years is shown in Tables 4A and 4B. Peaking Factors based upon historic annual average to peak loads are also shown. Table 4A – Historical Demand Data Based on PCE Records, Stebbins Alaska Year Annual Consumption (kWh) [Column C] Annual Average Load (kW) [Column D] Annual Peak Load (kW) Peaking Factor [D] / [C] 2003 1,313,000 150 290 1.9 2004 1,466,500 167 319 1.9 2005 1,450,000 165 294 1.8 . 5 Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 Table 4B – Historical Demand Data Based on AVEC Records, St. Michael Alaska Year [Column B] Annual Average Load (kW) [Column C] Annual Peak Load (kW) Peaking Factor [C] / [B] FY 2003 157 319 2.0 FY 2004 164 319 1.9 FY 2005 165 318 1.9 The annual kWh consumption in the 2004 PCE report was used as a baseline value for estimating future demands. Anticipated future loads from section 3.3 were added to this baseline to establish the average demand at design (see Table 5). Peak demand in the design year was calculated by applying a peaking factor of 1.9. Table 5 – Projected Electrical Demands Baseline Consumption (Stebbins) 1,466,500 kWh Estimated Increase (10-year outlook and intertie) 2,625,800 kWh Estimated Annual Consumption (2016) 4,092,300 kWh Projected Average Demand1 467 kW Projected Peak Demand 888 kW Key: 1 – The projected average demand includes the combined loads from Stebbins and St. Michael 3.6 Projected Fuel Demand at Design Due to the combined effects of upcoming capital improvements and anticipated community growth, Stebbin’s annual fuel consumption is expected to be on the order of 600,000-gallons (approximately 750 gallons per capita) by the year 2016. Table 6 presents the anticipated effects of capital improvement projects and community growth on annual fuel consumption. The additional amounts shown for Tapraq Fuel and Ferris General Store are proportioned based on the current throughput of each facility. Table 7 estimates the annual fuel consumption for the design year. . 6 Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 Table 6  Projected Fuel Consumption Increases Anticipated Growth Factors Participant Intertie to Saint Michael Water / Sewer Improvements Airport Improvements School Improvements Community Growth Subtotal AVEC 136,0001 19,0001,2 2,0001,2 -- 31,0001,3 188,000 City of Stebbins -- 25,0002 -- -- -- 25,000 BSSD -- -- -- 6,0002 -- 6,000 Tapraq Fuel -- -- -- -- 37,000 (DF)3 17,000 (Gas)3 37,000 (DF) 17,000 (Gas) Ferris General Store -- -- -- -- 9,0003 9,000 Grand Total 265,000 Diesel 17,000 Gasoline Key: 1 – Assumes generator efficiency of 14 kWh / Gallon. 2 – For additional information see section 3.3.2 – 3.3.4 3 – For additional information see section 3.4. Table 7  Estimated Fuel Consumption Year 2016 Diesel Fuel Gasoline Current Annual Consumption (Table 3) 270,000 50,000 Projected Fuel Consumption Increase (Table 6) 265,000 17,000 Sub-Total 535,000 67,000 Estimated Combined Fuel Consumption in Design Year: 602,000 gallons 3.7 Recommended Fuel Storage Capacity The proposed fuel storage capacities for facilities within the scope of this CDR are listed in Table 8. The recommended capacities are based upon estimated fuel consumption at design (year 2016) and a minimum of 13-months storage. Additional space within the proposed tank farms has been provided . 7 Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 for future tanks to accommodate the next 20 years of growth. Conceptual drawings for the proposed facilities are provided in Appendix C. Table 8 - Recommended Fuel Storage Capacity Key: 1 – Proposed storage based upon projected 13 month consumption at design. Participant Current Consumption (Table 3) Projected Increase (Table 6) Future Annual Consumption 13-Month Consumption Proposed Gross Storage1 Proposed Net Storage2 AVEC 105,000 188,000 293,000 317,000 351,000 316,0003 City of Stebbins 20,000 25,000 45,000 49,000 54,000 48,6004 BSSD 56,000 6,000 62,000 67,000 81,000 73,0005 Tapraq Fuel Company 74,000 (DF) 50,000 (Gas) 37,000 (DF) 17,000 (Gas) 111,000 (DF) 67,000 (Gas) 120,000 (DF) 73,000 (Gas) 137,500 (DF) 83,500 (Gas) 124,000 (DF)6 75,000 (Gas)6 Ferris General Store 15,000 9,000 24,000 26,000 29,500 26,6007 2 – Net storage assumed to be 90% of gross. 3 – Includes thirteen 27,000-gallon horizontal diesel tanks. 4 – Includes two 27,000-gallon horizontal diesel tanks 5 – Includes three 27,000-gallon horizontal tanks. 6 – Includes eight 27,000-gallon horizontal tanks (5 diesel and 3 gasoline) and one 5,000-gallon dual product dispensing tank. 7 – Includes one 27,000-gallon double wall horizontal tank and one 2,500-gallon protected dispensing tank. . 8 Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 4.0 FACILITY SITING AND DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Site Control The proposed sites for the AVEC, City and Tapraq tank farms and the AVEC power plant are within Tract B, SNC Subdivision, Plat No. 2004-12. Title for this site is vested in the Stebbins Native Corporation. An existing, City-owned road right of way (ROW) for Caribou Street crosses the proposed site; a portion of that ROW will need to be vacated and a new ROW to the east of the site will need to be established. In an initial effort to establish site control, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was developed between AVEC, the Stebbins Native Corporation, the City of Stebbins and Tapraq Fuel Company; a copy of the signed MOA is included in Appendix B. The proposed site for the BSSD tank farm is located on Lot 2, U.S.S. 2049, which is owned by the State of Alaska Department of Education and Early Development. The proposed site for the Ferris General Store tank farm is owned by Robert Ferris. A site control opinion prepared by Rick Elliot Land Consultant is included in Appendix B. 4.2 Geotechnical Conditions A geotechnical investigation has not been completed for this project. However, Duane Miller and Associates, in conjunction with the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC), completed a subsurface investigation near the proposed co-located tank farm site in March, 2000. A total of ten test holes were drilled in the area and soil samples were taken for gradation and consolidation tests. Test hole depths varied from 6.5 feet to 49 feet. The general soil profile in the area consists of 1 ft to 3 ft of organic silts overlaying five to ten feet of sand, followed by silt and sandy silt to depth. All but one boring was frozen to depth. Groundwater was not encountered. 4.3 Borrow Sources Three potential borrow sources, known locally as borrow pits #1, #2, and the Clear Lake pit, are located within reasonable proximity to the City of Stebbins. Borrow pits #1 and #2 are located on the hill just east of town. The Clear Lake source is located adjacent to the road to St. Michael and is reportedly the most accessible. Access to this pit is via a narrow gravel road, which leaves the St. Michael-Stebbins Road and extends approximately 550 feet southwest. Reportedly, material in the pit consists of moderately frost susceptible silty / sandy gravel. Test results of samples from the Clear Lake source indicate a degradation value of 78 and a Los Angeles Abrasion loss of 25 percent. The coarse Sulfate Soundness result was 0.5 and the fine was 8.2. These values suggest that material from the clear lake site should be acceptable for the construction of surface coarse aggregate and embankment. Sands may be available along the beach or via screening at existing pits. Beach sources will likely require additional permitting prior to use. The subsurface rights to all pits are owned by the Bering Straights Native Corporation; royalty charges range from $2 to $3 per cubic yard. 4.4 Community Flood Data Vertical control for the conceptual drawings in this addendum is based upon the 2004 Stebbins Community Map prepared by Kawerak Inc. and the Alaska Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED). The vertical control for the finalized community maps is the monument designated “TR15, TRB ANCSA 14(c)” with a recorded elevation of 18.58 feet above mean sea level (MSL). Based upon this datum, the approximate elevation of the proposed co-located tank farm site is 18 feet MSL. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) report “Alaska Communities Flood Hazard Data 2000” has a 100 . 9 Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 year flood elevation of 27.32 feet MSL. The USACOE report entitled “Stebbins, Alaska Storm Damage Reduction Reconnaissance Report, July 1988” includes a regression analysis that estimates the 50-year flood elevation at approximately 23.3 feet MSL. The community’s flood gauge is located on the southwest corner of the teacher’s housing, a part of the old BIA school. 4.5 Snow Drifting Verifiable information on the prevailing wind direction in Stebbins is limited. Based upon the orientation of the airport runway, the prevailing wind direction in Stebbins appears to be northeast - southwest. The proposed facilities (tanks, standby generator module, crew quarters, etc.) were situated to minimize impacts from snow drifting. . 10 Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 5.0 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS 5.1 Scope of Work The proposed Scope of Work for bulk fuel tank farm and power plant upgrades is provided below. Conceptual design drawings for the proposed improvements are provided in Appendix C. A construction cost estimate for the project (developed by CE2 Engineers) is included in Appendix D. Bulk Fuel System  AVEC Tank Farm – Construct a new bulk fuel tank farm with thirteen 27,000-gallon single wall, horizontal AST’s. The tanks will be placed within a lined timber-dike wall containment basin. A new barge header with one 750-foot long, 4-inch diameter, buried pipeline will be installed to fill the facility.  Tapraq / City Tank Farm – Construct a new co-located bulk fuel tank farm with ten 27,000-gallon single wall, horizontal AST’s and one 5,000-gallon, dual product dispensing tank. The tanks will be placed within a lined timber-dike wall containment basin. Diesel tanks within the facility will be filled via a new 4-inch diameter, 100-foot long spur line from the AVEC tank farm fill line. A second barge header and 750-foot long, 4-inch diameter, buried pipeline will be installed to fill the facility’s gasoline tanks.  School Tank Farm – Construct a new bulk fuel tank farm at the school with three 27,000-gallon single wall, horizontal ASTs. The tanks will be placed within a lined timber-dike wall containment basin. A new single product barge header will be installed within the diked area for filling the tanks.  Ferris General Store Tank Farm – Install one 27,000-gallon double wall, horizontal AST and one 2,500-gallon protected dispensing tank at the Ferris General Store. The tank will be filled via a new single product barge header installed near the tank farm.  Dispensers – Install one dual product retail dispenser and one single product fleet dispenser at the tank farm for Tapraq Fuel Co. and the City (respectively), and one single product retail dispenser at the Ferris General Store. All dispensers will be mechanical and manually operated unless otherwise requested. No remote consoles, pre-paid card readers or other sophisticated systems are planned.  Install new electrical controls and lighting improvements as required.  Provide all EPA required spill contingency equipment. Power System  Power Plant – Fabricate and install a new modularized power plant. The facility will include eight modules (3 engine units, 1 control unit, 1 crew quarters, 1 heated storage unit, 1 cold storage unit and one lube storage unit). A separate heat recovery unit will be attached to one of the generator modules. The plant will be constructed on an elevated pile foundation. A fully enclosed breezeway . 11 Stebbins, Alaska CDR Addendum Bulk Fuel and Power System Upgrades June, 2007 . 12 will provide access between individual modules. Module design and generator set / switchgear specifications will be provided by AVEC.  Heat Recovery System – Install new insulated circulating glycol lines to serve the school, the City’s water treatment plant and / or the Corporation’s office and store.  Electrical Intertie – Construct a new 10-mile long, 15 kV overhead primary power transmission line from Stebbins to Saint Michael.  Distribution System – Upgrade the existing distribution system in Stebbins as necessary to connect the proposed power plant and intertie.  Alternative Energy - Install two to four wind turbines near Stebbins and connect them to the proposed intertie.