Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNorth Pacific Rim Housing Authority Wind AppALASKA Renewable Energy Fund ��IMYMTN0P" Grant Application Application Forms and Instructions The following forms and instructions are provided for preparing your application for a Renewable Energy Fund Grant. An electronic version of the Request for Applications (RFA) and the forms are available online at htto://www.akeneroyauthority.org/RE Fund.html The following application forms are required to be submitted for a grant recommendation: Grant Application GrantApp.doc Application form in MS Word that includes an outline of Form information required to submit a complete application. Applicants should use the form to assure all information is rovided and attach additional information as required. Application Cost Costworksheet.doc Summary of Cost information that should be addressed Worksheet b a licants in reparing their application, Grant Budget GrantBudget.xls A detailed grant budget that includes a breakdown of Form costs by task and a summary of funds available and requested to complete the work for which funds are being requested. Grant Budget GrantBudgetlnstr.pdf Instructions for completing the above grant budget form. Form Instructions • If you are applying for grants for more than one project, provide separate application forms for each project. • Multiple phases for the same project may be submitted as one application. • If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project, provide a plan and grant budget for completion of each phase. • If some work has already been completed on your project and you are requesting funding for an advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the preceding phases are satisfied and funding for an advanced phase is warranted. • If you have additional information or reports you would like the Authority to consider in reviewing your application, either provide an electronic version of the document with your submission or reference a web link where it can be downloaded or reviewed. REMINDER: • Alaska Energy Authority is subject to the Public Records Act, AS 40.25 and materials submitted to the Authority may be subject to disclosure requirements under the act if no statutory exemptions apply. • All applications received will be posted on the Authority web site after final recommendations are made to the legislature. AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page i of 15 9/2/2008 �AILASKA Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application SECTION 1 —APPLICANT INFORMATION Name (Name o/utility, IPP, argovemment entity submirfing proposal) North Pacific Rim Housing Authority Type of Emily: Regional Housing Authodly Mailing Address Physical Address 8300 King Street 8300 King Street Anchorage, AK 99518 Anchorage, AK 99518 Telephone Fax Email 907-562-1444 907-562,1446 DIen@nprha.com 1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT Name Title Olen Harris Executive Director Melling Address 8300 King Street Anchorage, AK 99518 Telephone Fax Email 907-56241 907-562-1445 .1.n@nprha.com 1.2 APPLICANT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS Please check as appropriate. If you do not to meet the minimum applicant requirements, your application will be rejected. 1.2.1 As an Applicant, we are: (put an X in the appropriate box) 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 X 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 or its board of directors, executive management, or other governing authority. If a No 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 or follow procurement standards that comply with the standards set forth in the grant No agreement. Yes 1.2.4. If awarded the grant, we ran comply with all terms and conditions of the attached or grant form. (Any exceptions should be clearly noted and submitted with the No application.) AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 2 of 15 913/2008 ALASKA Renewable Energy Fund r&z) ENERGY AUTHORITY Grant Application SECTION 2 — PROJECT SUMMARY I 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 AnalysislConceptual 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. NPRHA is proposing a Reconnaissance Project for our dock and harbor facilities in Chenega Bay and Tatitlek. NPRHA has undertaken many aspects of the reconnaissance phase and data gathering for this proposed project and believes that they will justify going forward to a feasibility analysis. That being said, we have not yet been able to quantify the amount of renewable energy resource available for the project or the best combination of resources. Currently, we have a 24 hour a day base load of 750 watt and a regular but periodic additional load of 3-6 kw from high mast lighting. The Renewable Energy Atlas of Alaska indicates that our site may be a fair to good site and we believe with our special load and high energy costs that renewable energy can provide a cost-effective solution to reducing our energy demands. 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 The Project is a Reconnaissance Project to investigate the possibilities of installing supplemental or replacement renewable energy for the lighting needs for the public docks and harbors operated by NPRHA in Tatitlek and Chenega Bay, Alaska. It will include quantifying the renewable energy resource available by erecting a monitoring tower, completing other items of the reconnaissance phase including consolidating our data into this process, completing environmental screening, reviewing system benefits, proposing a system design, other phase requirements and lastly the analysis and recommendations. 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. NPRHA has developed this total budget on the assumption that a system will be built of $315,000 for all phases of the project. We have consulted with our construction manager, electrical engineer, and a renewable energy wind designer to define the costs for a moderate system in a remote but connected village. Both villages have access via the Alaska Marine Highway which will mitigate costs to some degree. NPRHA assumes that both projects will be viable and jointly administered and have put in a single administrative fee. Other than that sole cost, NPRHA anticipate that the cost will be similar for both villages, but that Chenega Bay will have a final cost of approximately 10% higher due to higher transportation costs. AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 3 of 15 9/3/2008 /&W� ALASKA Renewable Energy Fund MED ENERGY AUTHORITY Grant Application 2.4 PROJECT BENEFIT Bdefy discuss the financial benefits that will result from this project, including an estimate of economic beneflts(such as reduced fuel costs) and a description of other benefits to the Alaskan public. NPRHA has run a series of analysis based upon a low (electric), mid range —fuel, and high range (electric) savings for this project. All analysis assume that this will have a fairly high cost to develop per kilowatt because we are installing 2 small systems at separate remote sites. We have special uses that can be designed for and included in capital costs and we have done that in our analysis. Currently NPRHA purchases all of our electricity from the local utilities. Sometimes, our additional load may be a factor in requiring an additional winter fuel delivery to the village which is a more expense delivery. Our primary usage is a wintertime usage and we account for approximately a % fill of the utility tank in Tatitlek. By removing our load we will make the local utility more reliable. The dock load is also a large load that come on all at once and only runs for a short period of time but requires the local utility to maintain the capacity to provide us with power. By removing our large sporadic load, the local utility may be able to operate their generator more efficiently. Current user fees do not cover all of the utility costs of the high mast lighting which we are required to provide free of charge to the Alaska Marine Highway System. These docks also serve as the major emergency oil spill response docks for Prince William Sound. Fortunately, they have not been needed, but that means that no funds are generated for their maintenance and operation. Renewable Energy Systems will help NPRHA maintain these docks as viable public services for Prince William Sound and the Communities of Tatitlek and Chenega Bay. Our estimates of cost saving vary from a low of $333,850.00 based on minimal rate and usage increases. To a more realistic $353,267.00 based on fuel savings for the wind system over twenty years, to our high estimate based on historic rate and use increases and projecting them forward at 8% a year for a savings of $506,870.00. 2.6 PROJECT COST AND BENEFIT SUMARY Include a summary of your project's total costs and benefits below. 2.5.1 Total Project Cost $313,000 (including estimates through construction. 2.5.2 Grant Funds Requested in this application. $30,500 2.5.3 Other Funds to be provided (Project match) $15,000 2.5.4 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.6.2 and 2.5.3) $45,500 2.6.5 Estimated Benefit (Savings) $333,860 2.5.6 Public Benefit (if you can calculate the benefit in terms of $ To be determined during dollars please provide that number here and explain how reconnaissance relating you calculated that number in your application.) to keeping the docks operational AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 15 9/3/2008 /rip ALASKA Renewable Energy Fund 40C) ENERGY AUTHORITY Grant Application 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. The project manager for the project for NPRHA will be Larry Heuer with Heuer Contracting, NPRHA competitively procured his project management services and has successfully completed many housing, community facility, and infrastructure projects within the Chugach Region utilizing our current project management structure. Please see the attached resume for Mr. Heuer. NPRHA will competitively procure a qualified firm to complete the reconnaissance study for the project and structure the contract so that if the resources are determined to be available the same firm will complete the feasibility study, final design and engineering, and project bidding process for the construction phase. The construction contractor will be procured utilizing the final design documents under a competitive bidding process and NPRHA, in conjunction with Heuer Contracting and the design firm, will complete the contract management functions during construction. 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.) Please see the attached detailed project schedule, project is anticipated to start soon after grant awards and complete Phase I in January 2010 with construction in early 2011. 3.3 Project Milestones Define key tasks and decision points in your project and a schedule for achieving them. Milestone 1— Project Reconnaissance to determine if sufficient wind resources are present Milestone 2 — Completion of Feasibility Analysis Milestone 3 - Completion of project design and permitting Milestone 4 — Completion of construction of project Milestone 5 — Project begins operation 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 AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 5 of 15 9/3/2008 Renewable Energy Fund rWALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY Grant Application for known, key personnel, contractors, and suppliers as an attachment to your application. NPRHA is very experienced with successfully completing capital projects in the Chugach region and will use our existing project management process for completion of this project. The project will be overseen by Olen Harris, NPRHA's Executive Director, with contracted project management services provided by Heuer Contracting. This method has been used for a large variety of projects by NPRHA for many years and has a proven track record of delivering high quality projects on time and within the project budget. Barry Moring, NPRHA's Chief Financial Officer, will oversee all of the financial, administrative, and grant compliance aspects of the project. Please see attached summary and references for Mr. Harris, Mr. Heuer, and Mr. Moring. The engineering and construction contractors for the project will be selected through a competitive procurement process that is fully compliant with all Federal and State of Alaska procurement requirements. 3.5 Project Communications Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status. NPRHA and Heuer Contracting will hold regular project meetings with the contractor selected to completed the reconnaissance study to keep informed on the status of the work being performed and the contractor will be required to submit monthly written reports on the progress of the study, similar methods will be utilized during the feasibility phase, final design and permitting phase, and construction phase but will become more frequent since these phases should progress quickly due to the relatively small size of the project. NPRHA will regularly communicate with Alaska Energy Authority during the entire life of the project, the Authority will be updated on a regular basis with the frequency determined by the wishes of the Authority and phase of the project. NPRHA will provide monthly updates of our progress in achieving project milestones and meet with the Authority as milestones are met and the projects is ready to move into a new phase. 3.6 Project Risk Discuss potential problems and how you would address them. The only risk identified for this project is the risk that there is not sufficient renewable resources to provide the power, based on our information and AEA information from the Regional Economic Wind Development data this does not appear to be a significant risk for a project of this size. If this does become an issue NPRHA will work with AEA and alternative energy firms to determine if there is another renewable resource or combination of renewable resources that would still make financial sense to pursue for the facilities. SECTION 4 — PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TASKS • Tell us what the project is and how you will meet the requirements outlined in Section 2 of AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 6 of 15 9/3/2008 /©aim ALASKA Renewable Energy Fund GEE) ENERGY AUTHORITY Grant Application 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. • 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 extentlamount 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. The dock sites at both Chenega Bay and Tatitlek are direct marine exposure sites with exposed and cleared upland areas owned by NPRHA. We anticipate that these sites will have sufficient wind resources for our application. NPRHA anticipates either a 5 or 7.5 kw wind generator with a large battery bank determined by the wind study. During the period of the wind study, we will also look at the possibility of solar or tidal/wave resources as both of these site have unobstructed southern exposure and are on the water. The amount of overcast days and snowfall may prohibit solar in Chenega Bay and the small scale may make tidal and wave unfeasible in both locations. The Reconnaissance Phase should resolve most of those unanswered questions. NPRHA has a very low steady state demand and an occasion much higher demand. Our preliminary study has found that there are some wind generators and inverter combinations that will work at low wind speeds and generate minor power sufficient for or demand and when higher winds come they would be able to either directly power the main lights or charge the battery banks. NPRHA anticipates that they would still have to remain intertied to the village power system in case of extended no or low wind conditions or extended need for the high mast light such as a major oil spill. This is part of our normal public function and it will be necessary for us to be able to operate in all conditions. A wind system could provide significant saving to our normal operations, help us to keep the docks operations and help to provide emergency lighting at the docks by the battery system for the marine and navigational lighting. 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. NPRHA currently purchases power for all of the facilities from the communities' local electric utility, both Chenega and Tatitlek rely on diesel fired generator systems to provide all of the power for each community. Currently commercial power rates for Chenega Bay are $.435/KWH and rates for Tatitlek are $.76/KWH, due to the type of facilities NPRHA is not able to participate in Power Cost Equalization to offset any of the energy costs. Residential rates subject to Power Cost Equalization funding are $.46 in Tatitlek and $.42 in Chenega Bay. AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 7 of 15 9/3/2008 /&�ALASKA Renewable Energy Fund GK:::) ENERGY AUTHORITY Grant Application 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. NPRHA has used Tatitlek as our primary example in this application, and will continue to do so for convenience and consistency. Simply, both Chenega Bay and Tatitlek have very similar situations and it is easier to just use one and say the other is for all intents identical. We will continue that here. Power is generated by a set of 3 Diesel generators that have been rebuilt about 4 times. There is 1 smaller 125 kw unit and 2 larger 250 kw generators. Phase loading and power requirements at the docks often require the operations to shift from the 125 kw to the 250 kw in its less efficient 50 to 55% operations. This is why the burn rate average was so poor in the spreadsheet. Our docks are the only know high draw operations in the community and the only units which tend to unbalance the load in the community and require the switch to the larger unit then for an overall greater demand. All units run on diesel and are designed for waste heat recovery which is not yet utilized. The situation is similar in Chenega Bay, except that their gensets are in poorer condition and are scheduled for replacement which should increase their operational efficiency. 4.2.3 Existing Energy Market Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy customers. Currently NPRHA purchases all of our electricity from the local utilities. Sometimes, our additional load may be a factor in requiring an additional winter fuel delivery to the village which is a more expense delivery. Our primary usage is a wintertime usage and we account for approximately a % fill of the utility tank in Tatitlek. By removing our load we will make the local utility more reliable. The dock load is also a large load that come on all at once and only runs for a short period of time but requires the local utility to maintain the capacity to provide us with power. By removing our large sporadic load, the local utility may be able to operate their generator more efficiently. It is possible that local utilities may be able to reduce rates or maintain their rates at their current level for longer periods of time if we remove our load. AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 8 of 15 9/3/2008 /&E) ALASKA Renewable Energy Fund 4WD ENERGY AUTHORITY Grant Application 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 NPRHA believes that similar systems will be determined as the most appropriate for both community dock facilities. Phase I of course is the reconnaissance phase which we are applying for to help make this determination. We believe that it will be a 5 or 7.5 kw system depending on the wind and if it is cheaper to increase battery storage for the high mast lighting load. The system should have a low speed generating starting speed to meet our low level steady state demand at most times to minimize battery cycles. We anticipate that we will install more energy efficient LED marine navigational lights and High Mast Obstruction Lights to reduce our steady state load. We may also be able to reduce the size of our high mast lighting from 6 - 1000 watt to 6-750 watt lights or even 6-600 watt units, which would cut down our peak load by 25% to 40% which would greatly reduce the size of our battery storage and inverter system. Because we serve a public function and also serve as an emergency facility, we need the capacity to function during all emergencies. The battery system will enhance that ability as long as an intertie to the village power remains, we believe that will be a manual intertie, as the navigational lighting could run for months on the battery system. That is not true of the high mast lighting. The batteries will need to be kept in a conditioned house or storage. This would be an insulated, warm space with ventilation for gases and controlled to insure that overheating did not occur. Any excess generation capacity would either be intertied to the village grid or used as electric heat to a nearby building. There is a nearby building in each community. We believe the wind generators would sit on 100' towers on our (NPRHA's own) upland site adjacent to the dock and close to the power intertie. Power will be provide directly from the wind generator to the battery/ inverter building where it will either go directly to power the dock usage or be combined to power the steady state and to charge the batteries, depending on battery state. We anticipate that the tower and battery building will site within 200' of the main power panel serving the docks presently, where the intertie will would be done. NPRHA will have to perform a permit screening and anticipate that at a minimum a coastal zone permit will be required for this project. However, both of these sites have gone through full permitting when they were constructed as docks including their 100' high mast lighting so all issues including airport clearances were addressed. Unless, the towers have to be moved off our site, we do not anticipate any permit or regulatory problems other than just going through the process. We have been through the process numerous times before. We do not believe there are any special bird related nesting or other special avian issues in the immediate areas of these towers. AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 9 of 15 9/3/2008 /&�ALASKA Renewable Energy Fund GK:::) ENERGY AUTHORITY Grant Application 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. North Pacific Rim Housing Authority owns all of the land and facilities where the equipment will be installed, no third party property will need to be crossed to complete the system. 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 The required permits will be determined during the feasibility phase of the project when the environmental assessment is completed, it is anticipated that the permits required will be minimal due to the size of the systems and fact that a full environmental assessment was completed when the facilities were constructed in 1994. The existing facilities also have mast lighting that is mounted on a 100' tower, the same height as the proposed project. 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 specles • 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 environmental assessment process will be completed in the next phase of the project when final system parameters and known, it is anticipated that the environmental review will not result in any major barriers or substantial additional costs since the site was subject to a full environmental assessment when the dock facilities were constructed and each facility has mast lighting that is mounted on 100' towers, the same height as the proposed project. The facilities are also located away from the residential and light commercial areas of each community and should not detract from the scenic beauty of each community since they will be located in the industrial areas of the community. 4.4 Proposed New System Costs (Total Estimated Costs and proposed Revenues) AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 10 of 15 9/3/2008 Renewable Energy Fund rWALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY Grant Application 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. The total anticipated costs for this project are estimated to be $313,000 based on discussions and information provided by an electrical engineering firm and an experienced wind energy contractor. Costs for this phase are anticipated to be $45,500; with requested grant funding for this phase of the project is $30,500 with NPRHA providing $15,000 in matching funding which includes $11,500 in cash and $3,500 in direct administrative expenses. The projected capital costs of the renewable energy system are anticipated to be $211,000 with an additional $102,000 in costs related to reconnaissance, feasibility analysis, design, and permitting work. 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 This application is for the reconnaissance phase of the project to determine if there are sufficient resources and what type of system will best meet the needs of the facilities. When final system type and requirements are known operation and maintenance costs will be developed and provided for out of user fees and tariffs collected at the facilities, no grant funds are requested for 0&M costs for the project. 4.4.3 Power Purchase/Sale The power purchase/sale information should include the following: • Identification of potential power buyer(s)/customer(s) • Potential power purchase/sales price - at a minimum indicate a price range • Proposed rate of return from grant -funded project NPRHA will be the sole customer for the power and will use all of the power generated for navigational and area lighting at the facilities. Funding will be set aside annually based on the operation and maintenance plan for the system when final system design and operation and renewal costs are known. 4.4.4 Cost Worksheet AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 11 of 15 9/3/2008 raA L A S M Renewable Energy Fund w-, E14ERGYAUTHORITY Grant Application Complete the cost worksheet form which provides summary information that will be considered in evaluating the project. Download the form, complete it, and submit it as an attachment. Document any conditions or .sources your numbers are based on here. See Attached Cost Worksheet and excel spreadsheet used to develop the cost data based upon various assumptions there are 4 sheets in the excel spreadsheet. 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. NPRHA will be the owner and operator of the equipment and will operate and maintain the equipment in conjunction with the other facilities and housing stock that we own and maintain in each community. Facility sustainability will be greatly improved since currently the annual costs of electricity at each facility equals or exceeds the user fees and tariff amounts generated since the principal user of the facilities, the Alaska Marine Highway System, does not pay any docking fees to use the facilities as a condition of the transfer agreement when the facilities were transferred from the State to NPRHA. 4.4.6 Analysis and Recommendations Provide information about the economic analysis and the proposed project. Discuss your recommendation for additional project development work. NPRHA reviewed the project under several differing economic outlooks. We projected what had happened in the past and used an 8% increase in rates and usage of the main dock lighting. This projection produced the highest saving potential. We believe that this 8% rate over the full 20 year period will not maintain, but that the rate will likely be less. Prince William Sound traffic is definitely increasing and that is a major question for our operations as it effects the high mast lighting demand in the late fall, early spring and winter. This could be a major factor and is the most difficult to project into the future. We have used a 6% rate increase and a 6% usage increase in the winter month lighting growth. NPRHA believes this is the minimum that can be reasonably expected and is reflected in our low savings projection. We have also done a minimal fuel saving project for the village based on a more efficient generator operation and reduced demand from the dock and have a mid -range of approximately $353,267.00 this is really our low energy savings and some additional efficiency saving for the village based on fuel savings. In other words, We believe that a rough quantification of other benefits would be approximately $20,000.00 based upon our low savings estimate. Additional project development work would be to use any wind study information to see if it would be viable for the Village of Tatitlek or Chenega Bay to supplement their power from a lower hill site. The Village is not in a prime wind site and if not for the special power profile of AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 12 of 15 9/3/2008 ra&ALASM Renewable Energy Fund ENERGY AUTHORMY Grant Application NPRHA's power usage, it would not normally be a prime candidate for wind power. We believe that with our power use profile, energy cost, public benefit and the state of current technology, these two wind sites will prove cost effective within a reasonable payback period while also providing additional public benefit. The study may also provide recommendations for resizing of the generator's or changing the pattern of power generation to reduce village operating costs when this sporadic load is removed. SECTION r 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 The average amount of fuel displacement for the communities is expected to grow over the lifetime of the project as dock traffic continues to grow with tourism and commercial traffic. From annual fuel displacement of approximately 1,800 gallons and $7,700.00 to 2,570 gallons and $34,300.00 in 2030 at the end of the analysis period for a total our total mid -range cost savings of $353,267.00, or we would be looking at an avoided cost of purchased electricity form the communities of $333,850.00. NPRHA is not eligible for tax credits, green tag sales nor do we believe we are eligible for energy subsidies but that is part of this phase study. The benefits were discussed in other areas of this application but are briefly reiterated here. First is the increased operation safety and reliability of the ferry and oil spill response docks; Second is NPRHA fiscal ability to be able to keep these facilities functional at all; Third is the reduced load on the village generator and the potential for lower village utility rates; Fourth is increased reliability on the navigational lighting; fifth is the reduced carbon footprint from green power at the dock side; sixth, this will act as a demonstration to other harbor facilities as a way to reduce operational costs and environmental impacts for these sites; Be a visual demonstration, site accessible to travelers on the Alaska Marine Highway System traveling in Prince William Sound demonstrating the viability of alternative and renewable energy in Alaska. 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 of budget costs by tasks using the form - AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 13 of 15 9/3/2008 / AA ASK � Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application NPRHA estimates that the total project budget will be $313,000, with NPRHA providing $15,000 of matching funds for the project. NPRHA will also be investing approximately $10,000 in energy efficiency upgrades in conjunction with the project to make the navigation and area lighting at the facilities as energy efficient as possible. NPRHA will be utilizing fund balance from our Docks fund to provide our portion of the funding. AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 14 of 15 9/3/2008 ALS AKA Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application SECTION 7— ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION AND CERTIFICATION SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS WITH YOUR APPLICATION: A. Resumes of Applicant's Project Manager, key staff, partners, consultants, and suppliers per application form Section 3.1 and 3.4 B. Cost Worksheet per application form Section 4.4.4 C. Grant Budget Form per application form Section 6. D. An electronic version of the entire application per RFA Section 1.6 E. Governing Body Resolution per RFA Section 1.4 Enclose a copy of the resolution or other formal action taken by the applicant's governing body or management that: - authorizes this application for project funding at the match amounts indicated in the application - authorizes the individual named as point of contact to represent the applicant for purposes of this application - states the applicant is in compliance with all federal state, and local, laws Including existing credit and federal tax obligations. F. CERTIFICATION The undersigned certifies that this application for a renewable energy grant is truthful and correct; and that the applicant is in compliance with, and will continue to comply with, all federal and state laws including existing credit and federal tax obligations. Print Name Olen Harris Signature �( Title Executive Director Date 11110/2008 AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 15 of 15 9/3/2008 /ZUSALASKA Renewable Energy Fund GED ENERGY AUTHORITY Application Cost Worksheet Please note that some gelds 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. To be determined in this reconnaissance phase of project. 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' grid, leave this section blank) NPRHA currently gets all of our dock and harbor power from the local village utilities. For instance in Tatitlek, the electric rate is .76 a kwh, we are only looking to replace a small portion of the local power, that which supplies the dock and harbor power because of the unique power usage pattern, we believe that a wind system can be incorporated with a reasonable payback period. We have estimated the information based on a combined usage fro both villages and average savings and usages. i. Number of generators/boilers/other ii. Rated capacity of generators/boilers/other iii. Generator/boilers/other type iv. Age of generators/boilers/other v. Efficiency of generators/boilers/other 3 in Tatitlek, 3 in Chenega Bay Varies in each community combination of 150 and 125 KW Gensets Diesel Varies — some rebuilt 5 years ago, some 2 years ago To be determined in this reconnaissance phase of project. Reflected in the current $.76kwh rate. b) Annual OW cost (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank) i. Annual OW cost for labor To be determined in this reconnaissance phase of project. Reflected in the current $.76kwh rate. ii. Annual O&M cost for non -labor To be determined in this reconnaissance phase of project. Reflected in the current $.76kwh rate. c) Annual electricity production and fuel usage (fill in as applicable) (if system is part of the Railbelt grid, leave this section blank) 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 9126108 Page 1 'GEED ALASKA Renewable Energy Fund � ENERGY AUTHORITY i. Electricity [kWh] Approx 20,000 kwh consumption ii. Fuel usage Diesel [gal] 2050 gallons Other Approx 200 gallons for transport fuel 10 % iii. Peak Load 6.8kwh at dock iv. Average Load 1.2 kwh v. Minimum Load .75 kwh vi. Efficiency High pressure sodium high mast lighting vii. Future trends Project a 6% increase in both traffic (lighting needs and rate increases annually) d) Annual heating fuel usage (fill in as applicable) i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu] NIA ii. Electricity [kWh] NIA iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu]NIA iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu] NIA v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] NIA vi. Other NIA a) Installed capacity 5 kw wind generator at both Tatitlek and Chenega Bay b) Annual renewable electricity generation i. Diesel [gal or MMBtu] Approx 2050 gallon saved by 2020 ii. Electricity [kWh] iii. Propane [gal or MMBtu] iv. Coal [tons or MMBtu] v. Wood [cords, green tons, dry tons] vi. Other a) Total capital cost of new system $211,000 b) Development cost $313,000 c) Annual O&M cost of new system To be determined by final system design d) Annual fuel cost 5. Project Benefits RFA AEA 09-004 Application Cost Worksheet revised 9126108 Page 2 ALASKA Renewable Energy Fund ENERGY AUTHORITY a) Amount of fuel displaced for i. Electricity 38,200 gallons over 20 years ii. Heat NIA but some excess may be used for the mariculture building iii. Transportation 3820 gallons over 20 years b) Price of displaced fuel $353,267.00 c) Other economic benefits To be determined during the reconnaissance phase. one primary benefit will be the ability to kept the public ferry terminal and oil spill response dock operation and available for emergency response d) Amount of Alaska public benefits $40,000 above cost a) Price for power purchase/sale NIA 7. Project Analysis a) Basic Economic Analysis Project benefit/cost ratio Low ratio 1.066 on our lowest project for 20 years and highest costs, capital costs to mid -range savings = 1.67, capital costs to high -range savings = 2.40 Payback Total high cost payback lowest increased in other energy costs projection 18.75 years, capital cost for midrange saving = 11.94 years, and capital costs to high savings = 8.325 years RFA AEA 09-004 Application Cost Worksheet revised 9126108 Page 3 Average fuel used to offset wind generation at docks 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 kwh used per community in 2011 8530 8647 8770 8901 9040 9187 9343 9508 9683 total per both communities 17060 17294 17540 17802 18080 18374 18686 19016 19366 current better bum rate per kwh .094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 total fuel saving in gallons 1,604 1,626 1,649 1.673 1,700 1,727 1,756 1,788 1,820 cost per gallon inflated @ 6% 4.40 4.66 4.94 5.24 5.55 5.89 6.24 6.62 7.01 total energy fuel cost 7,056.02 7,581.97 8,151.21 8,769.34 9,440.66 10,169.83 10.963.07 11,826.08 12,766.37 fuel to transport fuel at 10% 160 163 165 167 170 173 176 179 182 cost of fuel to transport fuel 705.60 758.20 815.12 876.93 944.07 1,016.98 1,096.31 1,182.61 1,276.64 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 9869 10066 10274 10496 10730 10979 11242 11521 11817 12131 12464 19738 20132 20548 20992 21460 21958 22484 23042 23634 24262 24928 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 0.094 1,855 1,892 1,932 1,973 2,017 2,064 2,113 2,166 2,222 2,281 2,343 38,201 7.43 7.88 8.35 8.85 9.38 9.95 10.54 11.18 11.85 12.56 13.31 13,792.29 14,911.66 16,132.98 17,470.48 18,931.56 20,533.14 22,286.51 24,209.99 26,321.91 28,642.62 31,194.60 321,152.28 186 189 193 197 202 206 211 217 222 228 234 3,820 1,379.23 1,491.17 1,613.30 1,747.05 1,893.16 2,053.31 2,228.65 2,421.00 2,632.19 2,864.26 3,119.46 32,115.23 42,021 353,267.51 Alaska Energy Authority - Renewable Energy Fund - - BUDGET INFORMATION -- BUDGET SUMMARY: Local Match .Local Match 1Mfilestone or Task Federal Funds State Funds Funds (Cash) ';Funds (in -Kind) Other:Funds .TOTALS 1. Reconnaissance $30,500.00 $15,000.00 $45,500.00 _ --- - 2. Feasibility Study - -- _.. -- - - $26,500.00 $26,$OQ:00 3. Final Desing and Permitting $30,000.00 $30,000.00 _$211,000.00 $0.00 Total $313,000.00 Milestone # or Task # BUDGET CATAGORIES: 1 2 3 4 5 6 TOTALS ��.. ,Duet Labor andSenefits 0 00; Travel, Meals, or Per Diem $0.00 - - $30a000 00': Supplies _ $0 00 - - -- - - Contractual Services _ - - -- $12,000.00 $26,500.00 $30,000.00 $32,000.00. lOQ500 00' Construction Services $161,000.00 $161,000.00 Other Direct Costs _ - 3 500.00 _ 18 0.00 00 $21,500:00 TOTAL DIRECT CHARGES $45,500.00 $26,500.00 $30,000.00 $211,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $313,000.00 RFA AEA09-004 Budget Form ALASKA Renewable Energy Fund / �; ENERGY AMORM Grant Budget Instructions Information concerning the proposed budget needs to be provided on the attached form. The Budget Summary (upper portion of the form) is to provide information on the funding for the entire project by tasks. The applicant is to provide amounts and identify the source of all funds that will be used to complete this project. The tasks should represent major units of work that will need to be completed on the project. At a minimum they should represent the phases discussed in the application (Reconnaissance, Feasibility, Design and Permitting, or Construction). Tasks may also represent subtasks under a specific phase. For example, under Conceptual Design phase, a separate permitting task could be noted. The Budget Categories (lower portion of the form) is to provide specific budget information for the grant funds being applied for. Budget information for the other funds to be used to complete the project need only be provided if that additional information is currently available. Allowable costs for a grant include all reasonable and ordinary costs for direct labor and benefits, travel, equipment, supplies, contractual services, construction services, and other direct costs identified that are necessary for and incurred as a direct result of the project. A cost is reasonable and ordinary if, in its nature or amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the costs. 1. Allowable Cost Allowable costs are only those costs that are directly related to those activities necessary for the completion of the proposed project. The categories of costs and additional limits or restrictions are listed below: a. Direct Labor and Benefits Include salaries, wages, and employee benefits of the Applicant's employees for that portion of those costs that will be attributable to the time actually devoted by each employee to, and necessary for the project. Direct labor costs do not include bonuses, stock options, other payments above base compensation and employee benefits, severance payments or other termination allowances paid to the Applicant's employees. b. Travel, Meals, or Per Diem Include reasonable travel expenses necessary for the Project. These include necessary transportation and meal expenses or per diem of Applicant employees for which expenses the employees are reimbursed under the Applicant's standard written operating practice for travel and per diem; or, the current State of Alaska Administrative Manual for employee travel. c. Equipment Include costs of acquiring, transporting, leasing, installing, operating, and maintaining equipment necessary for the Project, including sales and use taxes. Subject to prior approval of the Authority's Project Manager, costs or expenses necessary to repair or replace equipment damage or losses incurred in performance of work under a grant may be allowed. However, damage or losses that result from the Applicant's RFA AEA09-004 Grant Budget Instructions Page 1 of 4 r&'� ALASKA Renewable Energy Fund employees, officer's, or contractor's gross negligence, willful misconduct, or criminal conduct will not be allowed. d. Supplies Include costs of material, office expenses, communications, computers, and supplies purchased or leased by the Applicant necessary for the project. e. Contractual Services Include the Applicant's cost of contract services necessary for the Project. Services may include costs of contract feasibility studies, project management services, engineering and design, environmental studies, field studies, and surveys for the project as well as costs incurred to comply with ecological, environmental, and health and safety laws. f. Construction Services For construction projects this includes the Applicant's cost for construction contracts, labor, equipment, materials, insurance, bonding, and transportation necessary for the project. Work performed by the Applicant's employees during construction may be budgeted under direct labor and benefits, project management or engineering. Major equipment purchases made by the Applicant may be budgeted under equipment. g. Other Direct Costs In addition to the above the following expenses necessary for the project may be allowed. • Net insurance premiums paid for insurance required for the grant project; • Costs of permits and licenses for the grant project; • Non -litigation legal costs for the project directly relating to the activities (in this paragraph, "non -litigation legal costs" includes expenses for the Applicant's legal staff and outside legal counsel performing non -litigation legal services); • Office lease/rental payments; • Other direct costs for the project directly relating to the activities and identified in the grant documents; and/or • Land or other real property or reasonable and ordinary costs related to interests in land including easements, right-of-ways, or other defined interests. The Applicant is reminded to include sufficient funds for the management of the project, as the Authority may terminate the grant or assume the project management responsibilities if it is determined by the Authority that the Applicant is not providing adequate project management on its own. 2. Specific Expenditures Not Allowed Ineligible expenditures include costs for overhead, lobbying, entertainment, alcohol, litigation, payments for civil or criminal restitution, judgments, interest on judgments, penalties, fines, costs not necessary for and directly related to the grant project, or any costs incurred before the beginning date of the grant. This is not intended to be a complete list of all ineligible expenditures. Overhead costs described in this section include: salaries, wages, applicable employee benefits, and business -related expenses of the Applicant's employees performing functions not directly related to the grant project; RFA AEA09-004 Grant Budget Instructions Page 2 of 4 ALASM Renewable Energy Fund • office and other expenses not directly related to the grant project; and • costs and expenses of administration, accounting, human resources, training, property and income taxes, entertainment, self-insurance, and warehousing. 3. Match and Cost Sharing If the Applicant is providing a match, it is should be detailed either as a specific dollar amount or as a percentage of the total project budget. The type and amount of matching contributions should be discussed in the application under section two. Cost sharing or matching is that portion of the Project costs not borne by the Authority. The Authority will accept all contributions, including cash and in -kind, as part of the Applicants' cost sharing or matching when such contributions meet the following criteria: • Are provided for in the Project budget; • Are verifiable from the Applicant's records; • Third party costing sharing contributions are verifiable (with a letter of intent or similar document); • Are not included as contributions for another state or federally assisted project or program (i.e., the same funds cannot be counted as match for more than one program); • Are necessary and reasonable for proper and efficient accomplishment of the Project or program objectives; • Are allowable costs; • Are not paid by the State or federal government under another award, except for authorized by the State or federal statute to be used for cost sharing or matching; • Must be incurred within the grant eligible time period. Any match proposed with the application will be required in the Grant award and the Grantee will be required to document the use of the proposed matching funds or in -kind contributions with their request for reimbursement. 4. Valuing In -Kind Support as Match If the Applicant chooses to use in -kind support as some; or, its entire match, the values of those contributions will be reviewed by the Authority at the time the budget is approved. The values will be determined as follows: • The value of real property will be the current fair market value as determined by an independent third party or a valuation that is mutually agreed to by the Authority and the Applicant and approved in the grant budget. The value assessed to Applicant equipment or supplies will not exceed the fair market value of the equipment or supplies at the time the grant is approved or amended. • Equipment usage will be valued based on approved usage rates that are determined in accordance with the usual accounting policies of the recipient or the rates for equipment that would be charged if procured through a competitive process. Rates paid will not exceed the fair market value of the equipment if purchased. RFA AEA09-004 Grant Budget Instructions Page 3 of 4 41E,7_1 ENERGY AUTHORITY Renewable Energy Fund • Rates for donated personal services will be based on rates paid for similar work and skill level in the recipient's organization. If the required skills are not found in the recipient organization, rates will be based on rates paid for similar work in the labor market. Fringe benefits that are reasonable, allowable, and allocable may be included in the valuation. Transportation and lodging provided by the Applicant for non -local labor will not exceed the commercial rates that may be available within the community or region. 5. Grant Disbursements Applicants are reminded that they must request disbursement of grant funds in the form and format required by the Authority with appropriate back-up documentation and certifications. This format will be provided by the Authority. The back-up documentation must demonstrate the total costs incurred are allowable, and reflect the amount being billed. Documentation must include: • A summary of direct labor costs • Travel and per diem reimbursement documentation • Contractor or vendor pay requests • Invoices Timesheets or check copies to document proof of payment must be available for audit purposes at the Applicants place of business. Payment of grant funds will be subject to the Applicant complying with its matching contribution requirements of the proposed grant. RFA AEA09-004 Grant Budget Instructions Page 4 of 4 NPRHA Renewable Energy Grant Program Draft Budget Phase Reconnaissance NPRHA admin Define renewable energy resource by installing monitoring tower and monitoring equipment. Includes transportation, erection, monitoring and demob Review existing systems, Project benefits, Energy pruchase sales, Land ownership„ permits, Envirionmental screening Proposed system design, Proposed system cost, Analysis and recommendations Phase II Feasibility NPRHA anticipates that if the reconnaissance confirms our plans that the feasibility phase will be straight forward as NPRHA owns the property or has long term leases and all or the property has previously gone through an envirionmental assessment process which we can use for documentationfor this process. Phase III Final Design & Permitting NPRHA again sees this as a small system with minimal engineering but the normal permiting process and business plan. We have allocated some costs between the villages Tatitlek Chenega Bay 3,500 14,000 16,000 30,000 3,500 3,500 7,000 2,500 2,500 5,000 45,500 Tatitlek Chenega Bay 12,500 14,000 26,500 Tatitlek Chenega Bay 14,000 16,000 30,000 Phase IV Construction, Commissioning and Reporting Tatitlek Chenega Bay System construction and intertie with current equipment 62,000 68,000 130,000 Existing system integration 6,000 8,000 14,000 Proposed System Design 8,500 8,500 17,000 Construction plan and schedule, permits, monitoring, misc reports 8,500 9,500 18,000 Analysis and recommendations 6,500 7,500 14,000 NPRHA Admin 8,500 9,500 18,000 211,000 Total grant costs 313,000 NOV-07-200B 11:01 Port Graham Village 907 284 2222 P.001i001 NORTH PACIFIC RIM HOUSING AUTHORITY RESOLUTION 0 09-06 ENTITLED: APPROVAL OF SUBMISSION OF GRANT APPLICATIONS TO ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY UNDER THE RENEWABLE ENERGY FUND WHEREAS; North Pacific Rim Housing Authority is the owner and operator of two dock facilities in Tatitick and a dock and small boat harbor facility in Chenega Bay; and WHEREAS; North Pacific Rim Housing Authority received ownership of these facilities from the State of Alaska; and WHEREAS; North Pacific Rim Housing Authority is responsible for maintenance and operating costs for these facilities, including providing electricity for facility area and navigational lighting; and WHEREAS: The Alaska Energy Authority operates the Renewable Energy Fund which provides grants for renewable and energy efficiency projects; and WHEREAS: North Pacific Rim Housing Authority wishes to submit applications for wind energy projects in Chenega Bay and Tatitlek at our dock and harbor facilities located in those commur ities; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED. That the executive director of North Pacific Rim Housing Authority is authorized to submit an application or multiple applications for wind energy projects to Alaska Energy Authority under the Renewable Energy Fund for projects at NPRHA facilities in Chenega Bay and Tatitlek. Passed on this 7" Day of November 2008 �9� chairman A st Valdez Tatitlek Eyak Chenega Seward Port Graham Nanwalek north Ne pacific rim housing authority Re: Certification North Pacific Rim Housing Authority hereby certifies the following in conjunction with the submission of the application to the Alaska Energy Authority Renewable Energy Grant Fund. • The Executive Director of North Pacific Rim Housing Authority is Olen Harris and has been authorized by resolution of the Board of Commissioners to submit an application to the Alaska Energy Authority Renewable Energy Fund; and • North Pacific Rim Housing Authority has sufficient fund balance in our Dock and Harbors fund to provide the matching funds identified in the amount of $15,000 and has authorized their use for this purpose; and • North Pacific Rim Housing Authority is in compliance with all federal, state, and local laws, including existing credit and federal tax obligations. Olen Harris Executive Director 8300 King Street • Anchorage, AK 99518-3066 • Ph. (907) 562-1444 • Fax (907) 562-1445 • Toll Free 1-888-274-1444 164 Providing Housing Services To The People of The Chugach Native Region NPRHA Schedule FOR Renewable Energy Projects Chenega Bay and Tatitlek Docks 1. Application for Grants 11/10/08 2. Grant Award 12/ 1 /08 3. Develop full project work plan 12/1/08-12/18/08 4. RFP for wind resources study and energy consultant 12/1 /08-12/31 /08 5. Wind resource study and design configuration 1/l/09- 12/31/09 6. Final basic design complete * 1/1/10 7. Existing system study —ongoing by staff & consultants 1/1/09- 7/31/09 8. Proposed system costs * 1115110 9 Project benefits * 1/3 1/ 10 10. Energy purchase sale N/A 11. Land ownership — confirm unless changed completed 12. Develop lists of applicable permits and timeline for applications 1/31/09-7/31/09 13. Complete Environmental screening 1/31/09-7/31/09 14. Analysis and recommendation *1/31/10 15. PHASE II Feasibility 16. All aspects 2/1/10- 7/31/10 17. PHASE III Final Design and Permitting 8/1/10- 12/31/10 18. PHASE IV Construction and Initial Operation 1/1/11- 12/31/11 19 Project close-out and I year operations reports 9/31/12