Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNome Banner Wind Project Nome App Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 1 of 25 9/2/2008 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 http://www.akenergyauthority.org/RE_Fund.html The following application forms are required to be submitted for a grant recommendation: Grant Application Form GrantApp.doc Application form in MS Word that includes an outline of information required to submit a complete application. Applicants should use the form to assure all information is provided and attach additional information as required. Application Cost Worksheet Costworksheet.doc Summary of Cost information that should be addressed by applicants in preparing their application. Grant Budget Form GrantBudget.xls A detailed grant budget that includes a breakdown of costs by task and a summary of funds available and requested to complete the work for which funds are being requested. Grant Budget Form Instructions GrantBudgetInstr.pdf Instructions for completing the above grant budget form.  If you are applying for grants for more than one project, provide separate application forms for each project.  Multiple phases for the same project may be submitted as one application.  If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project, provide 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. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 2 of 25 9/3/2008 SECTION 1 – APPLICANT INFORMATION Name (Name of utility, IPP, or government entity submitting proposal) Banner Wind, LLC Type of Entity: Private LLC (Independent Power Producer) Mailing Address PO Box 1129, Nome AK, 99762 Physical Address 400 Bering Street Telephone 907-443-2561 Fax 907-443-4038 Email merickson@snc.org 1.1 APPLICANT POINT OF CONTACT Name Melinda Erickson Title Executive Assistant Mailing Address PO Box 1129 Nome, AK 99762 Telephone 907-443-4035 Fax 907-443-4038 Email merickson@snc.org 1.2 APPLICANT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS Please check as appropriate. If you do not to meet the minimum applicant requirements, your application will be rejected. 1.2.1 As an Applicant, we are: (put an X in the appropriate box) An electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS 42.05, or X An independent power producer, or A local government, or A governmental entity (which includes tribal councils and housing authorities); Yes 1.2.2. Attached to this application is formal approval and endorsement for its project by its board of directors, executive management, or other governing authority. If a collaborative grouping, a formal approval from each participant’s governing authority is necessary. (Indicate Yes or No in the box ) Yes 1.2.3. As an applicant, we have administrative and financial management systems and follow procurement standards that comply with the standards set forth in the grant agreement. Yes 1.2.4. If awarded the grant, we can comply with all terms and conditions of the attached grant form. (Any exceptions should be clearly noted and submitted with the application.) Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 3 of 25 9/3/2008 SECTION 2 – PROJECT SUMMARY Provide a brief 1-2 page overview of your project. See Exhibit : FOLDER 2 A Banner Wind Project Executive Summary 2.1 PROJECT TYPE Describe the type of project you are proposing, (Reconnaissance; Resource Assessment/ Feasibility Analysis/Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; and/or Construction) as well as the kind of renewable energy you intend to use. Refer to Section 1.5 of RFA. We are applying for the Phase 4 CONSTRUCTION of a Commercial Wind Project as an Independent Power Producer. The other phases have been accomplished through early 2008. Phase 1 – Banner Wind LLC was fortunate enough to take advantage of the reconnaissance done by the Nome Joint Utilities System and the Alaska Energy Authority. The City of Nome along with AEA were able to provide the maps to classify wind class and alternative energy options, see Exhibit: Folder 2 K: Nome Region Energy Assessment. Anemometers were installed in Nome as part of this initial work to assess the resource. Without the actual anemometer data this project would not be at the construction phase it is now in. Phase 2 – Resource Assessment/Feasibility Analysis of the project was stated by Brian Jackson, as “This project is completely feasible from a technical and financial standpoint as a true generation project to contribute meaningful, reliable, renewable, electric energy to the Nome Joint Utility Distribution Grid.” Furthermore this was outlined by the study done by City of Nome and AEA on the wind classes and alternative energy options. Wind Power has been identified by AEA as the most beneficial option for the community of Nome for power generation. This project began in 2007, but could not be formally designed until more than a full year of quality data was made available by the Alaska Energy Authority from local anemometers. Sandra Cardon from Renaissance Engineering & Design (www.clever-ideas.com)(RED) performed an extensive analysis of the existing anemometer data and the regional site locations. Evaluations began with the Snake River Valley and then included Anvil mountain and Bonanza Peak but Banner was ultimately selected for several reasons to be the absolute best possible location for development near Nome. An array design was completed with the complex terrain and site location on Banner Ridge specifically which confirms the detailed wind map designation from the AEA mapping project of high wind class on Banner Ridge and low wind class in the Snake River valley. Renaissance was hired in 2007 to complete a Feasibility Study with existing data at that time for a wind project in Nome which included Snake River and Anvil sites as options. Based on the final actual wind data, the project was completely designed around the new location after all of this initial scoping was done in 2007 and early 2008. Exhibits: FOLDER 2 C RED Data Analysis Summary Memo, FOLDER 1 B RED Brochure, FOLDER 4 H RED Sandra Cardon Resume The business planning, project development, and project design activities have been managed by Western Community Energy, LLC (www.westerncommunityenergy.com) (WCE). All phases of the project have been managed and are on track for completion in 2008, (see Management Section and Resumes) In fact, this project was moved from its original intended location and completely re-designed several times. Despite such changes, other than the direct expenses attributed to the change in location, and upgraded facilities, this project is “On-Time and Under-Budget” in relation to the forcasted controlled expenses. Exhibits: WCE Brochure, WCE Documents, WCE Brian Jackson, Mike Costanti, Ian Graham Resumes. Phase 3 – Final design and permitting – The most important thing to note on the design is that nothing here is “revolutionary” or “experimental” The system is benefiting from the past ten years of turbine installations and operations in Kotzebue, Alaska. The entire O&M program for the Entegrity Turbines has been designed around the experiences there and in other locations to provide long term reliable operations. The final foundation design was based on geotechnical evaluations and drilling at the site to Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 4 of 25 9/3/2008 confirm the status of the bedrock. The geotechnical evaluation was performed by Rick Mitchells at Duane Miller Associates (DMA) (www.alaskageo.com). Geotech Report and foundation designs by Troy Feller at BBFM Engineers (BBFM) (www.bbfm.com) are included exhibit documents. The permitting evaluations and applications have been completely taken care of by Laurie Hulse at Hattenburg, Dilley, and Linnell (HDL) (www.hdlalaska.com). Web page company descriptions of these three Alaska companies are included in Exhibits: DMA, BBFM, HDL. Phase 4 – The Banner Wind Project is currently in the Construction, Commissioning, Operation, and Report stage. Western Community Energy is managing all phases of the project including the final effort to get it on-line before winter sets in. Construction of this project provides for the complete installation of eighteen Entegrity EW-50 wind generators in Nome, Alaska. This is the first commercial wind farm to be installed in the city of Nome which currently gets 100% of its power from diesel generation. The construction phase began in September and will wrap up in October, with final commissioning by November 2008. The project has focu sed intently on a 2008 complete start and finish timeline to immediately start saving diesel fuel. Nome is a rural community with approximately 3,500 residents and is a hub community which supports many villages in the region. As Nome is a hub for other village support, this project is intended to be a hub for supporting renewable energy projects in the villages starting next year. STG Inc. is the contractor responsible for the foundation construction, roads and turbine erection services. They have the experience and expertise to help take this project to the finish line. The project manager for STG is Brennan Walsh under the supervision of Jim St. George. (STG) (www.STGinc.cc). Web page description and experience information is included in Exhibits: STG. Each of the phases are part of the total project expenses and are included as matching funds. Expenses for any individual contract in Phase 1-3 are included as part of the total project expenses. This includes Feasibility, Geotech, Permitting, Project Design, and Development Payments. 1-3 phases. 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 installation of this wind power project will provide a maximum output of 1,170 kW to the Nome Joint Utility electric grid in Nome, Alaska over a 20 year extendable project timeframe. The owners of the project are committed to sell the energy at a price below the avoided cost calculations, even without any grant funding. Grant funding will allow further reduction in the price of approximately $0.03 per kWH for every one million in grant funds. Selling the energy at a rate below avoided costs will provide savings to the utility to help to lower the energy costs in the Nome area and provide some energy produced locally that is not dependent on imported oil. Furthermore, this project helps enable future village installations in the region by helping with a base of operations, spare parts location, local training facility and regional hub. Providing for renewable energy projects in villages should help reduce the dependency on oil in those locations where oil must be flown or barged in and ultimately help reduce energy rates in those locations as well. Through implementing a power sales agreement, this project is unique in that it takes advantage of federal tax credit incentives for wind energy projects which help offset the actual cos t of energy. Overall, this project provides a cash and tax credit based revenue stream, provides jobs and keeps money working in the community while increasing overall power generation reliability by producing it locally. Banner Wind LLC (jointly owned b y Bering Straits Native Corporation and Sitnasuak Native Corporation) owns the wind farm while the construction and initial operations are managed by Western Community Energy LLC. The profits from the project which are ultimately distributed to the shareholders of BSNC and SNC will help provide income to an area where many have very limited incomes. This is an excellent demonstration of a commercial opportunity that needs to be eagerly developed. 2.3 PROJECT BUDGET OVERVIEW Briefly discuss the amount of funds needed, the anticipated sources of funds, and the nature and source of other contributions to the project. Include a project cost summary that includes an estimated total cost through construction. The funds for the project construction have come from BSNC and SNC directly in the form of capital Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 5 of 25 9/3/2008 investments and loans to facilitate the construction and keep the project on track for a 2008 on -line finish date. All of the funds expended to date consist of private financing. The project stands as a priv ately owned independent power producer to own and operate the facility through a power sales agreement to the local utility. As such, the sale of energy provides for the ongoing operations and maintenance expenses for the life of the project and for the bank debt payments for the project loan. Offsetting the capital investment with a grant will allow the project to sell the energy to the utility at a reduced cost. The funds requested are $4.126M with a 20% matching fund from Bering Straits Native Corporation and Sitnasuak Native Corporation conjointly through Banner Wind LLC, the project Company. The 20% match funds total $1.031M. The estimated total cost of the project is thus 5.157M. See Detailed Budget in Exhibits: 6_Schedule, Budget, Cost, Photos: W CE Budget Breakdown. The following table shows the budget breakdown. The Project Owner has committed the resources to build the project and the funds state funds will be distributed on a re-imbursement basis for some of the funds already expended. The sources of funding for the project to date have been direct capital investments and bank financing. Milestone or Task State Funds Local Match Funds (Cash) TOTALS 1 Project Design, Permitting, Consulting $0.00 $138,443.00 $138,443.00 2 Turbines and Turbine Equipment $2,738,082.00 $684,520.00 $3,422,602.00 3 Construction, Roads, Foundations $615,232.00 $153,808.00 $769,040.00 4 Wind Turbine Erection, Assembly $157,116.00 $39,279.00 $196,395.00 5 Electrical and Turbine Wiring $272,049.00 $15,521.00 $287,570.00 6 Support Structures, SCADA, O&M Facility $343,808.00 $0.00 $343,808.00 A majority of these costs are based on contracts already completed and firm construction quotes so this budget represents very close to final numbers. The final shipment of spare parts and the final construction of the O&M Shop facility are scheduled for Spring 2009 with materials on the first barge to Nome. These items were revised during the first phase of construction in September and are not part of the commissioning and commercial operation, but are key to the long term viability of the project in the coming years. It is important to note that this project is on a fast track construction schedule with completion in Mid - November. The funds being used for construction are based on capital investments and loan financing to get it done. The budget information is as accurate as possible at the time and the project is on track to finish without any delays or surprises at this time. Initially, this project was intended to be installed adjacent to the Utility power line. The new location on Banner Ridge will produce a tremendous amount of output compared to the initial site as discussed in the feasibility analysis. However, this new location will require a pproximately 2 miles of new 25kV line extension. To support the extra energy production and encourage the development of a more productive resource for the long term energy benefits, Nome Joint Utility Services board of directors approved the construction of the new distribution line. As part of the interconnection agreement and the power purchase agreement NJUS is managing and installing the 25kV Utility line extension to the project themselves in close coordination with the actual wind farm construction activities. 2.4 PROJECT BENEFIT Briefly discuss the financial benefits that will result from this project, including an estimate of economic benefits (such as reduced fuel costs) and a description of other benefits to the Alaskan public. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 6 of 25 9/3/2008 The BSNC Board of Directors passed a Resolution requiring that 50% of all their profits from this project be reinvested in renewable energy projects in the 17 villages that make up the Bering Straits Region. This is a significant first step to create a low cost hub which can support th e surrounding communities with future installations. A hub project will enable more cost effective, better maintained village projects in the future while continually creating annual revenues to support more development. In some ways a grant towards this project becomes the “gift that keeps on giving.” It supports itself through ongoing project revenues but creates a strong presence for other projects. The goal is to expand development of commercially viable projects without needing grants to justify their development. The grant for this project offsets the increased capital costs from moving the project to the ridge top instead of the valley, but also directly helps reduce the cost of the wind component of the energy supply for Nome for the life of the project. Success of this project will lead to exporting the profits and technical expertise to the villages who are suffering even higher costs than Nome. The entire region is in a wind category ranging from Class 4 to Class 7 winds. Wind energy is classified in a scale from 1 to 7, 1 being light winds and 7 on the other end of the spectrum. Wind is a good energy resource when it hits the Class 4 scale. The majority of the villages that make up the Bering Straits Region have primarily a “subsistence life style” as they lack a true cash economy. Seal, walrus, moose, caribou and fish make up their primary food source. High energy costs for gas, fuel oil and electricity put an even higher burden of distress on these residents. Our Native citizens make use of all of the animal resources and environment; it is time to add the wind and take advantage of what has previously been a burden and source of hardship. The primary goal is to ultimately add wind energy to all the villages of the region, and this is the start. The Board also made the decision to sell the wind energy to Nome Joint Utilities at a rate below the “avoided costs” with a goal to benefit all residents of Nome. The goal of everyone involved has been to create a lasting influence with no compromises on the installation itself to have a project that will be reliable and sustainable and support itself after construction. The first benefit this project provides to the community is a departure from the 100% dependency on imported fuels from outside of Alaska. Though the State of Alaska benefits from the sale of Oil as an export product. The villages, however, are dependent on imported fuel from outside the state as their only source of energy. This represents a small microcosm reflecting the status of the nation as a whole. The United States is taking serious and dramatic steps to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. The villages in Alaska must do the same thing. The first step towards a sustainable future requires a project like this that reaches out and is implemented for the sake of the future of the community. This project is absolutely a win-win scenario for everyone involved. Direct Financial Benefits to the Nome Community:  Up to 200,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually (expected range from 175,000 to 209,000 gallons per year from production estimations and actual utility value of 15.81 kwh per gallon.)  At $ 3.72 per Gal. (actual last purchase price) * 200,000 gallons = $744,000 one year of savings based on last actual purchase  The avoided cost calculations tend to lag behind the immediate cost of fuel This project is basing the savings on a discount to the Utility Avoided Cost of Energy calculation. Thus, this AEA Renewable Energy Fund Grant provides to the Ratepayers and Community a direct savings on their energy rate of $0.12 per kWh for every kWh produced and sold to the Utility. Instead of selling the energy at $0.21 (which is still below the avoided cost) the project will sell the energy at $0.09.  With a target expectation of 3,000,000 kWh per year (at $0.12 per kwh discount) that represents a direct savings to the community of $360,000 per year while still providing a reasonable return on the substantial local investment of over $1M in the project. (BASED ON THE LAST PURCHASE OF 200,000 gallons for $744,000 THE TRUE SAVINGS ANNUALLY COULD BE A LOT HIGHER THAN THE $360k USED IN THIS EXAMPLE) Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 7 of 25 9/3/2008  This savings will continue year after year for 20 years in the community and provide a meaningful percentage of energy that is produced locally. Over a 20 year period that savings amounts to $7,200,000 in the community for a direct benefit. Thus the benefit cost ratio for the grant is $7.2M over a cost of $4.126M which equals: 1.74.  If the savings were to be calculated based on the last actual purchase of Diesel Fuel and that price was assumed constant for 20 years they would be calculated at $744,000 per year or a total of $14.880M and the benefit cost ratio would be over 3.6. If the cost of diesel continued to escalate, that ratio would do the same.  The payback for the grant to the direct benefit to the community on energy sales price alone is LESS THAN 11.5 YEARS (5.5 years using the diesel savings of $744k per year for current price) Additional Benefits are Listed beyond these direct f inancial benefits in Section 5 below. This entire project went through extensive planning and design stages through the summer of 2008 with a construction start in September 2008 and a project construction finish in October 2008. Final commissioning and on-line operations will be November 2008. This project is a testimony to the possibilities for future projects with fast deployment and strong local support. Clearly , it has become time to “quit studying and start doing.” This project will immediately start saving up to 200,000 gallons of diesel fuel per year based on current production estimates. Western Community Energy has managed each phase of the project and it is on track for on-time completion. Furthermore, Western Community Energy will manage the operations and maintenance of the project over the next five years completely while helping to promote wind development in the region. The construction of an on-site facility is commencing and is intended to serve as the wind farm O&M and training fac ility. This shop will ultimately have high speed internet, direct fiber network communications to each turbine, small wind and solar energy systems, high bay service with overhead winch and equipment storage facilities, living quarters, as well as office space. Western Community Energy will have the full use of this facility for all O&M Activities and also already have on site for the project a late model F350 4x4 Truck with Mattrax track gear for year round turbine access and maintenance. This facility along with the modern 18 turbine wind farm it supports will become a regional training facility as well as a maintenance support hub (with spare parts and tools). The Banner Wind Project is a prototype project that provides enough critical mass to enable and support the future village projects. The Entegrity Wind turbine coupled with a strong maintenance and service platform provides reliable energy and can be erected in villages with low cost foundations coupled with a tilt-up system that does not require cranes See Exhibit: FOLDER 3 B EWSI_Tilt-Up Diagrams. With the 2008 Completion and commissioning of the Banner Wind Project, four new villages are being evaluated with an objective of installing 10-12 turbines in the summer of 2009. 2.5 PROJECT COST AND BENEFIT SUMARY Include a summary of your project’s total costs and benefits below. 2.5.1 Total Project Cost (Including estimates through construction.) $ 5.157M 2.5.2 Grant Funds Requested in this application. $ 4.126M 2.5.3 Other Funds to be provided (Project match) $ 1.031M 2.5.4 Total Grant Costs (sum of 2.5.2 and 2.5.3) $ 5.157M 2.5.5 Estimated Benefit (Savings) $0.12/kwhx3M kwh/yr 2.5.6 Public Benefit (If you can calculate the benefit in terms of dollars please provide that number here and explain how you calculated that number in your application.) $ 7.2M over a 20 year period based on the energy rate discount only. Calculating the true Public Benefit in terms of dollars based on the specific items listed in Section 2.4 is difficult. The Public Benefit of reducing our 100% Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 8 of 25 9/3/2008 dependence on imported fuel could be “priceless.” Note: Each $1 million in grant funds offsets the selling price by almost $0.03 per kW h. Estimated production on an annual basis is 3 million kWh. A $4.126 million grant results in a reduction in the cost to the utility of $360,000 per year or $7.2 million over the 20 year period. As stated previously, this is a gift that keeps on giving. ALSO: THIS PROJECT HAS AN OUTPUT OF 1.17MW AT A TOTAL INSTALLED COST OF $5.157M WHICH REPRESENTS A CAPITAL COST OF $4,400 PER KW INSTALLED WHICH IS LIKELY THE LOWEST COST DEVELOPED WIND PROJECT IN ALASKA BASED ON OTHER NUMBERS FROM PROJECTS ACROSS THE STATE. EVEN WHEN THE TOTAL UTILITY LINE EXTENSION IS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THE TOTAL INSTALLED COST IS LESS THAN $5,000 PER KW WHICH IS A SUBSTANTIAL VALUE IN THE PROJECT DESIGN AS IMPLEMENTED. SECTION 3 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN Describe who will be responsible for managing the project and provide a plan for successfully completing the project within the scope, schedule and budget proposed in the application. 3.1 Project Manager Tell us who will be managing the project for the Grantee and include a resume and references for the manager(s). If the applicant does not have a project manager indicate how you intend to solicit project management Support. If the applicant expects project management assistance from AEA or another government entity, state that in this section. The project management is under the leadership and direction of Western Community Energy (www.westerncommunityenergy.com ). Western Community Energy has developed this project from the initial design to the project construction and completion. WCE is assisting the owners in contractor selection and management throughout the project and is also responsible for ongoing maintenance and operations after construction. Brian Jackson and Mike Costanti have several decades of combined experience in energy and energy systems. Ian Graham is the local project manager providing daily supervision and direction of project activities during construction. Western Community Energy is the exclusive value-added reseller of the Entegrity Wind Turbines for the Northwest including Alaska, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Montana. This project represents a long-term relationship between all of the entities involved including Banner Wind, Western Community Energy, and Nome Joint Utilities. The project is the result of extensive analysis and design from the initial resource assessment to the project location, layout, foundation design, and construction. Brian Jackson, P.E., C.E.M., M.B.A. , Western Community Energy Brian Jackson, P.E., C.E.M., M.B.A., is one of the founders of Western Community Energy and combines 17 years of mechanical engineering experience in electricity generation and project management with a master's degree in Business Administration to provide effective consulting and system design services that are relevant to a client's bottom line through increased productivity and profits or significant savings. He is also a Certified Energy Manager with the American Association of Energy Engineers and spent 11 years working for Idacorp/Idaho Power Company in the field of power generation. Several of those years focused on various types of renewable energy sources including multi-megawatt hydro-electric power plant construction, photovoltaics, wind, and biomass. He also spent several years working with commercial and industrial customers in the areas of distributed generation and cogeneration. See Exhibits: FOLDER 1 A WCE Brochure, FOLDER 4 MANAGEMENT Resumes: Brian Jackson, Mike Costanti, Ian Graham In addition to the WCE Team, BSNC and SNC have provided extensive project leadership, expertise, and support for the project through See Exhibits: FOLDER 4 MANAGEMENT RESUMES, Jerald Brown, Neal Foster, and Matt Ganley. This project has been through several board review meetings and has the support of both companies as well as the entire community to be finished as planned. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 9 of 25 9/3/2008 3.2 Project Schedule Include a schedule for the proposed work that will be funded by this grant. (You may include a chart or table attachment with a summary of dates below.) The project Schedule chart below with the listed target and completion dates outlines the actual schedule being attained for the project. The main point to make is that this project is on task and on-time with the most critical dates past. The arrival of the last barge to Nome on the first week of October has been one of the most time sensitive issues of the entire summer since the last group of turbines is on that barge and it is critical to finishing the project before winter 2008. That barge had mechanical delays and is arriving a week past the target date, but the rest of the project should not be delayed by that in the end. (See DETAILED WCE GRANT PROJECT SCHEDULE IN EXHIBITS) Folder 6: Schedule, Budget, Cost Worksheet Photos: WCE Banner Wind PROJECT SCHEDULE WCE Banner Wind PROJECT SCHEDULE 11x17 (large format pdf file) BANNER WIND PROJECT Schedule Summary Accomplishment Target Date Start Date Finish Date Complete Turbine Order Feb-08 May-08 Done Schedule Shipping Barges June-Sept 08 Sep-08 Done Final Wind Analysis Jun-08 Jun-08 Done Permitting Start Jun-08 Jun-08 Done Geotech Field Analysis Jul-08 Jul-08 Done Foundation Design Aug-08 Aug-08 Done Final Site Design July-Aug 08 Aug-08 Done Construction Start: Roads, Foundations Sep-08 Sep-08 Done Arrival of Last Barge; Wire, 7 Turbines October_3 2008 October 6, 2008 Arrived Turbine Erection Oct-08 Sep-08 Oct-08 Turbine Electrical Wiring Oct-08 Oct-08 Utility Interconnection Oct-08 Oct-08 Turbine Commissioning Oct-08 Nov-08 Final Operations and SCADA Networking Nov-08 Nov-08 O&M Shop Facility Spring 09 It could not be overemphasized that this project has gone from a late start to project Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 10 of 25 9/3/2008 commissioning and completion in a total time window of 6 months from Mid-May 2008 to Mid- November 2008. This schedule was made possible by a team approach and a commitment by all entities involved to deliver results. The goal has always been to get this project on-line in 2008 and use it for a base to support future village installations with training and local O&M expertise. Also, with the rising costs of fuel, the community support and enthusiasm for this project has been substantial and important. Every single entity listed under 3.4 Project Resources is to be commended for the accomplishment to date and the commitment to a strong finish over the next critical month. The last project item, the O&M Facility was planned for Spring 2009 construction and is the only activity with a 2009 implementation. This is not crucial for the operations and maintenance of the wind project during the current year and was planned for 2009 on purpose to avoid any distractions during the wind farm development. It would be a tragedy to have a great O&M Shop Facility and miss any part of the Wind Project Schedule so the rest of that will be implemented to have all the materials and items needed on the first spring barge to Nome. Other operations facilities are available in Nome for Western Community Energy to operate out of for the first winter season. The shop design itself represents a departure from conventional construction and an innovative, cost effective solution to be replicated in other hub communities. 3.3 Project Milestones Define key tasks and decision points in your project and a schedule for achieving them. The key project Schedule Milestones are outlined in the Attached Exhibit: FOLDER 6 E WCE Project Schedule with the detailed point by point subtask listing. ALL OF THOSE MILESTONES ARE ACHIEVED UP TO OCTOBER 6, 2008. CONFIRMATION HAS BEEN ASSURED OF THE ARRIVAL OF THE LAST 2008 BARGE TO NOME WHICH CONTAINS THE LAST SEVEN WIND TURBINES AND IS BEING UNLOADED ON OCTOBER 6, 2008. This barge is approximately one week late due to mechanical difficulties, however, the project is making quick adjustments to the schedule to get the last turbines installed on time. Meanwhile the electrical interconnection work is proceeding by the Utility and the electrical contractor. The Five project Milestones from a Budget Standpoint and Key Project Cost Breakdown Standpoint are: 1. Project Design, Reports, Permitting, Consulting, Legal 2. Turbines and Turbine Equipment 2. Construction, Roads, and Foundations 3. Wind Turbine Erection 4. Electrical and Turbine Wiring 5. Support Structures, O&M, Controls, Final Commissioning 3.4 Project Resources Describe the personnel, contractors, equipment, and services you will use to accomplish the project. Include any partnerships or commitments with other entities you have or anticipate will be needed to complete your project. Describe any existing contracts and the selection process you may use for major equipment purchases or contracts. Include brief resumes and references for known, key personnel, contractors, and suppliers as an attachment to your application. Every company and individual involved with this project was hand selected based on proven results, experience, and accomplishments. This project has been moving at an extremely fast pace from concept to completion. Maintaining the budget expenses and managing the project with so many unknowns from the beginning was not a small effort. Doing that while managing shipping schedules and working toward a short construction window has been extreme. Everyone involved had to rely on the others to get their part done on time and never compromise safety or quality. Brochures and information from the following companies are included as exhibits. Exhibits Folders: Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 11 of 25 9/3/2008 1_Business Documents, Qualifications, Brochures 4_Project Management Resumes  Western Community Energy, LLC: Brian Jackson, Mike Costanti, Ian Graham, Kelsey Buhr  Renaissance Engineering & Design, PLLC: Sandra Cardon  Entegrity Wind Systems, Inc.: Malcolm Lodge  Apterra Technologies, LLC: Ted Schwartz  STG Inc: Jim St. George, Brennan Walsh – Foundation Construction, Roads, Crane and Erection  Dwayne Miller and Associates: Rick Mitchells – Geotech Analysis and Report  www.alaskageo.com  BBFM Engineers Inc: Troy Feller – Foundation Design www.bbfm.com  Hattenburg, Dilley, and Linnell (HDL): Laurie Hulse – Permitting www.hdlalaska.com  Eagle Electric: Rob Bensin  Bering Straits Development Company: Tony Parsons  Nome Joint Utility Systems (NJUS): John Handeland The Partners that compose Banner Wind LLC (BSNC and SNC) including the management, employees and both boards of directors have shown incredible leadership in stepping out with this project instead of waiting for someone else to build it. Clearly, they are fully committed to the Banner Wind Project and have allocated sufficient funds and support to ensure that it proceeds to completion with or without grant monies. Three key individuals have been responsible for the day to day support and decision proce sses involved with this project development and their resumes are included Exhibit: FOLDER 4 MANAGEMENT RESUME: Jerald Brown, Neal Foster, Matt Ganley. Brochures and web page company descriptions of these companies are included in Exhibits: WCE- Company Intro and Bios, WCE-Brian Jackson Resume, WCE-Mike Costanti Resume, WCE-Ian Graham Resume, RED-Renaissance Eng Brochure, RED-Sandra Cardon Resume, EWSI-SOQ,Warranty, EWSI- Wind Turbine Information Manual, EWSI Entegrity Tilt Up Design; EWSI Lifting Instructions; STG, DMA, BBFM, HDL, Eagle Electric. 3.5 Project Communications Discuss how you plan to monitor the project and keep the Authority informed of the status. The construction part of the project will be completed and fully operational when funding is provided. The project will have a fiber optic local area network solution that has extremely reliable data collection and communications capabilities to the main control room at the site. A major concern was the communications reliability and that part of the system has also gone through extensive design considerations. The initial design has now been determined and the equipment is in the process of being ordered at this time. A wireless radio modem will be utilized to connect the project to the internet through a link to the Bering Straits office building in downtown Nome. The Entegrity Turbines come with a network interface that can interface with each individual turbine. The project will be enhanced by a local Scada control package that will allow monitoring and operations of the project from the maintenance office or from the computer at the Nome internet connection. Apterra Technologies, LLC provides services and solutions for real-time data acquisition, monitoring and management of wind farms and other renewable energy systems. Apterra’s systems are field-proven and deployed widely in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. The company’s Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems easily integrate with a variety of turbine controllers and sensor networks. Components of this system include the Hawkeye Remote Terminal Unit (“Hawkeye RTU”), which provides remote data acquisition, monitoring and control services, and the Hub Server which enables centralized access to networked Hawkeye RTUs. The Hawkeye RTU is implemented as an embedded computer which interfaces with turbine controllers via a serial port or Ethernet connection. Features include a web-accessible application that enables users to remotely view the real-time state of monitored wind turbines and to configure and control the turbine through a web browser. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 12 of 25 9/3/2008 The Hawkeye RTU captures turbine state and statistical averages in 10-minute intervals. The captured data is persisted in the Hub Server’s central database to enable farm -wide analysis and reporting. The Hawkeye RTU also delivers daily summaries of turbine performance by email and its error notification feature facilitates prompt turbine troubleshooting. The Apterra Hub Server enables efficient management and control of the wind farm through the aggregation of farm-wide data in a central, industry standard SQL database. This database serves as the foundation of the Hub’s rich data reporting and charting capabilities. The Hub Server is hosted and supported at a managed, commercial-grade site hosting facility to ensure high availability. Apterra is also specifically providing software and hardware consulting support to enhance the core capabilities of its off-the-shelf systems with client-defined custom features vital to ensuring project success. Apterra is developing and integrating custom modules to enhance this system usefulness and value by allowing a complete local control and reporting network. Some sample screens and control interface and reporting information is included as an exhibit along with the Apterra Brochure. This project thus has a complete plan for the O&M Team as well as the project owners to monitor the performance as well as operate the equipment with an internet platform as well as a local LAN direct fiber connection solution. IF FUNDED, THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE A SPECIFIC WEB PORTAL JUST AS THE OWNERS HAVE FOR ACCESS SO THE ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY CAN LOG INTO THE WIND FARM AND MONITOR THE OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE. THE DATA AS DESCRIBED IS LOGGED AND TRACKED THROUGH AN ON-LINE DATABASE FOR LONG TERM PERFORMANCE REPORTING AND ANALYSIS. 3.6 Project Risk Discuss potential problems and how you would address them. There are basically two types of project risk associated with this wind project: Construction Risk and Operations Risk. Both categories have been dealt with at the highest level to manage the risk and ensure the quality and reliability of the final project. 1. Construction Risk Construction Risk has been mitigated every step of the way through diligent design and extremely careful selection of contractors and project participants. This project went through four separate design iterations while working towards the September/October 2008 construction period. The biggest variable that added to construction costs also helped with construction risks. The project was moved from soft soils to a rocky mountain. Through the geotechnical exploration, the bedrock was determined to be solid at 6 to 10 feet below the surface. Mounting the towers to bedrock with rock anchors and steel columns proved to be an excellent solution to insure a solid base and also control construction costs. 2. Operations Risk Operations Risk has been mitigated as much as possible throughout every design step. There is no doubt that this is a harsh environment and some of the key efforts that have been implemented to insure long and reliable operations follow:  Black Turbine Blades: Through experience in Kotzebue over the past ten years the implementation of black blades on the Entegrity Wind Turbines has helped minimize icing  Underground power utility lines  Access Roads to Site improvement  Access Road on Project to each turbine  Turbine controllers centralized in heated shack structure  Fiber optic local communications network to each turbine controller.  Local Nome O&M Facility and Operations support Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 13 of 25 9/3/2008 Beyond the measures listed, the emphasis throughout this project has been to invest substantially in the project in areas that will insure long-term reliable operations. The key is to provide the maintenance on a steady, reliable platform that is structured around the long term operations goals. This project provides for risk reduction for its own installation, but also through the support and facilities, it will also provide for reliable future village installations and their reliability. Western Community Energy is committed to long term O&M Support for this project and future village installations. The local Nome O&M and Tr aining Facility will be the first of its kind in Alaska to provide structured wind maintenance technician operator training in addition to the support for village applications. SECTION 4 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND TASKS  Tell us what the project is and how you will meet the requirements outlined in Section 2 of the RFA. The level of information will vary according to phase of the project you propose to undertake with grant funds.  If you are applying for grant funding for more than one phase of a project provide a plan and grant budget for completion of each phase.  If some work has already been completed on your project and you are requesting funding for an advanced phase, submit information sufficient to demonstrate that the preceding phases are satisfied and funding for an advanced phase is warranted. 4.1 Proposed Energy Resource Describe the potential extent/amount of the energy resource that is available. Discuss the pros and cons of your proposed energy resource vs. other alternatives that may be available for the market to be served by your project. Per Alaska Energy Authority the project location falls under the class 5 and 6 wind category. See Exhibit: FOLDER 2 B AEA Wind Map The City of Nome, with NETL, AEA with the Department of Energy did a study of various alternative energy options. The study indicated that wind would be the best and most cost effective solution in the short term, in order to provide an immediate benefit to the residents of Nome. BSNC and SNC teamed up in 2008 and took the leadership to implement a project that could be accomplished in the current year time frame. The energy resource has been evaluated and validated through several means to determine that the wind project could be built for less than $5,000 per kW installed cost and that the expected capacity factor would be above 25%. This project was an extensive undertaking requiring huge efforts from everyone involved in the project from its beginning concept to the construction phase in October. The resource itself around Nome is extensive and substantial. Unfortunately it is on the mountain top and not in the valley as originally hoped. The cost of developing a project adjacent to the powerline in the valley could have been substantially lower; however, the permitting and project delays could have been greater. It turns out that the mountain top was a place of lower concern from both a wetlands, and a coastal birds standpoint. Building on solid rock was a design constraint. However, the fractured rock surface allowed for trenching for the underground wiring. The powerline running up the mountain is sufficient to allow more turbines to be installed on the top of Banner Ridge at a future date without having to upgrade the existing line. After the extensive data and site analysis work done on virtually every ridge around Nome, the project team is confident that this is absolutely the best possible wind development project in the region and the best location. The following bullets summarize some of the resource information:  Class 5 and 6 Wind Resource – Banner Ridge, Nome Alaska. 18 Turbine Wind Farm, Entegrity Wind Turbine EW50: Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 14 of 25 9/3/2008  1.17 MW Max Capacity with production of 2,936,000 kWh annual production estimate from wind farm array including array losses which represents a 29% capacity factor on the maximum output capability of the turbine.  This is based on actual data analysis and actual array layout design modeled for the site and location from the Snake River Anemometer installed by AEA.  Turbine Availability Assumed 95%, production estimation 2,789,200 = 27% Capacity Factor  (NOTE: Entegrity is achieving 98% availability on turbines with full O&M Package as WCE is providing that are maintained properly)  (Also, this does not take into account the expected substantial increased output for air density in the coastal arctic location) More detailed information is presented in the Exhibits: Folder 2_Project Design and Reports with the Renaissance Engineering & Design Summary Document from the Feasiblity Analysis work for the project. 4.2 Existing Energy System Following information Provided by NJUS about currently installed NJUS Existing Generating Equipment 4.2.1 Basic configuration of Existing Energy System Briefly discuss the basic configuration of the existing energy system. Include information about the number, size, age, efficiency, and type of generation. Existing Generating Equipment (Brand & Model #) Size (kW) Age (Years) Avg. Efficiency (kWh/Gal Diesel) EMD #20-645F4B 2,865 23 13.08 EMD #12-645E4 1,500 19 12.84 Caterpillar #3616 3,660 17 16.39 Caterpillar #3516B-LS 1,875 9 14.35 Wärtsilä #12V32B 5,211 3 16.32 Wärtsilä #12V32B 5,211 3 16.32 Caterpillar #3456B 430 3 Black start; haven't had to run it enough to get # Boiler 1.5M BTU 3 Emergency use; haven't run to get # Boiler 1.5M BTU 3 Emergency use; haven't run to get # 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. There is no current renewable energy resource being used. 100% of the energy used is diesel powered generators. The impact of this wind project is of very important concern to the local community. The interesting thing is that the gold mine is contracting for energy supply from the utility in addition to the community itself. The mine’s load may be larger than the community and more steady. Thus, the impact of the wind farm as part of the total energy is much smaller at about 1MW at peak output than it would be otherwise. The result of that is also that even if this project offsets approximately 200,000 gallons of diesel fuel per year as expected, the net consumption by the utility will still likely double from what it was before the mine came on line for the energy. 4.2.3 Existing Energy Market Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 15 of 25 9/3/2008 Discuss existing energy use and its market. Discuss impacts your project may have on energy customers. b. Annual O&M Costs i. Provide your annual Labor O&M costs ($) $1,187,403 ii. Provide your annual Nonlabor O&M costs (S) 6,958,135 c. Annual Electricity Production and Fuel usage i. Provide Annual Electricity Produced (2007 data in kWh) 30,542,141 ii. Provide Annual Fuel Usage (2007 data in gallons) Diesel 1,932,287 Other 0 iii. Peak Load (2007 data in MW/kW) 5,080 iv. Average Load (2007 data in MW/kW) 4,030 v. Minimum Load (2007 data in MW/kW) 2,173 vi. Efficiency (2007 data in kWh/gal of diesel) 15.81 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 SEE EXHIBITS IN FOLDERS ON CD: 2.PROJECT DESIGN AND REPORTS FOLDER Banner Wind Executive Summary Wind Map – Alaska Energy Authority Renaissance Engineering & Design Feasibility Analysis Summary Memo (RED) RED Nome Wind Data Summary Report (from Complete Feasibility Analysis) Western Community Energy Project Design Documents (WCE) WCE Project Overview Site Map WCE Electrical Design One-Line WCE 25kV and 480V Powerlines Trenching and Turbine Locations WCE Wind Turbine Control Shack Layout and Design WCE Banner Wind PROJECT SCHEDULE Geotech (DMA), Foundation Design (BBFM), SCADA Design (Apterra) Documents 3.ENTEGRITY WIND TURBINE INFO (EWSI) EWSI Entegrity SOQ – Statement of Qualifications EWSI Entegrity National Renewable Energy Laboratory Performance Test s EWSI Entegrity Wind Turbine Information Package EWSI Entegrity Tilt Up Tower Option EWSI Lifting Instructions 6.PROJECT PHOTOS AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 16 of 25 9/3/2008 See Exhibit: FOLDER 7 Letters of Support SYSTEM DESIGN SUMMARY: The project consists of 18 Entegrity Wind Turbines with a total peak output of 1170 kW or 1.17MW Nameplate capacity. The Entegrity turbines have a nominal rated output of 50kW with winds below 30mph, but in the dense Alaska coastal air they are expected to operate often at the peak output of 65kW each. These turbines have a 50’ blade diameter and are mounted on 100’ lattice tower structures. The anticipated capacity factor is between 25% and 28% from modeling analysis based on data from near the site. Anticipated annual generation is 2,936,000 kWh. These turbines are unique in the small wind generator realm. They have been described as the “largest small generator” in comparison to other turbines in the marketplace which may be the “smallest large generators”. The Entegrity was specifically chosen after a detailed analysis of its specific suitability for village installations. It is a very simple machine with simple yet critical maintenance requirements, not unlike a John Deere tractor. With the appropriate maintenance they can be kept operating for decades. The design has gone through extensive analysis and testing at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden Colorado. Those full reports are available on-line, but the document covers and test numbers are included in the exhibits. The Entegrity turbines have a simple induction generator with no sensitive power electronics. They have power factor correction capacitance built into the control system and are designed for complete standalone operations with direct integration to existing utility grids with monitoring and control through internet connections. The Entegrity turbine has no yaw motors or gears as it passively aligns downwind with the incoming winds. Entegrity provides through Western Community Energy a complete 5 YEAR Operations and Maintenance and Warranty Program. Thus, this project has no additional Operating and Maintenance expenses for the first five years. Project revenues are budgeted every year however, to provide for ongoing O&M for years 6-20 as well as boosting facilities and personnel for support of future village installations. In addition to other cold weather modifications as special connectors, gearbox heater, and sealed control panels, the Arctic Versions have black blades and special leading edge coatings for shedding ice as quickly as possible. Many modifications are the result of years of operations in Kotzebue, Alaska. In fact, personal visits and interviews were conducted in Kotzebue regarding this turbine and op erations there before selection was made. The entire O&M plan presented by WCE was based on detailed investigation into operations of these Entegrity turbines in arctic environments. The selection was based on multiple issues, but focused around the ability to manage foundation costs, utilize the turbine in village installations without requiring cranes, and overall simplicity of the units. The WCE design modifications to the standard manufacturers equipment included a complete on-site 5 year O&M commitment, local operations facility and an intensely managed plan from the beginning. The design incorporates a fiber optic local area network linking all of the turbines and their controls with heated control shack facilities housing the circuit breakers and controls for each turbine in a weatherproof safe environment for years of service and operator safety. The shacks are designed for extreme weather and shelter for turbine O&M services on site. Five shacks are included with four controls in each of four shacks and two sets of controls in one shack. A support desk and centralized site operations wireless point to point internet will operate from this second control shack. The wireless point to point connection will have clear line of site to the high speed secure internet services at the 3 Story Bering Straits Native Corporation headquarters 4 miles away in downtown Nome. Another key aspect of this project is the complete O&M Facility to be built on the hill at the wind farm. This facility will store spare parts for the Nome project as well as other villages. This facility will have an Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 17 of 25 9/3/2008 office/control room, along with living quarters for training technicians from other locations utilizing the operating wind farm as a hands-on training tool. The facility itself is intended to be an energy efficient example for other renewable energy applications in the future including small wind, solar thermal, solar photovoltaic, and other technologies with an adjacent proximity to the wind farm grid. Future applications of bulk energy storage technologies are possible at that location with minimal modifications . 4.3.2 Land Ownership Identify potential land ownership issues, including whether site owners have agreed to the project or how you intend to approach land ownership and access issues. The land is currently owned by Sitnasuak Native Corporation, in split-estate with Bering Straits Native Corporation. The project owner Banner Wind LLC is jointly owned by these two corporations and has a Lease Agreement for the project from the land owner companies. See Exhibit: FOLDER 5 D Land Lease 4.3.3 Permits Provide the following information, 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 following lists of permits have been covered through the various appropriate agencies. The partners hired a consulting firm, HDL to perform the permitting tasks with Laurie Hulse leading this task. HDL has extensive experience in Alaska and permitting for wind projects as well as other construction and development projects. List of Applicable Permits:  FAA Form 7460-1 Notice of Proposed Construction  ADNR Coastal Zone Consistency Determination/Review  USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species Determination  COE Wetlands Determination and/or 404 Permit Adherence to NEPA was not a requirement because there was no federal funding involved in the project. However, the partners have conducted their own cultural and historical evaluations with their staff archeologist.  Anticipated permitting timeline 50 to 120 days (started in mid-July 2008) Communications with agencies and their timely responses have determined that FAA is the only permit required. This determination of hazard/no hazard is currently in review at FAA.  Identify and discussion of potential barriers A driveway permit from the Alaska DOT was required for the utility road access to the Nome Teller Highway. That permit actually did create a delay in finishing the road for a couple weeks in September while that process was finalized. Permission was finally given by DOT and the road has been fin ished as requested to allow construction access from the South side of the project. FAA could possibly delay the project approval process through their final review and could potentially determine that the site and/or tower elevations could present a hazard to air traffic. Local FAA personnel Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 18 of 25 9/3/2008 have been contacted with the crane location on site as well as all activities and have expressed support and even enthusiasm for the project. Final FAA determination is imminent, but not secured, however this risk is remote and should be offset by the existing project design parameters which have taken all of that into consideration as part of the selection process. Specifically: The total height of the tower is 100’ with a 50’ blade diameter. Thus the tip of the turbine blade is approximately 125’ from the existing terrain. Typically the FAA is not concerned with structures below 150’ in total height at all. Also, Banner Ridge is not in the approach or departure path of either runway at Nome. This was taken into consideration when evaluating the other possible locations in the area around Nome. Other ridges in the region such as Newton Peak are in the flight line from the runway and even Anvil was considered within a certain angle of the flight path, though it has the existing Military Radar Structures on it from World War II operations. Banner is NOT in the flight line of either runway. The likely mitigation in the event of future discussions may be the addition of some tower lighting. 4.3.4 Environmental Address whether the following environmental and land use issues apply, and if so how they will be addressed:  Threatened or Endangered species  Habitat issues  Wetlands and other protected areas  Archaeological and historical resources  Land development constraints  Telecommunications interference  Aviation considerations  Visual, aesthetics impacts  Identify and discuss other potential barriers  Threatened or Endangered species USFWS determined that any threatened or endangered species were unlikely to fly that far inland, so this issue is cleared.  Habitat issues USFWS determined that adverse effects on habitat is unlikely  Wetlands and other protected areas The area is not classified as a wetland  Archaeological and historical resources Not applicable when federal funding is not used, however, staff archaeologist has reviewed and has been monitoring project construction. Note specifically Matt Ganley’s resume included in the management resume section as monitoring the project in this regard from the initial site walk through construction.  Land development constraints Not applicable  Telecommunications interference Not applicable Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 19 of 25 9/3/2008  Aviation considerations FAA Notice of Proposed Construction has been filed and is under review.  Visual, aesthetics impacts Not applicable  Identify and discuss other potential barriers The Alaska DNR Division of Coastal and Ocean Management determined that a Consistency Review was not required for this project. 4.4 Proposed New System Costs (Total Estimated Costs and proposed Revenues) The level of cost information provided will vary according to the phase of funding requested and any previous work the applicant may have done on the project. Applicants must reference the source of their cost data. For example: Applicants Records or Analysis, Industry Standards, Consultant or Manufacturer’s estimates. 4.4.1 Project Development Cost Provide detailed project cost information based on your current knowledge and understanding of the project. Cost information should include the following:  Total anticipated project cost, and cost for this phase  Requested grant funding  Applicant matching funds – loans, capital contributions, in-kind  Identification of other funding sources  Projected capital cost of proposed renewable energy system  Projected development cost of proposed renewable energy system The Exhibits contain a document: Banner Wind Project Detailed Budget Breakdown in the Folder 6_Schedule, Budget, Photos etc. As stated elsewhere most of these costs are finalized and many are already delivered. This project is on-time and under budget (for all the items that were not subject to major location changes in scope) which is a major achievement in Alaska any year but particularly when managed in a 6 month time frame. The total project cost complete is estimated at $5.157M with a request of 80% $4.126M from the State and 20% cash contribution by Banner Wind LLC totaling $1.031M. This represents completely a completely installed and operating wind farm over with over 1MW capacity at a total cost LESS THAN $5,000 per kw INSTALLED with ZERO ADDITIONAL O&M EXPENSES FOR THE FIRST FIVE YEARS. THIS PROJECT IS INTENDED TO SET A NEW PRECEDENT FOR WIND IN ALASKA WITH A SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS MODEL AND LONG TERM VALUE. 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 WESTERN COMMUNITY ENERGY is providing local Operations and Maintenance for this facility along with the Warranty support functions at no additional charge to the project for the first five years during the Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 20 of 25 9/3/2008 warranty period. Full warranty support is included for the first five years completely. Ongoing O&M for years 6-20 are the major expense anticipated for this The minimum energy sales price is taking this into consideration. There is also a need to fund future upgrades and improvements targeted near the end of the second ten year period. Since this is a comme rcial venture the goal is for continuous improvements and quality operations throughout the life of the project. The following bullet points outline the budgeted O&M expenses:  O&M Plan is a PayAhead Deposit Program for Future Needs – Budget Increases with Fleet Age, These are high O&M Estimates but these turbines will be in high production and require “pro- active” maintenance more than typical “re-active” maintenance:  Years 1-5: $0 Actual Cost, Covered by Western Community Energy and Entegrity Completel y. Budget Retained annually for O&M account in future years: $75k per year minimum – Target of $90,000 per year (Approx $0.03 per kWh).  Years 6-10: Beginning Balance in O&M Account. Assume O&M Budget continues with contribution of $90K per year as O&M and component (blade/brakes/etc.) replacement/upgrade funds in later years. (Approx $0.03 per kWh)  Years 10-20: Assume $0.04 per kWh budgeted for future increased O&M and upgrades.  Years 20+: Assume $0.05 per kWh budgeted as part of new contract at that date or other arrangements. According to manufacturer’s documentation: Typically, the system requires 2 man days of annual inspection and adjustment and 3 hours a month or less in routine inspection. A remote monitoring system as described is also provided which will allow remote diagnosis and performance monitoring. At the time of commissioning EWSI will conduct operations and maintenance training for personnel if requested. WCE will use local personnel as much as possible for all of the facility work and will provide training and oversight for future village installations through the Nome facility. The operation and maintenance cost must ultimately be funded through project revenues. The grant funding will offset the capital costs of the project and the minimum ongoing project revenues will be utilized to cover all future O&M expenses. 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 It is anticipated that 100% of power generated by the project will be sold to Nome Joint Utilities System, under a power purchase agreement yet to be finalized. Several meetings have ensued with all parties to the agreement to date. The final terms of the purchase are dependent on project costs and the outcome of this grant request application. At all times the goal has been to keep the energy sales price as low as possible and prove that wind can be installed and provided a lower cost to the communities. If this BANNER WIND PROJECT grant request is fully funded we anticipate a selling price of $0.09 per kWh. For comparison purposes NJUS’s cost of producing power, under the current system is approximately at least $0.23 per kWh, just for the fuel, not including any other costs. Without any grant funds we anticipate the selling price to be close to $0.21 per kWh. Banner Wind LLC is not seeking to profit from the grant funded portion of the project. The grant funded portion of this project is utilized to directly lower the cost of energy to the utility. Banner Wind LLC, is anticipating a return of $0.05 per kWh or roughly $150,000 per year based on a target of 3,000,000 annual kWh production based on approximately $1.1M in capital invested on the portion of the funding not provided by the grant. The land lease portion of the energy sales is set at $0.01 per kWh paid to BSNC and SNC specifically for the land. The O&M portion is targeted at $0.03 per kWh and is set aside from the Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 21 of 25 9/3/2008 beginning of the project to help fund future repairs and upgrades. This is the methodology that leads to the targeted sales price of $0.09 per kWh if the grant is funded. The project also benefits from a short term cash sale of green tags from the project as well as federal tax incentives. Banner Wind will maximize the project benefits to all parties while Western Community Energy insures the operational excellence and maintenance of the project. As stated earlier, BSNC has committed 50% of their total profits from the project to future village installations. Returns to the shareholders of each native corp will help many people in the community of Nome. It is absolutely critical that this project is sustainable from a business standpoint as well as from a mechanical and installation standpoint. 4.4.4 Cost Worksheet 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. Almost all of these costs are based on firm quotes for contracts on tasks that are already finished or significantly in progress. These are not hypothetical costs with unknown parameters. WCE has been managing the project each step of the way and each of the contractors involved. The budget overview from section 2.3, section 2.5, the Milestone Items from Section 3.3 and the listed expenses and funds for Section 4.4.1 are all discussed and presented in the overall see Exhibits: FOLDER 5 BUDGET INFORMATION SUMMARY and this COST WORKSHEET. 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. Banner Wind LLC will be operated by both Bering Straits Native Corporation and Sitnasuak Native Corporation. See Exhibit: FOLDER 5 F Operating Agreement. Western Community Energy has helped manage this project as well as the overall business model . The solution implemented for this project clearly demonstrates a business solution that delivers results and gets equipment in the ground. The project is completely sustainable from its beginning to the longer term operations. The model is simple, a private company builds a commercially viable project capturing the federal tax incentives and sells the energy to the utility company at a price below their cost of generation. Furthermore, some profits from that project are further dedicated to expanding installation of renewable energy projects in the surrounding villages. Though the model is simple, it has taken months of work to implement a design and solution and then stage a two month construction window with precise execution stages . As stated before, every contractor and each person involved with this project has committed to the resources and schedule to get this project done. Western Community Energy will have a long term involvement and presence with this project to provide the Complete Operations and Maintenance in the first 5 years locally and to manage the Entegrity Wind Systems Inc. complete five year warranty on the EW 50 Wind Turbines. This time frame starts and becomes effective at the time of turbine installation and successful commissioning or ninety (90) days after the shipping date, whichever occurs first. BSNC and SNC will work with Western Community Energy on a long term basis long after the completion Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 22 of 25 9/3/2008 of the project and on into the years 6-20 operations to ensure stability of the project. This grant request does not diminish the business case, but offsets the intended power sales price to create a LONG TERM PRICE REDUCTION for energy in Nome from this project. It is imperative that the minimum energy sales price of $0.09 per kWh is a number that covers the long term O&M as well as the financing charges and debt payments for the COST SHARE part of the project expense by Banner Wind LLC. The goal of Banner Wind LLC is not to have a project with zero investment, but to be able to sell the energy to Nome Joint Utility System at a low price that helps to actually lower the energy rates in the community in a substantial way instead of just a small discount. However, even at a small discount at $0.02 below the utility costs, the wind energy will help the community by displacing as much as 200,000 gallons of diesel fuel per year. As fuel prices may increase, the value of the fuel savings could dramatically increase. 4.4.6 Analysis and Recommendations Provide information about the economic analysis and the proposed project. Discuss your recommendation for additional project development work. The economic benefit for the residents of Nome would be the significant reduction in the cost of power. We recommend additional funding for wind power for the community. This project had its beginnings with a high energy cost USDA grant application in 2007. Attached are a number of letters of support that were obtained for the USDA project that was not granted. See Exhibits Folder: 7_2007 Letters of Support for Wind Project. Banner Wind LLC is a business entity that was created to build a wind farm and get it done immediately. The approval and commitments to the project were formalized in May of 2008 with a target completion of November 2008. With shipping schedules and short construction windows everyone knew this was not going to be easy. This was extremely aggressive and involved tremendous efforts on the part of the manufacturer – Entegrity Wind Systems Inc., the project managers – W estern Community Energy, the system design and permitting team, Renaissance Engineering, DMA, BBFM, HDL, Apterra; the road and foundation construction contractor STG, Inc and the local crews and utility, Eagle Electric, Bering Straits Development Company, and particularly also Nome Joint Utility Service. More projects like this should be encouraged where the local community helps invest in the projects and has a stake in making a difference in their communities. Projects that can be designed and built within a single construction season are exciting and show momentum. They encourage the community by showing that things can be done and are being done now, not “some day” to help the energy costs. Regions like the Bering Straits (and truly the Western Coast of Alaska) with very high wind resources offer immediate opportunities to help offset diesel fuel usage. We recommend an emphasis on support for projects that can happen right away like this project for 2008, but also in th e 2009 construction season, more than some later date in the future. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 23 of 25 9/3/2008 SECTION 5– PROJECT BENEFIT Explain the economic and public benefits of your project. Include direct cost savings, and how the people of Alaska will benefit from the project. The benefits information should include the following:  Potential annual fuel displacement (gal and $) over the lifetime of the evaluated renewable energy project  Anticipated annual revenue (based on i.e. a Proposed Power Purchase Agreement price, RCA tariff, or avoided cost of ownership)  Potential additional annual incentives (i.e. tax credits)  Potential additional annual revenue streams (i.e. green tag sales or other renewable energy subsidies or programs that might be available)  Discuss the non-economic public benefits to Alaskans over the lifetime of the project Electricity Price Benefits: The installation of this wind power project will provide an output of up to 1,170 kW to the Nome Joint Utility electric grid in Nome, Alaska over a 20 year extendable project timeframe. The production is approximately 3,000,000 kWh per year, The owners of the project are committed to sell the energy at a price below the avoided cost calculations, even without any grant funding. Grant funding will allow further reduction in the price of approximately $0.03 per kWH for every one million in grant funds. Selling the energy at a rate below avoided costs will provide savings to the utility to help to lower the energy costs in the Nome area and provide some energy produced locally t hat is not dependent on imported oil. It is anticipated that 100% of power generated by the project will be sold to Nome Joint Utilities System, under a power purchase agreement yet to be finalized. If our grant request if fully funded we anticipate a selling price of $0.09 per kWh. For comparison purposes NJUS’s cost of producing power, under the current system is at least $0.23 kWh, just for the fuel, not including any other costs. The impact on energy customers from full funding of this grant request would result in a benefit to the customer of a savings of $0.12 kWh and over a 20 year span we are looking at a savings of over $7.2M, which would go towards the community. TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE ESTIMATE: at $0.09 and 3,000,000 annual kWh Total Project Revenue: $270,000 per year ($0.09 Total price) Land Lease Payment: $30,000 per year ($0.01) O&M Set Aside: $90,000 per year ($0.03) Investment Return: $150,000 per year ($0.05) A short term five year additional revenue stream from the sale of Green Tags has been negotiated at approximately $0.01 per kWh. The project will use as much of the federal tax credits as possible. The federal incentive is approximately $0.02 per kWh, but it is not clear how much of the federal credit can be used with the state grant. The assumption at this point is that with 20% of the capital contributed to the project construction, the tax credit should be at a minimimum $0.004 per kWh. Fuel Savings Benefits:  Up to 200,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually (expected range from 175,000 to 209,000 gallons per year from production estimations and actual utility value of 15.81 kwh per gallon.)  At $ 3.72 per Gal. (actual last purchase price) * 200,000 gallons = $744,000 one year of savings based on last actual purchase Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 24 of 25 9/3/2008  If the savings were to be calculated based on the last actual purchase of Diesel Fuel and that price was assumed constant for 20 years they would be calculated at $744,000 per year or a total of $14.880M and the benefit cost ratio would be over 3.6. If the cost of diesel continued to escalate, that ratio would do the same. Some detail of the economic benefits is also outlined in Section 2 above. The following bullets identify several key PUBLIC BENEFITS that this project will bring to Al aska in general, the Bering Straits region, and the community in Nome:  Local Jobs for Project Construction: (3 major local (Anchorage) consultants contracts for project design phase) (major local contractor (Anchorage) for construction activities) (4 loca l contracts (Nome Companies)for trucking, loading, tower assembly, electrical) (construction jobs up to 30 Full Time people at once for several weeks on site)  Revenue for local energy production stays in local economy instead of leaving local economy to imported fuel. Project helps lower energy price for residents. Profits from project are distributed to many local residents who are then more able to pay their energy costs. Percentage of profits dedicated to other village renewable energy projects.  O&M Employment (1+ ongoing technicians) Local O&M presence creates lasting employment in a highly skilled new technology job opportunity.  Expansion of Projects to Other Villages (more local technicians, more local benefits in region) (more diesel fuel savings in region) (more project reliability in villages based on Nome O&M centralized support)  Creation of Nome Renewable Energy Technician Training Center – Training Facility to Provide Skilled People for New Job Opportunities and Growth of Wind Industry.  Reduced cost of energy to local businesses at critical time – increases local economy and encourages growth vs. increased energy costs depress economy and discourage even staying in business in rural locations.  Increased sustainability for decreased dependence on imported diesel fuel for energy production. Less risk of running out of energy “when the tank is low” with more locally installed wind generation. SECTION 6 – GRANT BUDGET Tell us how much your total project costs. Include any investments to date and funding sources, how much is requested in grant funds, and additional investments you will make as an applicant. Include an estimate of budget costs by tasks using the form - GrantBudget.xls The funds requested are $4.126M with a 20% matching fund from Bering Straits Native Corporation and Sitnasuak Native Corporation conjointly through Banner Wind LLC, the project Company. The 20% match funds total $1.031M. The estimated total cost of the project is thus 5.157M. See Detailed Budget in Exhibits: 6_Schedule, Budget, Cost, Photos: WCE Budget Breakdown. Also See GrantBudget Document BANNER WIND PROJECT.xls in Folder 6 as requested. Also see section 2.3 for a budget overview analysis and description. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Application AEA 09-004 Grant Application Page 25 of 25 9/3/2008 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 Folder 4 Management Resume B. Cost Worksheet per application form Section 4.4.4 Folder 6 Grant and Budget Forms Grant Budget Form per application form Section 6. Folder 6 Grants and Budget Forms 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 Neal Foster Signature Title President Date 10/06/08