Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022.04.01 REF Round14 Status Report (Final)REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Alaska Energy Authority —Renewable Energy Fund –Round XIV REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA SAFE, RELIABLE, & AFFORDABLE ENERGY SOLUTIONS Alaska State LegislatureApril 2022 Round 14 (FY2023) Renewable Energy Fund (REF)Status Report REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA REF Overview Page 3 REF Statutory Guidance Page 4 Round XIV Request for Applications Schedule Page 5 REF Evaluation Process Page 6 REF Funding Limits Page 10 Proposed REF Capitalization for Round 14 (FY2023)Page 11 REF Received Applications Summary Page 12 Non-Recommended Applications Summary Page 14 Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) Solicitation of Advice on Recommended Projects Page 16 REFAC Roles Page 17 REFAC Current Members Page 18 Recommended Applications Summary Page 19 Applications Forwarded for Legislature’s Decision on Funding Page 21 Partial Funding Recommendations Page 23 Online Supplemental Materials Page 25 2 SAFE, RELIABLE, & AFFORDABLE ENERGY SOLUTIONS Table of Contents REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA REF Overview 3 The Alaska Renewable Energy Fund (REF)is a competitive grant program that was establishedbytheAlaskaStateLegislaturein2008andisnowinitsfourteenthannualfundingcycle(i.e.Round).The program was established to help fund cost-effective renewable energy projectsthroughoutthestate.These projects are intended to help communities reduce theirdependenceonfossilfuelsinordertostabilizetheircostsofbothheatandelectricity.Theprogramalsocreatesjobs,promotes renewable energy technology transfer within Alaskancommunities,utilizes local energy resources,keeps money in local economies,and fosterseconomicdevelopment.As December 31,2021,the REF has funded $284 million worth ofprojectssinceitsinception. REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA REF Statutory Guidance (AS 42.45.045) Eligible projects must: Be a new project not in operation in 2008, and •be a hydroelectric facility; •direct use* of renewable energy resources; •a facility that generates electricity from fuel cells that use hydrogen from renewable energy sources or natural gas** (subject to additional conditions); or •be a facility that generates electricity using renewable energy. •natural gas** applications must also benefit a community that •Has a population of 10,000 or less, and •Does not have economically viable renewable energy resources it can develop. *3 AAC 107.615 a project is a ”direct use” of RE resources if it uses renewable energy resources to generate or to make a fuel used to generate energy Evaluation process Develop a methodology for determining the order of projects that may receive assistance, •most weight being given to projects that serve any area in which the average cost of energy to each resident of the area exceeds the average cost to each resident of other areas of the state, •significant weight given to a statewide balance of grant funds and to the amount of matching funds an applicant is able to make available •The REF evaluation process is comprised of four stages. 4 REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA DATE / ANTICIPATED DATE ACTION Nov 16, 2021 Request for Applications posted Jan 18, 2022 Application submission deadline Jan -Apr 2022 Evaluation of Applications Apr 15,2022 REFAC Meeting Apr 19, 2022 Submission of recommendations to Legislature July 1, 2022 Capital funds appropriated by Legislature –Grants could begin Request for Applications Schedule –REF Round XIV 5 REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA REF Evaluation Process -Stage 1 –Eligibility and Completeness The REF evaluation process is comprised of four stages. Stage one is an evaluation of applicant and project eligibility and application completeness, as per 3 AAC 107.635. This portion of the evaluation process is conducted by AEA staff. •Applicant eligibility is defined as per AS 42.45.045 (l). •“electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS 42.05, independent power producer, local government, or other governmental utility, including a tribal council and housing authority;” •Project eligibility is defined as per AS 42.45.045 (f)-(h) and is provided on the preceding page. •Project completeness •An application is complete in that the information provided is sufficiently responsive to the RFA to allow AEA to consider the application in the next stage (stage two) of the evaluation. •The application must provide a detail description of the phase(s) of project proposed. Applications which fail to meet the requirements of stage one will be rejected by the authority, and will notify each applicant whose application is rejected of the authority’s decision. 6 STAGE 1 CRITERIA PASS/FAIL Applicant eligibility, including formal authorization and ownership, site control, and operation PASS/FAIL Project Eligibility PASS/FAIL Complete application,including Phase description(s)PASS/FAIL REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA REF Evaluation Process -Stage 2 –Technical and Economic Feasibility Stage two is an evaluation concerning technical and economic feasibility. This portion of the evaluation process is conducted by AEA staff, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, and contracted third-party vendors. The following items are evaluated as part of the stage two evaluation, as required per 3 AAC 107.645: •Project management, development, and operations •Qualifications and experience of project management team, including on-going maintenance and operation •Technical feasibility –including but not limited to sustainable current and future availability of renewable resource, site availability and suitability, technical and environmental risks, and reasonableness of proposed energy system •Economic feasibility and benefits –including but not limited to project benefit-cost ratio, project financing plan, and other public benefits owing to the project All stage 2 criteria are weighted as follows as part of the evaluation process. Those applications that score below 40 points in this stage will be automatically rejected by the authority, however, those projects scoring above 40 can also be rejected as under 3 AAC 107.645(b) has the authority to reject applications that it determines to be not technically and economically feasible, or do not provide sufficient public benefit. 7 CRITERIA CRITERIA DESCRIPTION WEIGHT 1 Project management, development, and operation 25% 2 Qualifications and experience 20% 3 Technical feasibility 20% 4.a Economic benefit-cost ratio 25% 4.b Financing plan 5% 4.c Other public benefit 5% REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA REF Evaluation Process -Stage 3 –Project Ranking Stage three is an evaluation concerning the ranking of eligible projects. This portion of the evaluation process is conducted by AEA staff in conjunction with solicitation from the Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) . The following items are evaluated as part of the stage three evaluation, as required per 3 AAC 107.655-660: •Cost of energy •Applicant matching funds •Project feasibility (levelized score from stage 2) •Project readiness •Public benefits (evaluated through stage 2 benefits) •Sustainability •Local Support •Regional Balance •Compliance All stage 3 criteria are weighted as follows as part of the evaluation process. The stage 3 scoring is used to determine the ranking score. 8 CRITERIA CRITERIA DESCRIPTION WEIGHT 1 Cost of Energy 30% 2 Matching Funds 15% 3 Project Feasibility (levelized score from stage 2)25% 4 Project Readiness 5% 5 Public Benefits 10% 6 Sustainability 10% 7 Local Support 5% 8 Regional Balance Pass/Fail 9 Compliance Pass/Fail REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Even Split Energy Region Grant Funding % Total Cost burden (HH cost/HH income)Allocation cost of energy basis Additional funding needed to reach 50% % of target allocation % Total Allocation per capita basis Allocation per region basis Aleutians $17,565,348 7%9.26%$18,857,207 ($8,136,744)93%1%$3,036,869 $23,418,114 Bering Straits $20,906,582 8%15.43%$31,398,914 ($5,207,125)67%1%$3,516,125 $23,418,114 Bristol Bay $12,270,130 5%14.40%$29,312,927 $2,386,333 42%1%$2,660,674 $23,418,114 Copper River/Chugach $27,663,273 11%6.93%$14,096,383 ($20,615,081)196%1%$3,291,064 $23,418,114 Kodiak $16,486,919 6%5.83%$11,866,689 ($10,553,574)139%1%$3,143,209 $23,418,114 Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim $37,273,384 14%17.83%$36,284,058 ($19,131,355)103%4%$9,553,810 $23,418,114 North Slope $2,069,151 1%3.87%$7,881,335 $1,871,517 26%1%$2,653,027 $23,418,114 Northwest Arctic $24,839,198 10%15.99%$32,555,160 ($8,561,618)76%1%$2,675,970 $23,418,114 Railbelt $21,838,458 8%5.05%$10,271,915 ($16,702,501)213%78%$200,670,431 $23,418,114 Southeast $60,696,587 24%5.48%$11,159,454 ($55,116,860)544%9%$24,030,924 $23,418,114 Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanan $14,954,332 6%26.49%$53,915,209 $12,003,272 28%1%$2,367,148 $23,418,114 Statewide $1,035,888 0%0.00% TOTAL $257,599,251 100%$257,599,251 100%$257,599,251 $257,599,251 Cumulative through Round 13 Cost of Power Allocation PopulationTotal Round 1-13 Funding REF Evaluation Process -Stage 4 –Regional Spreading Stage four is a final ranking of eligible projects, as required per 3 AAC 107.660, which gives “significant weight to providing a statewide balance of grant money, taking into consideration the amount of money available, number and types of projects within each region, regional rank, and statewide rank.” This portion of the evaluation process is conducted by AEA staff in conjunction with solicitation from the Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) . The following items are evaluated as part of the stage four evaluation, as required per 3 AAC 107.660: •Cost of energy burden = [HH cost of electric + HH heat cost] ÷ [HH income] –this is used to determine target funding allocation by region –for regional spreading Stage 4 cost of energy burden given below. The below table indicates target funding, as has been allocated, by region, this will be applied to stage 3 statewide ranking to determine the regionally-spread rank. 9 REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA REF Round XIV funding limits are limited by the requested phase(s) in the application and the technology type applied. Low vs High Cost Energy Areas: •Low Energy Cost Areas are defined as communities with a residential retail electric rate of below $0.20 per kWh, before Power Cost Equalization (PCE) reimbursement is applied. For heat projects, low energy cost areas are communities with natural gas available as a heating fuel to at least 50% of residences, or availability expected by the time the proposed project is constructed. •High Energy Cost Areas are defined as communities with a residential retail electric rate of $0.20 per kWh or higher, before PCE funding is applied. For heat projects, high energy cost areas are communities that do not have natural gas available as a heating fuel. REF Funding Limits REF Round XIV Grant Funding Limits 10 REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Proposed REF Capitalization for FY2023 / Rd 14 The State of Alaska FY2023 proposed capital budget has allocated $15 million for REF Round 14 grant funding of recommended projects. As recommended, the current list of 27 recommended applications yields a total grant request of $14.9 million. With an anticipated REF budget of $15 million, this is sufficient to cover the current round 14 recommendations. The table to the right indicates historical REF program funding from the inception of the REF program to the anticipated $15 million for FY2023. The proposed $15M would be the largest REF capitalization since FY2014. 11 Fiscal Year Legislative Appropriation/Award FY2008 100,000,000$ FY2009 25,013,014$ FY2010 25,000,000$ FY2011 26,620,231$ FY2012 25,870,659$ FY2013 25,000,000$ FY2014 22,843,900$ FY2015 11,512,659$ FY2016 -$ FY2017 -$ FY2018 -$ FY2019 11,000,000$ FY2020 -$ FY2021 -$ FY2022 4,750,973$ FY2023 (Proposed)15,000,000$ Total (Excl. FY2023)277,611,436$ Total 292,611,436$ REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Energy Region No. of Applications REF Funding Requested ($)%, of Total Aleutians 1 321,000$ 2% Bering Straits 1 2,000,000$ 10% Bristol Bay 5 3,063,025$ 15% Kodiak 1 172,600$ 1% Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim 7 1,965,932$ 10% Northwest Arctic 3 3,192,435$ 16% Railbelt 13 6,464,707$ 32% Southeast 5 779,868$ 4% Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana 3 2,330,000$ 11% Total 39 20,289,567$ For REF Round 14, AEA received a total of 39 applications, with a corresponding total grant request of $20.2 million. Technology Type No. of Applications REF Funding Requested ($) Biomass 2 1,561,107$ Heat Recovery 1 50,000$ Hydro 6 4,100,868$ Hydrokinetic 1 207,500$ Other 3 510,000$ Solar 9 6,003,500$ Storage 4 3,222,500$ Wind 12 3,931,657$ Wind (to heat)1 702,435$ Total 39 20,289,567$ Round XIV –Received Applications Summary 12 REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Round XIV –Received Applications Summary The table to the right indicates the number of applications received by requested phase*, along with the corresponding grant request totals. Per the current RFA, there are four phases, listed below in chronological order, for which an applicant may request funding: (1)Reconnaissance (2)Feasibility and Conceptual Design (3)Final Design and Permitting (4)Construction *For purposes of tabulation, if an applicant applied for more than one phase, the first chronological phase was counted, with the latter phases being excluded. 13 Requested Phase No. of Applications REF Funding Requested ($) Reconnaissance 6 2,989,368$ Feasibility and Conceptual Design 14 5,578,135$ Final Design and Permitting 7 4,631,011$ Construction 12 7,091,053$ Total 39 20,289,567$ REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Stage 1 Non-Recommended Applications –Summary 14 In AEA’s stage one evaluation, as per 3 AAC 107.635, it was determined by AEA evaluation staff that twelve applications did not meet the eligibility and/or completeness requirements and were rejected. Two applicants appealed their rejections as per 3 AAC 107.650 –“Requests for reconsideration”. Upon AEA’s due consideration and review of the appeals, both rejections were upheld, and final written notices were issued to the applicants. No additional applications were rejected as per 3 AAC 107.645, stage two evaluations. With an initial receipt of 39 applications and 12 being rejected owing to stage 1 evaluations, there are 27 remaining applications which are thus recommended. With respect to grant funding requests, a total of $2.3 million was rejected in stage one. AEA received 39 initial applications. Owing to AEA’s stage 1 review, 12 applications were rejected, reducing the total grantfunds requested by ($2.3) million. The remaining 27 applications, totaling a grant request of $17.9 million, were then evaluated according to stage 2, stage 3, and stage 4 criteria. With an anticipated REF fund allocation of $15 million for FY2023, there are insufficient REF funds to cover one-hundred percent of the Round 14 requests, as initially requested. Partial funding recommendations, which are discussed further along in the presentation, were made in full consideration of project phases applied for, application scoring, project scope eligibility, and household cost of energy. REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Stage 1 Non-Recommended Applications 15 Below are the 12 identified applications which were rejected owing to stage 1 evaluation: Count App Number Applicant Name Project Title Technology Project Phase(s)Applicant Type Energy Region Election District Community (Nearest) Grant Funds Requested Matching Funds ($)Match Type (Cash/In-Kind)Stage I Rejection Reasoning 1 14013 State of Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities Galena Maintenance Station Solar Solar Feasibility and Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; Construction State Government Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana 39-T Galena 195,000.00$ 5,000.00$ Cash Ineligible Applicant - State Gov't 2 14014 State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Sport Fish Ruth Barnett Sport Fish Hatchery - Heat Recovery Heat Recovery Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design State Government Railbelt 1-A Fairbanks 50,000.00$ 2,500.00$ Cash Ineligible Applicant - State Gov't 3 14023 State of Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities Fairbanks Regional Office Building Solar Solar Feasibility and Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting State Government Railbelt 1-A Fairbanks 80,000.00$ -$ N/A Ineligible Applicant - State Gov't 4 14024 Naterkaq Light Plant Naterkaq Light Plant Battery Installation and Integration Storage Construction Utility Lower Yukon- Kuskokwim 38-S Chefornak 352,000.00$ $93,960 / $844,164 Cash/In-Kind Ineligible Project 5 14030 Levelock Village Council Levelock Renewables Final Design and Permitting Wind Final Design and Permitting Tribal Council Bristol Bay 37-S Levelock 201,500.00$ 12,000.00$ In-Kind Substantially Incomplete 6 14031 Atmautluak Tribal Utilities Atmautluak Light Plant Battery, Thermal Stove, and Metering Installation Storage Construction Utility Lower Yukon- Kuskokwim 38-S Atmautluak 375,000.00$ 40,000.00$ Cash Ineligible Project 7 14032 CalWave Power Technologies Yakutat Wave Feasibility and Design Project Hydrokinetic Feasibility and Conceptual Design IPP Southeast 32-P Yakutat 207,500.00$ 199,100.00$ Cash/In-Kind Ineligible Applicant - Not an AK registered business, does not have nor maintain a physical presence in AK, does not meet definition of IPP 8 14033 Levelock Village Council Levelock Feasibility Assessment & Conceptual Design Wind Final Design and Permitting Tribal Council Bristol Bay 37-S Levelock 141,025.00$ -$ N/A Substantially Incomplete 9 14036 Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority Emergency Renewable Energy Sources for Southeast Alaska - Saxman Other Construction Tribal Housing Authority Southeast 36-R Saxman 170,000.00$ 33,000.00$ Cash Late Application 10 14037 Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority Emergency Renewable Energy Sources for Southeast Alaska - Kake Other Construction Tribal Housing Authority Southeast 35-R Kake 170,000.00$ 33,000.00$ Cash Late Application 11 14038 Tlingit Haida Regional Housing Authority Emergency Renewable Energy Sources for Southeast Alaska - Angoon Other Construction Tribal Housing Authority Southeast 35-R Angoon 170,000.00$ 33,000.00$ Cash Late Application 12 14039 City of Port Heiden Reindeer and Barbara Creek Hydro Reconnaissance Project Hydro Construction Local Government Bristol Bay 37-S Port Heiden 225,000.00$ -$ N/A Late Application REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Solicitation of Advice from Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) As statutorily required per AS 42.45.045 and set forth in 3 AAC 107.660, the authority is to solicit advice from the REFAC concerning making a final list / ranking of eligible projects, which gives “significant weight to providing a statewide balance of grant money, taking into consideration the amount of money available, number and types of projects within each region, regional rank, and statewide rank.” This finalized list will be provided to the legislature for recommendation in accordance with AS 42.45.045(d)(3). Any grant awards are subject to legislative approval and appropriation. The right-hand table is provided to assess the “regional spreading” of REF funding. As indicated, both the Railbelt and the Southeast energy regions currently exceed 200% of their target allocation based on their cost of energy burden. Bristol Bay, Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana, and the North Slope energy regions are the remaining regions where the allocation, based on the cost of energy burden, has not met 50% of their potential allocation, categorizing these regions as “under-served”. The authority solicits advice from the REFAC relating to any recommendations in changes to funding level, ranking, and/or total amount of funding and number of projects. 16 REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA REFAC Roles Statutes (AS 42.45.045) •AEA “in consultation with the advisory committee…develop a methodology for determining the order of projects that may receive assistance….” •AEA “shall, at least once each year, solicit from the advisory committee funding recommendations for all grants.” Regulations (3 AAC 107.660) (a) To establish a statewide balance of recommended projects, the authority will provide to the advisory committee established in AS 42.45.045 (i) a statewide and regional ranking of all applications recommended for grants. (b) In consultation with the advisory committee established in AS 42.45.045 (i), the authority will (1) make a final prioritized list of all recommended projects, giving significant weight to providing a statewide balance of grant money, and taking into consideration the amount of money that may be available, number and types of projects within each region, regional rank, and statewide rank 17 REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA REFAC Current Members 18 NAME TITLE SECTOR APPOINTED BY VACANT TBD Small rural electric utility Governor (pending) Rose,Chris Founder / Executive Director, RenewableEnergy Alaska Project (REAP)Business/organization involved in renewable energy Governor Schubert,Gail CEO, Bering Straits Native Corporation Representative of an Alaska Native Organization Governor Amberg, Alicia Member,Denali Commission; Exec Dir, Associated General Contractors of Alaska Denali Commission Governor Thibert,Lee CEO,Chugach Electric Association Large urban electric utility Governor Von Imhof, Natasha Senator Senate Member 2 Senate President Wilson, David Senator Senate Member 1 Senate President Hopkins,Grier Representative House Member 2 Speaker of the House Josephson,Andy Representative House Member 1 Speaker of the House REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Round XIV –Recommended Applications Summary There are 27 remaining recommended applications, totaling a request of $14.9 million. 19 Energy Region No. of Applications Recommended Funding ($)%, of Total Aleutians 1 321,000$ 2% Bering Straits 1 2,000,000$ 13% Bristol Bay 2 1,423,500$ 10% Kodiak 1 172,600$ 1% Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim 5 1,238,932$ 8% Northwest Arctic 3 3,192,435$ 21% Railbelt 11 4,426,707$ 30% Southeast 1 62,368$ 0% Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana 2 2,135,000$ 14% Total 27 14,972,542$ Technology Type No. of Applications Recommended Funding ($) Biomass 2 1,561,107$ Hydro 5 2,462,868$ Solar 7 4,803,500$ Storage 2 2,423,500$ Wind 10 3,019,132$ Wind (to heat)1 702,435$ Total 27 14,972,542$ REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Click the map above to access an interactive web-based map of Round 14 recommended projects. Round XIV –Geographical Distribution of Recommended Applications 20 REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Applications Forwarded for Legislature’s Decision on Funding 21 On April 15, 2022 the REFAC voted unanimously in favor of the AEA’s recommended applications and assigned ranking, as presented above in descending order. Please see related summary report for details concerning the evaluation and description of the individual applications. Count App Number Applicant Name Project Title Project Phase(s)Energy Region Election District Technology Community (Nearest)Grant Funds Requested Matching Funds ($)Match Type (Cash/In-Kind) Stage 2 Score Stage 3 Score Benefit/Cost Ratio Household Energy Cost Regional Rank Statewide Rank Recommended Funding Level Recommended Funding Amount 1 14034 City of Galena Galena Community Scale Solar PV and Battery Project Final Design and Permitting; Construction Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana 39-T Solar Galena 2,000,000$ $1,500,000 / $6,000 Cash / In-Kind 84.17 80.16 1.27 10,020$ 1 1 Full w/ Special Provision 2,000,000$ 2 14029 Golden Valley Electric Association Interior Alaska Wind Energy Resource Assessment Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 9-E Wind Murphy Dome (Fairbanks) Deltana Area (Delta Junction) Donnelly Dome (Fort Greely) Pedro Dome (Fox) Wickersham Dome (Fox)1,425,000$ 680,700$ In-Kind 95.17 73.92 2.92 6,486$ 1 2 Partial 855,000$ 3 14002 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative Holy Cross Solar Energy & Battery Storage Feasibility Study Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana 37-S Solar Holy Cross 135,000$ 15,000$ Cash 71.5 69.37 0.88 10,548$ 2 3 Full 135,000.00$ 4 14012 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. AEEC/KPB CPL Landfill Gas CHP Project Final Design and Permitting Railbelt 31-P Biomass Soldotna 884,986$ 221,247$ Cash 90.75 68.76 1.89 3,428$ 2 4 Full 884,986$ 5 14022 Chugach Electric Association, Inc. On behalf of the Bradley Lake Management Committee (BPMC)Dixon Diversion Feasibility Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 32-P Hydro Fritz Creek/ Fox River 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ Cash 88 67.16 1.39 3,428$ 3 5 Full 1,000,000$ 6 14001 Nushagak Electric & Telephone Cooperative Nuyakuk River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Bristol Bay 37-S Hydro Dillingham 2,000,000$ 200,000$ Cash 79.75 65.63 0.97 6,262$ 1 6 Partial 1,000,000.00$ 7 14026 Nome Joint Utility System Nome Battery Energy Storage System Construction Bering Straits 39-T Storage Nome 2,000,000$ 500,000$ Cash 85.5 65.59 0.89 6,595$ 1 7 Full 2,000,000$ 8 14004 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative Pilot Station Wind Energy Feasibility Study & Conceptual Design Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim 39-T Wind Pilot Station 229,500$ 25,500$ Cash 75.5 65.3 0.41 8,225$ 1 8 Full 229,500$ 9 14007 Northwest Arctic Borough Design and Permitting for Solar PV and Battery Storage for Ambler, Kiana, Noorvik, and Selawik Final Design and Permitting Northwest Arctic 40-T Solar Ambler / Kiana / Noorvik / Selawik 590,000$ 34,000$ In-Kind 72.08 64.46 0.35 9,335$ 2 9 Full 590,000$ 10 14018 Kotzebue Electric Association, Inc. Kotzebue Wind to PV Transition Utilizing Existing Wind Infrastructure Construction Northwest Arctic 40-T Solar Kotzebue 1,900,000$ $250,000 / $452,000 Cash/In-Kind 75.83 64.46 0.84 7,247$ 1 10 Full 1,900,000$ 11 14005 City of Ouzinkie Ouzinkie Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Kodiak 32-P Wind Ouzinkie 172,600$ $50,000/$14,400 Cash/In-Kind 68.75 64.21 0.58 6,942$ 1 11 Full 172,600$ 12 14028 City of Nenana Nenana Biomass District Heat System Construction Railbelt 6-C Biomass Nenana 676,121$ $417,468 / $40,000 Cash/In-Kind 70.58 64.08 1.09 5,560$ 4 12 Full 676,121$ 13 14016 Kwig Power Company Kwigillingok Wind Turbine Upgrade Construction Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim 38-S Wind Kwigillingok 278,716$ 13,500$ In-Kind 77.25 61.87 1.25 8,462$ 2 13 Full 278,716$ 14 14009 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC Summit Lake Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 29-O Wind Moose Pass 232,000$ 58,000$ Cash 80 61.49 1.01 3,428$ 5 14 Full 232,000$ Recommended Projects Recommendation REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Count App Number Applicant Name Project Title Project Phase(s)Energy Region Election District Technology Community (Nearest)Grant Funds Requested Matching Funds ($)Match Type (Cash/In-Kind) Stage 2 Score Stage 3 Score Benefit/Cost Ratio Household Energy Cost Regional Rank Statewide Rank Recommended Funding Level Recommended Funding Amount 15 14020 Puvurnaq Power Company Kongiganak Wind Upgrade with Airfoil Blades for Turbines Construction Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim 38-S Wind Kongiganak 278,716$ 13,500$ In-Kind 77.5 61.33 1.12 8,538$ 3 15 Full 278,716$ 16 14027 Inside Passage Electric Cooperative Jenny Creek Hydro Reconnaissance - Kake IPEC Reconnaissance Southeast 35-R Hydro Kake 62,368$ 10,000$ In-Kind 73.5 60.09 0.44 7,439$ 1 16 Full 62,368$ 17 14011 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC Caribou Hills Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 31-P Wind Ninilchik/Fox River 209,600$ 52,400$ Cash 73.75 57.3 0.75 3,428$ 6 17 Full 209,600$ 18 14010 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC East Foreland/Nikiski Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 29-O Wind Nikiski 200,000$ 50,000$ Cash 73.33 56.99 0.75 3,428$ 7 18 Full 200,000$ 19 14025 City of Pilot Point Pilot Point Comprehensive Community Wind/Solar/Storage & Heat Project Construction Bristol Bay 37-S Storage Pilot Point 495,500$ $125,000 / $200,500 Cash/In-Kind 51.75 55.58 0.29 7,403$ 2 19 Partial 423,500$ 20 14015 City of Kotzebue Kotzebue Wind to Heat System Feasibility and Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; Construction Northwest Arctic 40-T Wind (to heat)Kotzebue 702,435$ -$ None provided 76.33 55.33 1.34 7,247$ 3 20 Full 702,435$ 21 14006 City of Homer, Department of Public Works Homer Energy Recovery Project Final Design and Permitting; Construction Railbelt 31-P Hydro Homer 492,500$ 107,000$ In-Kind 72.33 54.99 0.45 3,428$ 8 21 Partial 79,500$ 22 14008 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC Ninilchik Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 31-P Wind Ninilchik 192,000$ 48,000$ Cash 70 54.49 0.77 3,428$ 9 22 Full 192,000$ 23 14035 City of False Pass UNGA Man Creek Hydroelectric Project Final Design and Permitting Aleutians 37-S Hydro False Pass 321,000$ $27,000 / $27,000 Cash/In-Kind 59.33 51.33 0.7 6,947$ 1 23 Full w/ Special Provision 321,000$ 24 14003 Point MacKenzie Solar Point MacKenzie Solar Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; Construction Railbelt 8-D Solar Point Mackenzie 1,000,000$ 250,000$ In-Kind 56 47.1 0.63 3,058$ 10 24 Partial 75,000$ 25 14021 Akiachak Native Community Akiachak Wind Feasibility Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim 38-S Wind Akiachak 371,000$ -$ None provided 52.58 46.86 0.5 8,119$ 4 25 Full 371,000$ 26 14019 Native Village of Eklutna Eklutna Village Solar Energy Project - Feasibility Study Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 12-F Solar Native Village of Eklutna (Palmer proxy)22,500$ 7,500$ Cash 48.08 46.37 0.07 3,058$ 11 26 Full 22,500$ 27 14017 Native Village of Kwinhagak Kwinhagak Reconnaissance Study Reconnaissance Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim 38-S Solar Quinhagak 81,000$ 1,000$ In-Kind 44.67 45.2 0 7,645$ 5 27 Full 81,000$ TOTAL 17,952,542$ 14,972,542$ Note: blue cells denote standard electric project applications yellow cells denote heat project applications Recommended Projects Recommendation Applications Forwarded for Legislature’s Decision on Funding (continued) 22 Please see related summary report for details concerning the evaluation and description of the individual applications. REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA App Number Applicant Name Project Title Project Phase(s)Energy Region Election District Technology Grant Funds Requested Matching Funds ($)Match Type (Cash/In-Kind) Stage 3 Score Benefit/Cost Ratio Household Energy Cost Regional Rank Statewide Rank Recommended Funding Amount 14029 Golden Valley Electric Association Interior Alaska Wind Energy Resource Assessment Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 9-E Wind 1,425,000.00$ 680,700.00$ In-Kind 73.92 2.92 6,486$ 1 2 855,000$ 14001 Nushagak Electric & Telephone Cooperative Nuyakuk River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Bristol Bay 37-S Hydro 2,000,000.00$ 200,000.00$ Cash 65.63 0.97 6,262$ 1 6 1,000,000$ 14025 City of Pilot Point Pilot Point Comprehensive Community Wind/Solar/Storage & Heat Project Construction Bristol Bay 37-S Storage 495,500.00$ $125,000 / $200,500 Cash/In-Kind 55.58 0.29 7,403$ 2 19 423,500$ 14006 City of Homer, Department of Public Works Homer Energy Recovery Project Final Design and Permitting; Construction Railbelt 31-P Hydro 492,500.00$ 107,000.00$ In-Kind 54.99 0.45 3,428$ 8 21 79,500$ 14003 Point MacKenzie Solar Point MacKenzie Solar Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; Construction Railbelt 8-D Solar 1,000,000.00$ 250,000.00$ In-Kind 47.1 0.63 3,058$ 10 24 75,000$ TOTAL 5,413,000.00$ 2,433,000$ Round XIV –Partial Funding Recommendations As part of the evaluation process and pursuant to 3 AAC 170.655(b), five applications, as provided below, have been recommended for partial funding. To caveat, if these partial funding recommendations are reversed and full funding recommended, this would raise the total grant request amount for all remaining 27 recommended applications to $17.9 million. At $17.9 million, the anticipated REF fund capitalization of $15 million would be insufficient to fund the total grantrequest amount, yielding a delta of ($2.9 million). Reasoning for recommendations of partial funding are provided on the following page. Partial funding recommendations have been made in full consideration of additional due diligence and information needed from preliminary project phases prior to funding for final design and/or construction; eligibility of items comprising project scope; and statewide balance of grant money, taking into consideration the amount of money available, number and types of projects within each region, regional rank, and statewide rank (as per 3 AAC 107.660). 23 REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA App Number Applicant Name Project Title Partial Funding (as per 3 AAC 107.655[b]) 14029 Golden Valley Electric Association Interior Alaska Wind Energy Resource Assessment Partial Funding : As stated in the application, GVEA is looking to conduct reconnaissance and feasibility and conceptual design reports on 5 potential wind farm sites. In the application it is stated under section 2.4 - Project Description, "Funds from this project will be used to complete wind resource assessments at up to five sites in Interior Alaska (3-5 sites depending on grant funding)." Owing to an anticipated REF Rd 14 funding cap of $15 million, and additionally the relatively low cost of energy for Railbelt ratepayers relative to other areas of the state, AEA has sought to partially fund this application for 3 sites at GVEA's choosing, reduced from the requested 5 sites. Such partial funding still satisfies the request from the applicant, while also allowing for additional funds to be applied to those portions of the state where the cost of energy is greater. 14001 Nushagak Electric & Telephone Cooperative Nuyakuk River Hydroelectric Project Partial Funding : $2M project cap for REF "high cost area" projects. This project was awarded $1M in Rd 13, and is thus only eligible for $1M in this Rd 14. 14025 City of Pilot Point Pilot Point Comprehensive Community Wind/Solar/Storage & Heat Project Partial Funding : Applicant estimates $72,000 cost for extended maintenance contract cost. This 2 year maintenance contract item is not a fundable item per the REF statute AS 42.45.045(f)(2)(A)-(D) concerning project scope eligibility. Partial funding in the amount of $423,500 is recommended, which is exclusive of the $72,000 maintenance contract. 14006 City of Homer, Department of Public Works Homer Energy Recovery Project Partial Funding : The City of Homer submitted this application with a grant request amount of $492,500 for final design & permitting and construction project phases. The final design & permitting phase of this project is estimated to be $79,500, with the remaining $413,000 for construction. It is AEA's recommendation that this project be funded at $79,500 to provide for the funding of the final design and permitting phase. Given the nascent nature of the technology to be employed as stated in the application (self-contained turbine units generating power via excess pressure generated through the City of Homer's water utility system), such partial funding is recommended to thoroughly vet the technology and provide more refined estimates as to the energy generated, O&M, and system integration/interconnection, prior to construction. Additionally, owing to the anticipated REF Rd 14 funding cap of $15 million, and the lower cost of energy within the Railbelt relative to the other areas of the state, such partial funding allows for an offset of funds to those areas of the state where the cost of energy is greater. 14003 Point MacKenzie Solar Point MacKenzie Solar Partial Funding : AEA recommends partial funding in the amount of $75,000 to conduct an integration, interconnection, and feasibility study. Given the size of the proposed solar farm, inexperience of the solar contractor with utility-scale solar projects, and potential significant issues with interconnection (as stated in section 5.3.1 - Technical Risk, p. 17, of the application), AEA feels it is prudent for this project to be analyzed more comprehensively prior to allocating REF funds for construction. Additionally, partial funding is recommended for this application as it was second to last in the regional ranking for Railbelt applications for Round 14. Furthermore, being located within the Railbelt, the project would be located in one of the lowest cost of energy regions in the State and the partial funding of this project subsequently allows for the funding of other projects which seek to provide benefit to those areas with higher costs of energy, allowing for a more equitable distribution of REF funds across all energy regions. Round XIV –Partial Funding Reasoning 24 REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA Supplemental materials as listed below have been made available on the Alaska Energy Authority website for reference by interested parties: •Round 14 REF Recommendations •REF Round 14 Status Report •REF Round 14 Application Summaries Report •REF Round 14 Economic Evaluation Summary Reports •Application Documents •REF Round 14 Cover Letter •Request for Applications Solicitation •Standard Application Form •Heat Application Form •Best Practices Guides •Guide provided for each technology type –Biomass, Heat Pump, Heat Recovery, Hydro, Solar, and Wind •Economic Evaluation Model •Additional Documents Online Supplemental Materials 25 REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA 26 SAFE, RELIABLE, & AFFORDABLE ENERGY SOLUTIONS ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY 813 West Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Toll Free (Alaska Only) 888-300-8534