HomeMy WebLinkAboutArchangel Creek Hydro App
Prepared by:
POLARCONSULT ALASKA, INC.
1503 West 33rd Avenue, #310
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Tel: (907) 258-2420
Fax: (907) 258-2419
ARCHANGEL HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
AEA-09-004 - RENEWABLE ENERGY GRANT APPLICATION
FY 2010
NOVEMBER 10, 2008
RFA#: AEA-09-004
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
SEPTEMBER 27, 2023 PAGE i
Table of Contents
SECTION 1. - APPLICANT INFORMATION ............................................................................. 1
1.1. Applicant point of contact .................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Applicant minimum requirements ....................................................................................... 1
SECTION 2. - PROJECT SUMMARY .......................................................................................... 2
2.1. Project Type ......................................................................................................................... 2
2.2. Project Description............................................................................................................... 2
2.3. Project Budget Overview ..................................................................................................... 2
2.4. Project Benefit ..................................................................................................................... 2
2.5. Project Cost and Benefit Summary ...................................................................................... 3
SECTION 3. - PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN ...................................................................... 3
3.1. Project Manager ................................................................................................................... 3
3.2. Project Schedule................................................................................................................... 3
3.3. Project Milestones ................................................................................................................ 4
3.4. Project Resources ................................................................................................................. 4
3.5. Project Communications ...................................................................................................... 4
3.6. Project Risk .......................................................................................................................... 4
SECTION 4. - PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TASKS ............................................................. 4
4.1. Proposed Energy Resource .................................................................................................. 4
4.2. Existing Energy System ....................................................................................................... 5
4.2.1. Basic Configuration of Existing Energy System .......................................................... 5
4.2.2. Existing Energy Resources Used .................................................................................. 5
4.2.3. Existing Energy Market ................................................................................................ 6
4.3. Proposed System .................................................................................................................. 6
4.3.1. System Design .............................................................................................................. 6
4.3.2. Land Ownership ............................................................................................................ 6
4.3.3. Permits .......................................................................................................................... 6
4.3.4. Environmental ............................................................................................................... 6
4.4. Proposed New System Costs (Total Estimated Costs and proposed Revenues) ................. 7
4.4.1. Project Development Cost ........................................................................................... 7
4.4.2. Project Operating and Maintenance Costs .................................................................... 7
4.4.3. Power Purchase/Sale ..................................................................................................... 7
4.4.4. Cost Worksheet ............................................................................................................. 8
4.4.5. Business Plan ................................................................................................................ 8
4.4.6. Analysis and Recommendations ................................................................................... 8
SECTION 5. - PROJECT BENEFIT .............................................................................................. 8
5.1. Estimated Fuel Displacement .............................................................................................. 8
5.2. Estimated Annual Revenue .................................................................................................. 8
5.3. Other Annual Revenue Streams ........................................................................................... 9
5.4. Project Benefit from Direct Cost Savings ............................................................................ 9
5.5. Indirect Project Benefits .................................................................................................... 10
SECTION 6. - GRANT BUDGET ............................................................................................... 11
SECTION 7. - ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION ........................ 12
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008 PAGE 1 OF 19
SECTION 1. - APPLICANT INFORMATION
Name Archangel Green Power, LLC
Type of Entity: Independent Power Producer 1
Mailing/Physical
Address
C/o Jill Reese
P.O. Box 91187
Anchorage, AK 99509-1187
Telephone 232-9648
Fax none
Email jillreese@gmail.com
1.1. Applicant point of contact
Name Jill Reese
Title: Project Manager
Mailing Address C/o Jill Reese
P.O. Box 91187
Anchorage, AK 99509-1187
Telephone 232-9648
Fax none
Email jillreese@gmail.com
1.2. Applicant minimum requirements
As an Applicant, we are: (put an X in the appropriate box)
X1 An electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS
42.05, or
X1 An independent power producer, or
A local government, or
A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities);
Endorsements
Yes 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 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 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.)
1 Under State Law (AS42.05.221), IPPs selling wholesale energy to a public utility are subject to RCA
jurisdiction. If the project is feasible, AGP would submit an application to the RCA to become a certificated
utility.
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008 PAGE 2 OF 19
SECTION 2. - PROJECT SUMMARY
2.1. Project Type
The proposed project is for feasibility study and conceptual design of a run-of-river hydroelectric
project located on Archangel Creek in Hatcher Pass, Alaska. Reconnaissance studies in 2006
identified a potentially viable hydroelectric resource on Archangel Creek.
2.2. Project Description
The Archangel Creek hydroelectric project is a low-impact run-of-river project located in
Hatcher Pass, Alaska. The project will be located on state land in the Archangel Valley. Energy
from the project would be provided into the Matanuska Electric Association (MEA) grid.
Archangel Green Power, LLC (AGP) is the project proponent, and would contribute funding,
own, and operate the project. AGP has already completed reconnaissance studies of the
Archangel Creek resource, and finds that the project warrants further study. Construction would
be completed by qualified contractors and subcontractors selected through a competitive bidding
process.
2.3. Project Budget Overview
AGP has been investigating this project since 2006.
AGP requests FY10 grant funds to contribute to the feasibility and conceptual design phases of
the project. AGP has contributed both capital and in-kind services to the project. A project cost
summary is provided below.
2.4. Project Benefit
The direct financial benefits from the proposed project are summarized below. Assumptions
used to estimate these benefits are discussed in Section 5 of this application.
1. The project will be eligible for Renewable Energy Credits (RECs), which would be
transferred to MEA as part of the public benefit from a grant.
2. The capacity of the project will be made available to the local utility at no cost. This is a
direct benefit to the owners of the local utility, which are the MEA ratepayers.
3. The project will decrease the amount of energy being transmitted from the CEA system to
the Fishhook area. This will reduce line losses over that transmission line, increasing
overall efficiency of both the MEA and CEA transmission and distribution systems.
Project Phase Requested Grant
Funds
Local Match
(Capital and In-
Kind)
Total Funding
RECONNAISSANCE (COMPLETED) $0 $60,000 $60,000
FEASIBILITY & CONCEPTUAL DESIGN (FY 2010) $100,000 $0 $100,000
CONSTRUCTION (FY 2011) $0 $6,260,000 $6,260,000
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $100,000 $6,320,000 $6,420,000
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008 PAGE 3 OF 19
4. The project will pay property taxes to the Matanuska–Susitna Borough, increasing the
local tax base.
The project is also expected to have the following indirect benefits to the public:
1. Increased reliability and stability of the local power grid. Also, increased diversity of
fuel sources for the railbelt grid.
2. Reduced demand for Cook Inlet natural gas. This project will offset natural-gas fired
power generation, reducing natural gas consumption and incrementally extending the life
of the existing Cook Inlet fields, to the benefit of the public that relies upon these fields
for electricity and space heating needs.
3. A significant portion of the project funding will go towards hiring local construction
firms to perform the work, thus boosting the local economy.
4. Local firms are performing the design and development. This benefits Alaska by
promoting local experience and can be used to develop additional future projects thus
providing even more economic development and jobs for Alaskans.
2.5. Project Cost and Benefit Summary
2.1 PROJECT COST AND BENEFIT SUMMARY
Include a summary of your project’s total costs and benefits below.
Total
2.5.1 Total Project Cost
(Including estimates through construction.) $6,420,000
2.5.2 Grant Funds Requested in this application. $100,000
2.5.3 Other Funds to be provided (Project match) $60,000
2.5.4 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.5.2 and 2.5.3) $160,000
2.5.5 Estimated Benefit (Savings) $0
2.5.6 Public Benefit
(See section 5 for discussion) $6,837,061
SECTION 3. - PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
3.1. Project Manager
The Project Manager is Jill Reese. Ms. Reese's qualifications and resume are included in
Attachment A.
No project management assistance from AEA or other government entities is expected for this
project.
3.2. Project Schedule
The project would begin with award of grand funding. With subsequent funding and successful
findings in the feasibility study, construction would be completed within 36 months. More
detailed schedule information is provided in the AEA Statement of Interest in Attachment A.
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008 PAGE 4 OF 19
3.3. Project Milestones
Reconnaissance studies are complete. Feasibility and conceptual design of the system are the
next milestones for the project and will take approximately 12 months to complete. Final design,
power sales contracting, project financing, bidding, and construction are the remaining
milestones for the project.
3.4. Project Resources
Jill Reese is an experienced entrepreneur and business professional with the qualifications
necessary to make the Archangel project a success. AGP will retain Polarconsult Alaska, Inc. to
provide design and other engineering services for this project.
Polarconsult has extensive experience in the design, construction, and operation of small
hydroelectric projects such as the Archangel project.
In the construction phase of the project, AGP will retain bids from multiple vendors/contractors
for construction and major equipment supply. AGP will select vendors/contractors based upon
the best interests of the project.
3.5. Project Communications
AGP will keep AEA apprised of project status by issuing monthly project status reports. The
reports will include a brief (1 page) report including a narrative of current project status,
activities in the current month, problems encountered, and anticipated activities in the following
month. The report will also include a budget status summary.
As warranted, AGP may also advise the AEA grant manager of upcoming events such as field
visits on an as-needed basis.
3.6. Project Risk
AGP's reconnaissance efforts on the project have identified the following project risks:
Regulatory risk. The optimal project configuration would partially dewater some salmon
habitat. The regulatory feasibility of this configuration and other configurations will be
addressed in the feasibility study.
Cost risk. The penstock crosses significant areas of wetlands, requiring special att ention to
construction techniques to control costs and minimize the disturbed area. This will be
addressed in the feasibility study.
SECTION 4. - PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TASKS
4.1. Proposed Energy Resource
AGP has conducted a hydrology study for Archangel Creek quantifying the quantity and
duration of flows in Archangel Creek. This study is based upon a U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) gauge on the Little Susitna River several miles below Archangel Creek that provides
over 50 years of hydrology data for the project basin. Additional hydrology data is necessary to
fully characterize the water resource for the project.
Based on this hydrology, the project would have an installed capacity of 1.75 MW, and an
average annual energy generation of 7,700 MWh.
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008 PAGE 5 OF 19
Alternative energy resources available to this market include all alternatives available to the
railbelt energy grid, which principally include: natural gas, diesel/oil, coal, storage hydro, run-of-
river hydro, hydrokinetic, wind, geothermal, and tidal. These various alternatives are discussed
briefly below.
Natural gas and diesel have high fuel costs, and some exposure to any future carbon taxes.
Coal has a relatively high capital cost. The fuel is relatively inexpensive, however it has
significant exposure to any future carbon taxes. In some areas of the state, including the
Mat-Su Borough, coal has received significant opposition from the public.
Storage hydro, wind, and geothermal have high capital costs.
Wind has a low capacity factor (typically 25-35%, and varying from 0-100% output at any
time), and must be backed by firm stand-by generation.
Tidal and hydrokinetic systems also have high capital costs, and many tidal / hydrokinetic
technologies are not yet mature.
Other run-of-river hydroelectric projects may be competitive with this project on a cost basis,
however this project has very favorable economics on a capital cost per installed kW or kWh
basis.
Overall, this project is competitive with other renewable and nonrenewable generation options
available to the railbelt.
4.2. Existing Energy System
4.2.1. Basic Configuration of Existing Energy System
The project would be connected to the MEA grid, which is interconnected with the railbelt
energy grid. An upgrade of the existing MEA distribution line into Hatcher Pass would be
necessary for the Archangel Project.
4.2.2. Existing Energy Resources Used
MEA purchases wholesale power from Chugach Electric Association (CEA), Alaska Energy
Authority (AEA, Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Plant), and Enerdyne (McRoberts Creek
Hydroelectric Plant). MEA also owns a share of Eklutna Hydroelectric Project.
The project would not significantly impact existing energy infrastructure. The project would
interconnect with the MEA grid at a point where that system is capable of receiving the full
project output. In fact, this project would improve voltage and frequency stability on the MEA
system.
Under normal operating conditions, this project would offset natural gas-fired generation in the
Cook Inlet basin. This would incrementally reduce the demand for Cook Inlet natural gas,
extending the life of the Cook Inlet gas fields. This would directly benefit the residents of the
railbelt, which rely on that gas supply for affordable electricity and space heating. The volume
of natural gas offset by this project is modest compared to overall consumption, but is a
significant benefit to the public.
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008 PAGE 6 OF 19
4.2.3. Existing Energy Market
The existing energy market is the six railbelt utilities, Matanuska Electric Association (MEA),
Chugach Electric Association (CEA), Seward Electric System, Homer Electric Association,
Municipal Light & Power, and Golden Valley Electric Association. MEA is the logical market
for energy from this project, as the project is located within MEA service territory. Sales to
other utilities are possible, although the wheeling costs and complexity in negotiating wheeling
agreements could adversely affect the project’s economic feasibility.
AGP has not started contract negotiations for the sale of energy from the project to MEA. AGP's
power sales contract would likely be similar to contracts currently under negotiation between
MEA and Fishhook Renewable Energy, LLC and South Fork Hydro, LLC, two IPPs on the MEA
system. These IPPs have proposed hydroelectric projects very similar to the Archangel project.
4.3. Proposed System
4.3.1. System Design
The Archangel Project is described in the documentation provided in Attachment F.
4.3.2. Land Ownership
The project is located on state land. The powerhouse could be located on land owned by the
Motherlode Lodge or on adjacent state land, or on state land at a different site, if a different site
is recommended by the feasibility study.
4.3.3. Permits
The following major permits will be required for this project. Some of these permits have
already been applied for and are pending.
Water Use Permit / Water Rights (ADNR)
Land Lease/easement (ADNR)
Fish Habitat Permit (ADFG)
Nationwide Permit 17 for Hydropower Projects – for incidental wetlands fill and
similar matters (Army Corps of Engineers)
Utility certification or exemption (RCA)
Finding of non-jurisdiction (FERC)
Archeological consultation (SHPO)
Mat-Su Borough Building Permits
4.3.4. Environmental
Compatibility of the project with environmental considerations has been reviewed as part of the
permitting process. Key initial findings are summarized below, and discussed in greater detail in
Attachment F.
Fish Habitat. Compatibility with fish habitat would be addressed in the feasibility
study.
Threatened or Endangered Species. No critical habitat is designated in the project
area.
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008 PAGE 7 OF 19
Aesthetics. The project will have negligible if any aesthetic impact. Most of the
project footprint is not readily visible from existing roads or other high traffic areas in
Hatcher Pass.
The penstock would cross several wetlands areas. The penstock would be buried in
these areas, and anchored to prevent flotation. The penstock footprint would be
allowed to revegetate, leaving no permanent change to these wetlands areas. The
project is not expected to fill a significant area of wetlands. Any required wetlands
fill is expected to be permitted under a Corps of Engineers nationwide permit.
No archeological or cultural resources are known to be in the project vicinity. SHPO
will be consulted during the course of the project.
The project is located within DNR's Hatcher Pass Management Plan (HPMP). Which
governs land use and development in the area. The project is consistent with the
HPMP's designated development and usage objectives.
Telecommunications Interference. None.
Aviation Considerations. None.
4.4. Proposed New System Costs (Total Estimated Costs and proposed
Revenues)
4.4.1. Project Development Cost
AGP anticipated that the project would cost approximately $6,420,000. This estimate would be
refined as part of the feasibility study.
4.4.2. Project Operating and Maintenance Costs
Project operation and maintenance costs are projected to be $115,000 annually. AGP would
establish an operating fund at project startup to fund annual O&M expenses. This fund would
likely be capitalized as part of AGP’s project financing and then replenished on a perpetual basis
from operating revenues. The fund would also cover seasonal cash flow fluctuations, such as
reduced power sales revenue during the winter months, when the flow in Archangel Creek is
reduced. This fund would also be used to manage longer-term cash flow issues, such as
weathering drought years and some major maintenance / repair activities.
No grant funding is requested for operations and maintenance costs.
4.4.3. Power Purchase/Sale
The energy from the project would be sold to one of the six railbelt utilities. The most likely
purchaser would be the local utility, MEA.
Current projections are for the avoided cost of energy to MEA to run in the range of 5 to 13
cents/kWh for the life of the contract.
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008 PAGE 8 OF 19
Based upon existing estimates and available information, the estimated rate of return for the
project would be in the range of 2 to 15% annually.
4.4.4. Cost Worksheet
Assumptions used in completing the attached AEA cost worksheet are summarized below.
4. – Project Costs. This cost is the engineer's cost estimate for the project. Bids will be
obtained before construction begins.
5. – Project Benefits. Displaced fuel is based upon assumed reliance on natural gas and
an assumed heat rate for future gas-fired generation. See section 5 for more details on
these assumptions.
6. – Power Purchase Price. Based on contract negotiations for similar projects, power
purchase price will be MEA's avoided cost of energy. This is assumed to be $0.05/kWh.
4.4.5. Business Plan
4.4.6. Analysis and Recommendations
The Archangel Project is a favorable renewable energy project that warrants further study.
SECTION 5. - PROJECT BENEFIT
5.1. Estimated Fuel Displacement
The project would primarily displace Cook Inlet natural gas burned by Chugach Electric for
power generation. Estimated fuel displacement and assumptions used to generate the estimates
are summarized below:
Fuel Type Natural Gas
Annual Displaced Energy 7,700,000 kWh
Displacement 100%
Efficiency of Displaced Generation (Heat Rate) 9,800 btu/kWh
Average Annual Displaced Fuel 75.5 MMCF
Displaced Fuel over 30 Years 2,264 MMCF
Average Market Value of Displaced Fuel (assumed) $7.00/MCF
Annual Value of Displaced Fuel $528,220
Inflation Rate 2%
Discount Rate 5%
Present Value of Displaced Fuel over 30 years $10,353,345
5.2. Estimated Annual Revenue
Estimated annual revenue from power sales and assumptions used to generate the estimates are
summarized below:
Contract Item Proposed Terms
Contract price structure Avoided Cost
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008 PAGE 9 OF 19
Average avoided cost over 30 years (Power Sales Rate) $0.065/kWh
Average Annual Energy Sales 7,700,000 kWh
Average Annual Gross Revenue From Power Sales $500,500
Average Annual Operating Expenses $115,000
Average Annual Net Revenue (before taxes, depreciation, etc.) $385,500
5.3. Other Annual Revenue Streams
AGP anticipates that the project would qualify for low-impact certification under the national
standards established by Green-e2, and likely other certification entities. This would make
energy from the project eligible for green tags/renewable energy certificates (RECs). RECs
currently market in Alaska for $0.02/kWh (Denali Green Tags).
State or federal tax credits may be available to the project over its life. Currently avail able
federal tax credits for renewable energy have very limited eligibility criteria for hydroelectricity,
and this project would likely not qualify. Generally, the volatility in tax credit rules and
eligibility precludes forecasting any benefit from them over the project’s life.
5.4. Project Benefit from Direct Cost Savings
AGP has identified the following direct cost savings resulting from this project.
Green Tag / Renewable Energy Credits (RECs): AGP will transfer title and rights to all
RECs the project may qualify for to MEA. The project meets the certification criteria
established by Green-e for low-impact hydropower. RECs currently market in Alaska
for $0.02/kWh (Denali Green Tags).
Capacity and Energy Rate Reduction: While the Archangel project provides capacity to
the railbelt grid, to expedite contract negotiations, AGP will pursue a non-firm avoided
cost of energy price structure for this project. The lowest avoided cost of energy
available to MEA is likely to be at or equal to CEA's avoided cost for the foreseeable
future, and this is the avoided cost upon which a contract would likely be based. This
price structure offers the project's capacity as a direct benefit to MEA at no cost.
Line Efficiency: The line losses from the project to MEA are less than the line losses
from CEA generation to MEA. The project will increase the efficiency of the MEA and
CEA systems, reducing costs for both utilities.
Annual Property Tax Revenue: The Mat-Su Borough will likely levy property taxes on
the project over the life of the project. These annual property tax payments will
contribute to the tax base and economic activity in the Borough.
These annual public benefits are summarized, and their present value is estimated in the
following table. Assumptions used to generate the estimates are also stated.
2 Green-e National Standard, version 1.5. www.green-e.org.
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008 PAGE 10 OF 19
DIRECT ECONOMIC BENEFITS FROM PROJECT
Green Tags / RECs
Average annual generation: 7,429,000 kWh (assumed)
Market Value: 0.02 $/kWh
Annual Value: $148,580
Term: 30 years
Inflation Rate: 2%
Discount Rate: 5%
Present Value: $2,912,234
Increased Available Capacity
Installed Fishhook capacity 2,000 kW
Capacity Factor 0.44
Capacity Value $153.24 $/kW CEA-MEA Contract
Annual value of capacity $134,851
Term: 30 years
Present Value: $2,643,143
Line Efficiency
Line losses from CEA G&T to MEA 2.809% (CEA Tariff)
Line losses on MEA System: 2.0% (assumed)
Line losses from Fishhook to load center: 1.0% (assumed)
Power throughput avoided by project: 7,429,000 kWh (assumed)
Avoided energy losses (CEA): 208,681 kWh
Avoided energy losses (MEA): 74,290 kWh
Nominal value of energy: 0.065 $/kWh (projected over life)
Average annual savings from reduced energy losses: $18,393
Term: 30 years
Present Value: $360,513
Property Tax Revenue to Mat-Su Borough
Estimated annual tax obligation: $36,794
Term: 30 years
Present Value: $721,171
Clarification of Permitting and Regulatory Processes for IPPs
Estimated AGP costs in non-recurring permitting and regulatory efforts
that are applicable to successor IPP and run-of-river projects $200,000
Present Value: $200,000
TOTAL DIRECT ECONOMIC BENEFITS FROM PROJECT $6,837,061
5.5. Indirect Project Benefits
AGP has identified several indirect public benefits that may result from the project. These are
summarized and briefly discussed below.
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008 PAGE 11 OF 19
1. The project will be connected to the railbelt electrical grid. This provides desirable
operational enhancements to this transmission and distribution system. There is an
increase in stability, reliability, and redundancy. These gains can only be obtained by
providing multiple, distributed generation sources which is generally not feasible with
typical large utility generation facilities. This new generation asset also improves the
diversity of fuel sources powering the grid through the addition of renewable energy.
2. This new generation asset will offset generation from existing natural gas -burning
facilities in Southcentral Alaska. This will reduce consumption of Cook Inlet basin
natural gas. Cook Inlet gas production from existing developed fields is declining, and
shortages are already occurring during periods of peak gas demand. By offsetting natural
gas demand for electricity generation, this project will be extending the useful life of the
Cook Inlet gas fields to the benefit of the public.
3. A significant portion of the project funding will go towards hiring local construction
firms to perform the work, thus providing local jobs and experience in building a
hydroelectric project. Current unemployment in the area is at 7.0% compared with a state
average of 6.0%3.
4. A local firm is performing the design and development. This benefits Alaska by
promoting local experience and can be used to develop additional future projects thus
providing even more economic development and jobs for Alaskans.
SECTION 6. - GRANT BUDGET
The total estimated cost for project development through to commissioning is $6,420,000.
AGP has expended approximately $60,000 in capital and in-kind services on the Archangel
Project to date.
3 August 2008, State of Alaska, Department of Labor and Workforce Development,
http://www.labor.state.ak.us/research/monthlyunemprate/sep08map.pdf
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008 PAGE 12 OF 19
AGP will contribute capital and in-kind services to the project from its private resources to finish
the pre-construction phases of the project. AGP's share of construction funds would be in the
form of loans, from commercial lenders and government lenders, such as AIDEA's Power
Project Fund.
AGP is requesting a grant totaling $100,000 for the feasibility and conceptual design phase of
this project.
The grant budget is summarized on the attached Grant Budget Form.
SECTION 7. - ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION
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 6.
D. An electronic version of the entire application per RFA Section 1.6
E. Governing Body Resolution per RFA Section 1.4
F. Fishhook Design, Hydrology, and Permitting Information
G. 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 Jill Reese
Signature
Title Project Manager
Date November 10, 2008
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008
A. RESUMES OF APPLICANT’S PROJECT MANAGER, KEY STAFF,
PARTNERS, CONSULTANTS, AND SUPPLIERS PER
APPLICATION FORM SECTION 3.1 AND 3.4
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008
B. COST WORKSHEET PER APPLICATION FORM SECTION 4.4.4
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008
C. GRANT BUDGET FORM PER APPLICATION FORM SECTION 6.
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008
D. AN ELECTRONIC VERSION OF THE ENTIRE APPLICATION PER
RFA SECTION 1.6
ARCHANGEL GREEN POWER, LLC RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND GRANT APPLICATION
ARCHANGEL CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
OCTOBER 8, 2008
E. GOVERNING BODY RESOLUTION PER RFA SECTION 1.4