HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-04-13 AEA Agenda and docs
813 West Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage, Alaska 99503 T 907.771.3000 Toll Free 888.300.8534 F 907.771.3044
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
Alaska Energy Authority Board Meeting Wednesday April 13, 2022, 8:30 AM AGENDA- REVISED
Dial 1 (888) 585-9008 and enter code 212-753-619# Public comment guidelines are below.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL BOARD MEMBERS
3. AGENDA APPROVAL
4. PRIOR MINUTES – March 2, 2022
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS (2 minutes per person) see call in number above
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. Resolution 2022-02 Transfer of Assets to Utilities
B. BPMC Required Project Work
7. OLD BUSINESS
A. NONE
8. DIRECTOR COMMENTS
A. Response to Board Questions
B. Power Project Fund Loan Dashboard
C. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Program –Round 14 Update
D. Electric Utility Relief Program (EURP) Update
E. Denali Commission Update
F. Rural Update
G. Railbelt Reliabiility Council (RRC) Update
H. Legislative Update
I. Community Outreach
J. Articles of Interest
K. Next Regularly Scheduled AEA Board Meeting Wednesday, May 25, 2022
9. EXECUTIVE SESSION – To discuss confidential attorney-client communications regarding early payment of Power Revenue Bonds, 10th Series (Transmission Projects), the immediate knowledge of which would have an adverse effect on Alaska Energy Authority.
10. BOARD COMMENTS
11. ADJOURNMENT
Public Comment Guidelines Members of the public who wish to provide written comments, please email your comments to
publiccomment@akenergyauthority.org by no later than 4 p.m. on the day before the meeting, so they can be shared with board members prior to the meeting.
On the meeting day, callers will enter the teleconference muted. After board roll call and agenda approval, we will ask callers to press *9 on their phones if they wish to make a public comment.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2
This will initiate the hand-raising function. We will unmute callers individually in the order the calls were received.
When an individual is unmuted, you will hear, “It is now your turn to speak.” Please identify yourself and make your public comments.
813 West Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage, Alaska 99503 T 907.771.3000 Toll Free 888.300.8534 F 907.771.3044
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
RGYAUTHORITY.ORG
Alaska Energy Authority
DRAFT BOARD MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, March 2, 2022
Anchorage, Alaska
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Pruhs called the meeting of the Alaska Energy Authority to order on March 2, 2022, at 8:31
am. A quorum was established.
2. ROLL CALL BOARD MEMBERS
Members present: Chair Dana Pruhs (Public Member); Vice-Chair Julie Sande (Commissioner
DCCED); Albert Fogle (Public Member); Bill Kendig (Public Member); Anna MacKinnon (SOA-DOR);
Bill Vivlamore (Public Member); and Randy Eledge (Public Member).
Chair Pruhs welcomed Mr. Eledge as the newest Board member. Mr. Eledge briefly discussed his
personal background and professional background.
3. AGENDA APPROVAL
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director, suggested the addition of an Executive Session under Item 9F.
to include the AIDEA/AEA Organizational Chart and an update on staffing. There was no objection
to the friendly amendment to the agenda.
MOTION: A motion was made by Mr. Kendig to approve the agenda as amended adding
an Executive Session under Item 9F. to include the AIDEA/AEA Organizational Chart and an
update on staffing. Motion seconded by Mr. Fogle.
The motion to approve the agenda, as amended adding an Executive Session under Item 9F.
to include the AIDEA/AEA Organizational Chart and an update on staffing, passed without
objection.
4. PRIOR MINUTES – January 27, 2022
MOTION: A motion was made by Mr. Kendig to approve the prior minutes of January 27,
2022, as presented. Motion seconded by Mr. Fogle.
The motion to approve the minutes of the January 27, 2022, minutes passed without
objection.
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS (2 minutes per person)
Chair Pruhs informed that each person is allowed two minutes to comment. He requested that
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 12
each person clearly state their name and affiliation. Chair Pruhs asked Jennifer Bertolini, AEA, to
give directions for public comments. Ms. Bertolini directed that anyone online who wishes to
make a public comment press star-nine and they will be notified when it is their turn to speak.
There were no apparent members of the public online who wished to make a public comment.
There were no members of the public in-person who wished to make a public comment. Chair
Pruhs closed the public comment session. Chair Pruhs reminded staff to ensure that a microphone
is set up at the back table to use for potential in-person public comments.
6. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Moved to Item 9F.
7. NEW BUSINESS
A. Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) Presentation
Chair Pruhs requested Mr. Thayer begin the presentation. Mr. Thayer stated that Governor
Dunleavy has introduced two pieces of legislation for the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS).
Ms. Bertolini apologized for interrupting and indicated that there is a member of the public who
has their hand raised for public comment. Chair Pruhs noted that the public comment period is
closed.
Mr. Thayer continued that an RPS has been adopted in 30 states and two territories. Each RPS is
different for a different market. Governor Dunleavy has introduced one bill in the House and one
bill in the Senate. One hearing has occurred and two hearings are scheduled next week. Mr.
Thayer discussed that the original bills were drafted without participation from the Regulatory
Commission, AEA, or the utilities. Since then, meetings have occurred with the Governor and the
Governor’s Office and the entities to review suggested amendments.
Mr. Thayer explained that the presentation before the Board today was given to the Senate Energy
Committee and promotes the independent long-term cost reduction with competitive markets.
The goal is to transition to 30% renewable power by 2030 and to transition to 80% renewable
power by 2040. Mr. Thayer discussed that the best way to diversify the supply is to expand the
renewable energy portfolio, thus increasing Alaska’s energy security.
Mr. Thayer noted that the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) developed five scenarios and
determined that the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project would reach the goal for the railbelt
average from Homer to Fairbanks to utilize 80% renewable power by 2040. This is not a statewide
program. Issues are being addressed as to how the utilities will share renewable energy in the
different service territories.
Mr. Thayer discussed that there are 90 days left in the session and the bill is highly complex. He
commented that there are impassioned beliefs regarding renewables and indicated that 85% of
the state’s energy needs come from one company in Cook Inlet. Mr. Thayer suggested that
Alaska Energy Authority Page 3 of 12
diversification is necessary in Cook Inlet. He noted that other companies in the market left Cook
Inlet due to regulatory actions by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) who did not
approve gas contracts for seven years.
Mr. Thayer reviewed that the Dixon Diversion Project would increase renewable power by about
6% to 7%. Other projects include wind, solar, and tidal options. Both the wind and solar solutions
need to utilize batteries. Staff is working with the utilities to determine the placement location of
batteries. He discussed that the battery technology has changed. Mr. Thayer noted that there is
no nuclear energy included in the bill. He stated that nuclear energy is technically not renewable.
Per discussions with the Governor, nuclear will be included as clean energy in a separate bill. The
State and military are reviewing the possibility of nuclear energy at Eielson Air Force Base.
Mr. Kendig asked how this bill will affect rural communities and Power Cost Equalization (PCE).
Mr. Thayer discussed that the prices of Fairbanks, Anchorage, and Juneau set the floor for the PCE.
There is also a cap included in the legislation. Mr. Thayer noted that the goal for the RPS is not
to raise the cost to the consumer. If the consumer cost is raised, that would affect the PCE. This
is one of AEA’s concerns and AEA has recommended amendments to address these types of
issues. There were no additional questions of comments.
Chair Pruhs suggested that if the person in the public who has their hand raised is still on the line
after Item 7. is completed, then Chair Pruhs will return to Item 5. for public comment.
B. Annual Report
Mr. Thayer discussed that the 2021 Annual Report has been provided to members and was due
to the Legislature on March 1st. All electronic copies were sent on Monday. The hard copies are
in the process of being mailed. Mr. Thayer expressed appreciation to the team, especially Brandy
Dixon, AEA, for the in-house efforts in developing the annual report. Mr. Thayer discussed that
the Annual Report walks through the last year’s activities, including financials, owned assets, work
in rural Alaska, PCE Program, alternative energy, energy efficiency, and different technologies. The
State’s electrical hydropower has been increased by 27% on a statewide basis. Wind energy
capacity has increased 400% in the last decade. Mr. Thayer mentioned the Power Pledge
Challenge (PPC), the Remote Alaska Communities Energy Efficiency Challenge (RACEE), the Village
Energy Efficiency Program (VEEP), and the winding down of the Volkswagen Settlement funding.
Mr. Thayer discussed the Alaska Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy Program (C-PACE)
will be migrating to the Municipality of Anchorage. He thanked T.W. Patch, AEA, for moving the
program forward.
Mr. Thayer noted that the Annual Report includes information regarding the electric vehicles (EV)
infrastructure. He noted that the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) includes
over $50 million for electric vehicles. AEA is working with DOT on a Memorandum of
Understanding for their assistance with the back-office work and AEA’s work on the front-office
side in order to secure and distribute the funds. A report with DOT is due by August 1st.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 4 of 12
Chair Pruhs discussed the mention of changing battery technologies. He asked what timeframe
is utilized by the co-ops who are fully engaged in the placement of these batteries, and what
timeframe is the asset depreciated. Mr. Thayer stated that he would have to get and provide the
depreciation schedule information to Chair Pruhs at a later date. Chair Pruhs asked if the batteries
were lithium, lead-acids, or NiCd batteries. Mr. Thayer discussed that the batteries that are
removed from vehicles are recycled into other types of electrical needs. Mr. Thayer noted that a
battery for a car probably has a true life cycle of 20 years, which includes being recycled once. He
noted that the Department of Energy is reviewing and studying the recycling and disposal aspects
for these batteries. Mr. Thayer discussed that Tesla is beginning to replace batteries and to recycle
the batteries into a secondary market.
Mr. Thayer indicated that a Tesla battery has been recently brought online in Homer. Chair Pruhs
asked for the total price. Mr. Thayer noted that the cost was close to $115 million. The service
territory includes approximately 60,000 customers. Chair Pruhs requested additional information
regarding the type of batteries, the lifespan of the batteries, the depreciation schedule, and the
cost per meter.
Mr. Thayer discussed that Chugach Electric Association (CEA) and Matanuska Electric Association
(MEA) are reviewing the possibility of utilizing a battery at CEA’s offices located at International
Airport Road and Minnesota Drive. The battery would be portable and would have a small
footprint. There were no additional questions.
Chair Pruhs noted that the meeting will return to Item 5. Public Comment.
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS (2 minutes per person)
Ken Castner from Homer stated that he continues to have difficulty connecting to the meeting,
even though he presses star-nine repeatedly. He thanked Chair Pruhs for letting him speak. Mr.
Castner commented that the previous minutes indicated that after the Board returned from
Executive Session, Chair Pruhs stated that no “official” business had been done and the minutes
state that no “formal” business had been done. Mr. Castner commented that those two words
may mean the same for the Board, but that the two words do not mean the same thing to him.
Mr. Castner noted the discrepancy for the record.
Mr. Castner provided his second comment for the previous meeting that Chair Pruhs stated, “That
was a great presentation this morning from the utilities. I learned a lot.” Mr. Castner commented
that it was good for the Board to learn a lot and that the public ought to hear the information as
well. Mr. Castner does not know why AEA is taking presentations in Executive Session. Mr. Castner
believes things of that nature need to be shared with the public.
Mr. Castner provided his last comment regarding the vehicle batteries and noted that the oldest
batteries are in the RAV 4 and are 30 years old. Mr. Castner has a friend in San Francisco that is
still driving his car and his total maintenance bill over the course of 30 years is $52 dollars for a
third-year capacitor burn out. Otherwise, he noted that it should be considered that these vehicles
Alaska Energy Authority Page 5 of 12
are really maintenance free. Mr. Castner commented that HEA owns a big Tesla battery located
in Soldotna and not in Homer.
There being no other members of the public online or in-person wishing to make a public
comment, Chair Pruhs closed the public comment period again.
C. AEA Cash Movement Analysis and Insights
Chair Pruhs indicated that his agenda does not include Item 7C. Mr. Thayer suggested reviewing
AEA Cash Movement Analysis and Insights during Directors Comments. There was no objection.
Chair Pruhs suggested to take a five-minute at-ease. There was no objection.
Chair Pruhs returned the meeting to order and requested Mr. Thayer move to Item 9. Directors
Comments. There was no objection.
8. OLD BUSINESS – None.
9. DIRECTOR COMMENTS
A. Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)
Mr. Thayer noted that the information provided is the latest living document spreadsheet on the
IIJA. Mr. Thayer stated that he is in meetings at least twice a week with the Governor’s Office
reviewing the nuances of the bill and receiving guidance from the Federal Government on an
irregular basis. Clarification and a path forward have been provided for the electric vehicle
infrastructure program. The funding is available to Alaska through the Department of
Transportation. Mr. Thayer discussed that there appears to be qualified funding available for
infrastructure upgrades from Bradley Lake to Anchorage. AEA has submitted the request to the
Governor’s Office as a potential program.
Mr. Thayer discussed that there is money available to rural Alaska that needs a pass-through
agency in which AEA can serve as that pass-through agency. Some of the funding requires a 20%
match. AEA received a clarification regarding the utility match and noted that the money the
utilities have allocated to Bradley Lake and others for the O&M, that becomes State money and
will serve as a match. These issues are being reviewed by Legal and guidance is being sought
from the Federal Government. Mr. Thayer indicated that every state has similar questions and
clarifications. He noted that AEA staff members have been assigned different sections of the bill
to track and update. A meeting on Friday will review the possibility of funding for tidal research
for Cook Inlet power.
B. Owned Assets Update
Mr. Thayer discussed the provided Railbelt Owned Asset Update included in the packet. Staff has
been working with the Intertie Operating Committee (IOC) on the Systems Studies Subcommittee
Alaska Energy Authority Page 6 of 12
and the consultant to tune the Static VAR Compensator Power Oscillation Dampers. AEA is also
working with Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) to transfer Cantwell Substation distribution
equipment to GVEA. Snow Load Monitoring has continued to be an issue. The FY23 budget
preparation is beginning for the Alaska Intertie. Work continues with MEA and GVEA on
vegetation management plans that are due on April 1st. AEA is working with MEA in response to
a section line easement road building request by DOT.
Mr. Thayer reviewed that Bradley Lake is running at normal snowpack for the winter. He noted
that Bob Day, Superintendent, has retired and a new Superintendent will begin in mid-March. The
lake level was at its lowest point for this time of year in the last decade. Additional information is
included in the report regarding normal year lake levels for Bradley Lake. Mr. Thayer noted that
today is Kirk Warren’s last day with AEA, and he will begin his new role with the DOT as a Regional
Supervisor of Maintenance and Operations. Mr. Thayer discussed that Bryan Carey, AEA, will step
in as the Director of Owned Assets. Mr. Thayer informed that Mr. Carey has been with AEA for
over 20 years. Mr. Thayer looks forward to working with Mr. Carey in his new role. There were no
questions.
C. Renewable Energy Fund (REF)
i. Round 13 Update
ii. Round 14
Mr. Thayer provided the update on Round 13 and 14 for the REF. The Legislature funded 11
projects in Round 13. There are 39 applicants for Round 14 for a total ask amount of $19.2 million.
The Governor’s Budget includes $15 million for the round. Mr. Thayer believes that amount will
be sufficient after the technical and economic analyses are completed and qualifications are
reviewed. The Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) will then be consulted. The
REFAC consists of four legislators and five public members and will provide recommendations to
be submitted to the Legislature in early April.
Mr. Thayer discussed that the process timeline normally begins earlier, but was delayed this year
because the Department of Revenue (DOR) provided the information regarding the excess
earnings later than anticipated.
Ms. MacKinnon asked Mr. Thayer to provide the names of the four legislative representatives who
serve on the REFAC. Mr. Thayer listed Representative Adam Wool, Representative Tiffany
Zulkosky, Senator Natasha Von Imhof, and Senator David Wilson. Ms. MacKinnon asked who was
placed on the Finance Committees for consideration for the projects. She noted that Mr. Thayer
does not need to provide any additional information.
Chair Pruhs asked if there is a procedure to assist the applications on the next round if they were
found ineligible for qualification for this round. Mr. Thayer agreed. Chair Pruhs asked what AEA
does to assist those applicants and help facilitate them to meet the criteria for the next round.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 7 of 12
Mr. Thayer noted that staff initially reviews timeliness and completeness of the application. Staff
works with communities to get to that point. If there is an economic or technical analysis needed,
staff will work with communities to identify their weaknesses. AEA is very generous in trying to
make projects work, especially for the smaller communities. There is also an appeal process
available.
Mr. Thayer explained that there were three out of the 39 applicants this year that were other State
agencies looking for funding for solar or waste energy for their buildings. Those applicants were
disqualified because of the concern that a State agency has a State budget approval process to
follow through the Governor’s Office and Legislature. Mr. Thayer believes that the REF monies
are available to communities and State agency requests are an inappropriate fit for the program.
There were no additional questions.
D. Power Cost Equalization (PCE) Statistical Report
Mr. Thayer reviewed the PCE Statistical Report dated March 1, 2022. It has been provided to the
Legislature. This is a public document and is posted on the website. This statistical report data is
listed by community and there is also a report that is listed by utility. There were no questions.
E. EURP Update
Mr. Thayer discussed the Electric Utility Relief Program Update included in the Board packet. The
program was established during the Governor’s declaration and at the request of the Department
of Commerce, Community and Economic Development (DCCED) for AEA to distribute
approximately $7 million to reimburse the utilities for residential debt associated with COVID-19.
Approximately $3 million has been distributed. There were 35 applicants in Round 1. The program
does not apply to commercial customers. Mr. Thayer noted that approximately 200 communities
were anticipated to qualify for the program. Round 2 has begun and only one applicant has
submitted. The deadline is March 15th. Staff will meet with the Governor’s Office and DCCED after
the deadline to determine disposition of the balance of the funds.
Ms. MacKinnon commented that she believes that the deadline for the original COVID-19 funding
is possibly at the end of 2022. She noted that others should verify the specific timing.
Mr. Thayer discussed that AEA was asked to administer the program and it has been successful
with no issues. Included in the Board packet are letters to AEA thanking staff for their efforts in
distributing the funds. Mr. Thayer explained that other COVID-19 funds were available to assist
with residential debt and that entities could not apply twice for the same assistance. He gave the
example that the City of Seward paid off bad debt with other COVID-19 utility relief monies and
therefore, could not apply for this program. Mr. Thayer gave other similar examples. He stated
that most of the electrical utilities’ bad debt from COVID-19 has been made whole. There were
no additional questions.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 8 of 12
MOTION: A motion was made by Mr. Fogle to enter into executive session to discuss
confidential matters related to confidential personnel matters of the Authority. This is
supported by the Open Meetings Act, AS 44.62.310, which allows a Board to consider
confidential matters in executive session. In this case, the Board believes that these
personnel matters are required by law to be confidential. Motion seconded by Mr. Kendig.
The motion to enter into executive session to discuss confidential personnel matters passed
without objection.
F. EXECUTIVE SESSION: 9:14 am
Discuss confidential matters related to personnel matters.
FY2022 AIDEA / AEA Org Chart
The Board reconvened its regular meeting at 9:57 am. Chair Pruhs advised that the Board did not
take any formal actions on the matters discussed while in executive session.
Mr. Thayer invited Dona Keppers, AEA, to discuss the one-page report entitled AIDEA & AEA Cash
Movement Analysis and Insights that is included in the Board packets. Ms. Keppers reviewed the
amounts and timing of AIDEA’s and AEA’s cash flows into the Alaskan economy. She commented
that this is important to the mission of the agencies and the impact throughout the state. In FY21,
both AIDEA and AEA generated approximately $200 million in cash movement, of which 96% was
to Alaska vendors. There was approximately $97 million in AK CARES funding during the same
time.
Ms. Keppers discussed the specific accounts payable information for AEA, including the work for
Bradley, the Intertie, PCE, and others grants and projects. For FY21, about 38% of the accounts
payable activities is grant and project related. Ms. Keppers reviewed the general ledger entries
shown at the bottom of the page. She noted that AEA’s activity each year is both high volume
and high dollar. Ms. Keppers reiterated the importance of understanding the impact of the
accounts payable section for shared services of AEA and AIDEA.
Chair Pruhs asked what the typical time is to turn around an accounts payable invoice. Ms.
Keppers explained that some of the accounts payable invoices have terms and sometimes it takes
about three weeks. She discussed that staff reviews the accounts payable aging and utilizes
metrics to measure performance and the size of the staff based on the volume. Ms. Keppers
reviewed the increased shift in electronic banking for deposits and payments, and other pieces of
automation. This has decreased the amount of time it takes for activities. The accounts payable
are received both electronically and in paper form.
Chair Pruhs asked if purchase orders (PO) or some types of authorization are primarily utilized
when funds are spent. Ms. Keppers agreed. Chair Pruhs asked if the system allows AEA to attach
the invoice to the payment authorization. Ms. Keppers agreed. She noted the goal is to continue
to reduce the amount of paper invoicing received in accounts payable. The majority of the
Alaska Energy Authority Page 9 of 12
invoices are received through an email address, which includes all supporting documentation.
The information then moves through the business workflow and processes, including
procurement, PO, and contract services. The information is archived electronically as it moves
through the processed. Once the physical documents are archived, they are categorized in either
record retention or to shred. Ms. Keppers discussed that the goal is to reduce the paper footprint
and increase the electronic workflows within the systems.
Mr. Vivlamore asked for the definition of an Alaskan vendor. Ms. Keppers explained that Alaskan
vendors are defined as those that have Alaskan addresses. The AK CARES program included this
requirement. Ms. Keppers noted there are vendors that have out of state corporate addresses,
but their businesses are located in Alaska.
Chair Pruhs asked if there is a goal to shorten the three-week turnaround for POs. Ms. Keppers
discussed that staff is in the process of establishing the appropriate metrics and has the
responsibility to pay on or before the terms that are agreed to within the contracts. The goal is
to reduce the number of late payments. Chair Pruhs asked if there are any account payables (AP)
that are related to the account receivables (AR) that cannot be paid until AEA gets the receivables.
Ms. Keppers agreed and noted that the vendors are aware of those circumstances. There were no
additional questions.
G. Legislative Update
Mr. Thayer discussed that the Legislature is in session and AEA was required to update the
Legislature on the Capital Reserve Funds, Round 14 of the REF, Capital Project Status Report, and
the Susitna-Watana Project. Also included in the Board packet is a letter to U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) regarding Electric Vehicles (EV) Charging Program funds. Nothing in rural
Alaska qualifies because it is for the highway system and the marine highway system. This is a
cause of concern for AEA because it is exclusionary to rural areas including Bethel, Dillingham,
Nome, Kotzebue, and others.
Mr. Thayer noted that presentations that have been given or submitted to the Legislature are also
included in the Board packet. Mr. Thayer reviewed that staff is currently tracking eight active bills
and he is scheduled to testify on five bills this week and approximately the same amount of
testimony next week. Mr. Thayer discussed that the Renewable Portfolio Standards is a Governor’s
bill and AEA is carrying that legislation and responsible for participating in the hearings. There is
a bill in the House and in the Senate regarding the Renewable Energy Fund extension that requests
expiration in 2033. AEA is averaging two to three hearings a week on that legislation, and it should
move through the process without any issues.
Mr. Thayer stated that the Railbelt Energy Fund from the Legislature had $3.4 million of the funds
swept in 2021. Mr. Thayer noted that the balance is now zero and some legislators see this fund
as one that could be erased off of the books of the State. AEA has raised this issue and the
sponsor will introduce to Committee to keep the Railbelt Energy Fund because the Power Sales
Agreement for Bradley Lake was tied to the Railbelt Energy Fund in 1991, and is tied for another
Alaska Energy Authority Page 10 of 12
20 years. Bradley Lake excess payments can go to required project work and if the required project
work is not completed, the excess payments go into the Railbelt Energy Fund. If the Legislature
eliminates the Railbelt Energy Fund, then AEA and the utilities have to reopen a 30-year-old
document, and nobody wants to do that. Mr. Thayer discussed that the Legislature did not ask
AEA if the fund was still active or the purpose of the fund, but now that the Legislature knows,
staff anticipates they will maintain the Railbelt Energy Fund as an active fund with the State.
Mr. Thayer stated that AEA is working with Representative Thompson in support of the bill
regarding the PCE Endowment and community assistance, and up to $25 million for Rural
Powerhouses, Renewable Energy Fund or to capitalize the Bulk Fuel Revolving Loan Fund. In the
Governor’s budget this year, of that $25 million, there is $15 million for the Renewable Energy
Fund and $10 million for Powerhouses, which is being federally matched with another $10 million.
Mr. Thayer explained that Representative Thompson’s bill eliminates the cap of $25 million and
includes Bulk Fuel within the qualifying definition. Mr. Thayer noted that bulk fuel in the state
currently has $800 million in deferred maintenance.
Mr. Kendig asked if Senator Hoffman is supportive of the Representative Thompson’s bill. Mr.
Thayer noted that he does not know the answer and there is not a companion bill in the Senate.
Mr. Thayer informed that another bill, HB371, was introduced to change Alaska Energy Authority’s
name and duties. The bill would change the name to Alaska Energy and Broadband Authority.
The bill sees the Authority as a vehicle for putting in a billion dollars of broadband and creating a
broadband cost equalization program similar to PCE. Staff has been working on a bill analysis
and the fiscal note would require at least a dozen new people to maintain and distribute funding
for the new program. There have been no hearings held on the bill and there is no companion
bill in the Senate. AEA has been responsive to the analysis, but AEA neither planned nor
anticipated the bill.
Chair Pruhs noted that Mr. Thayer mentioned $800 million in deferred maintenance for bulk fuel
and asked what solution is planned. Mr. Thayer discussed that the solution is State funding. The
last two years’ of the Governor’s budget included $5.5 million for bulk fuel. Both the powerhouses
and bulk fuel qualify for federal matches. The $5.5 million in the budget this year was federally
matched by $7.5 million, which means approximately $13 million went toward the $800 million in
deferred maintenance. The number now is approximately $790 million.
Chair Pruhs asked if there are hard facts behind the estimated amounts. He discussed that with
5% inflation, the cost would be $840 million with no real depreciation on the asset for the year,
and with 7% inflation this year, the cost increases to about $900 million. He noted that Alaska is
seeing a considerable increase in the cost of construction, as well as increased inflation across the
country. Chair Pruhs expressed his concern about giving out a number that may not be accurate.
He asked for the plan on how the funding of $5 million is going to affect the total cost.
Mr. Thayer stated that the number given to the legislators is in excess of $800 million, so that they
could understand the size of the problem. He noted that the match of $7.5 million is
Alaska Energy Authority Page 11 of 12
approximately 1% of the problem. Mr. Thayer commented that the Governor or the Legislature
needs to add a significant amount of money to this issue. He believes that Representative
Thompson’s bill is trying to offer another revenue source so that the match of federal dollars can
be utilized.
Chair Pruhs reiterated the importance that staff be very clear regarding the accuracy of the
number, that includes defendable information, inflation, and depreciation. Mr. Thayer discussed
the amount is defendable. There is $400 million in bulk fuel in rural Alaska that is Coast Guard
code compliant. The statute requires that the top 25 communities identified have a defined
budget that is revised every year. There is a 10-year outlook of work that maintains an active
estimate. There were no additional questions.
H. Community Outreach
Mr. Thayer discussed that community outreach is increasing now that mask mandates have lifted.
The Governor is conducting an energy sustainability conference in May and AEA will participate.
I. Articles of Interest
Mr. Thayer introduced and welcomed Audrey Alstrom as the new Director of the Alternative
Energy and Energy Efficiency Programs. He discussed her professional background.
Mr. Thayer noted the articles of interest included in packet.
J. Next Regularly Scheduled AEA Board Meeting
Wednesday, April 13, 2022
Mr. Thayer advised that the next scheduled AEA Board meeting is Wednesday, April 13, 2022.
10. BOARD COMMENTS
Chair Pruhs expressed appreciation to Mr. Thayer and staff.
Chair Pruhs requested that Board business be conducted regarding Mr. Kendig becoming Vice-
Chair.
MOTION: A motion was made by Mr. Fogle to elect Mr. Kendig as Vice-Chair of the Alaska
Energy Authority Board. Motion seconded by Mr. Vivlamore.
The motion to elect Mr. Kendig as Vice-Chair of AEA was approved without objection.
Chair Pruhs appointed Mr. Vivlamore to AEA Audit and Budget Subcommittee. Chair Pruhs
thanked Mr. Vivlamore for taking the responsibility. There was no objection.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 12 of 12
Chair Pruhs thanked Ms. Bertolini and the staff for their efficient work.
11. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business of the Board, the AEA meeting adjourned at 10:22 am.
__________________________________________________
Curtis W. Thayer, Exceutive Director / Secretary
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
MEMORANDUM
TO: Curtis W. Thayer, Executive Director
THROUGH: Bryan Carey P.E., Director, Owned Assets
FROM: David Lockard P.E., Infrastructure Engineer
DATE: March 30th, 2022 RE: Transfer of Cantwell Substation Distribution Assets The Cantwell Substation and associated Cantwell distribution grid were constructed by Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) in the early 1980’s with funding from and at the direction of the Alaska Power Association (APA). Some of these assets, specifically the “Cantwell Distribution Line”, were transferred to GVEA in 1988 under the attached “Ownership Transfer Agreement for the Cantwell Distribution Line Project”. The 1988 Agreement did not specifically call out Cantwell distribution assets at the Cantwell Substation that are essential to the GVEA Cantwell distribution grid but not necessary to the operation of the Alaska Intertie. Aside from the 138/24.9kV transformer, this equipment operates at sub-transmission voltages.
GVEA would like to maintain, repair and replace the Cantwell distribution equipment in order to
serve its Cantwell customers. The expense of accomplishing those tasks should not be included
in the Alaska Intertie budget, since the equipment is not necessary to the operation of the
Intertie. The Intertie Management Committee has approved the transfer of this equipment. Dan
Bishop, GVEA Manager of Engineering Services, has stated that the Cantwell distribution
equipment listed in the spreadsheet is fully depreciated and at the end of its expected useful
life. I agree.
I recommend that the AEA Board approve this equipment transfer.
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-02
AUTHORIZATION FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO TRANSFER CERTAIN
EQUIPMENT IN CANTWELL, ALASKA TO GOLDEN VALLEY ELECTRIC
ASSOCIATION
WHEREAS, the Alaska Energy Authority (Authority) is a public corporation of the State
of Alaska governed by a board of directors with the mission to “reduce the cost of energy in
Alaska;”
WHEREAS, the Authority through appropriations from the Alaska legislature for the
construction of the Alaska Intertie has purchased and owns certain equipment used for the
transmission and distribution of electricity in Cantwell, Alaska;
WHEREAS, the Authority has no plans for the use of this equipment, which is located in
an area where this equipment can be properly maintained and used by the local utility, Golden
Valley Electric Association (GVEA);
WHEREAS, the Authority has the statutory authority to convey any personal property
owned by it in furtherance of its corporate purposes pursuant to AS 44.83.080(7) and 3 AAC
105.400-.480;
WHEREAS, this equipment is now fully depreciated on the Authority’s financial
statements;
WHEREAS, the Intertie Management Committee (IMC) on March 25, 2022 approved
by resolution the transfer of this equipment located in Cantwell, Alaska from the Authority to
GVEA;
WHEREAS, GVEA is willing to accept this equipment and assumes all liability,
operation, and maintenance costs; and
WHEREAS, the transfer of this equipment is in furtherance of the Authority’s corporate
purposes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Directors of the Alaska
Energy Authority:
1. The Executive Director is hereby empowered to negotiate the transfer of the relevant
equipment, located in Cantwell, Alaska, to GVEA.
2. The Executive Director of the Authority is hereby authorized to take such actions as may
be necessary or convenient to carry out the purposes of this resolution in the name of and
on behalf of the Authority.
3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval.
The resolution was declared adopted on this the day of , 2022.
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
___________________________________
Chairman
______________________________
Secretary
CORPORATE SEAL
Cantwell Substation Equipment Brief ListD 1 Circuit switcher (CWS‐1B1)161KV, 1200A, 3 phase, 60HZ, S&C Electric CompanyD 1 Transformer (CWS‐T1)5MVA, 138 ‐ 24.9Y/14.4KV with LTC, 60 HZD 3 Circuit reclosers (CWS‐1R1, CWS‐1R2, CWS‐1R3)24.9KV, 560A, 3 phase, 60HZ, McGraw‐EdisonD Distribution structure foundationsD Distribution electrical busD Distribution support structuresD Distribution electrical insulatorsD Distribution arrestersD Protective relays (mostly for transformer)D 25kV PTsD 25kV CTsD Switches CWS3S5, CWS3S6, CWS3S7, CWS2S8, CWS3S12, CWS3S13, CWS2S14, CWS3S9, CWS3S10, CWS2S11, CWS3S15, CWS3S16, CWS2S17D Station service transformerThe following equipment listed below shall remain a State owned assets:T 2 Motor operated disconnect switches (CWS‐4S1, CWS‐4S2)345kV, 1200A?, 3 phase, 60HZT Transmission structure foundationsT Transmission structures T Transmission electrical busT Transmission electrical insulatorsT Transmission ArrestersT 138kV PTT&D 1 Control BuildingControl panels, battery and battery charger ‐ AC and DC panelboards, remote terminal unit, and communication equipmentT&D Standby GeneratorT&D Substation fenceT&D Ground GridT&D RTU and communications
1
IMC RESOLUTION NO. 22-01
Intertie Management Committee
Resolution No. 22-01
Approval of Transfer of Certain State – Owned Cantwell Substation Assets
INTRODUCTION
The Intertie Management Committee (IMC) is responsible for the management, operation,
maintenance, and improvement of the Alaska Intertie Project (Alaska Intertie), subject to
the non-delegable duties of the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA). On June 23, 1988, AEA
transferred AEA’s right title and interest in the Cantwell Distribution Line to Golden Valley
Electric Association (GVEA). AEA and GVEA are entering into an Asset Transfer
Agreement for certain other equipment in the Cantwell Substation, and are seeking the
IMC’s approval.
PURPOSE OF IMC RESOLUTION 22-01
This IMC Resolution 22-01 provides the consent of the IMC to the Asset Transfer
Agreement of the equipment listed in attached Exhibit A. It specifically excludes certain
assets identified in Exhibit A.
IMC RESOLUTION NO. 22-1
WHEREAS, The Intertie Management Committee is responsible for the management,
operation, maintenance, and improvement of the Alaska Intertie Project (Alaska Intertie),
subject to the non-delegable duties of AEA.
WHEREAS, AEA and GVEA have entered into an Asset Transfer Agreement for certain
AEA owned assets listed in Exhibit A, and incorporated herein by this reference.
WHEREAS, AEA and GVEA have requested that the IMC approve the proposed Asset
Transfer Agreement that include certain assets and exclude other listed assets in Exhibit
A.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED THAT:
SECTION 1. The foregoing statements and recitals are incorporated herein as if
fully set forth.
ĂŶƚǁĞůů^ƵďƐƚĂƚŝŽŶ ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚƌŝĞĨ>ŝƐƚ
ϭŝƌĐƵŝƚƐǁŝƚĐŚĞƌ;t^ͲϭϭͿ ϭϲϭ<s͕ϭϮϬϬ͕ϯƉŚĂƐĞ͕ϲϬ,͕^Θ ůĞĐƚƌŝĐŽŵƉĂŶLJ
ϭdƌĂŶƐĨŽƌŵĞƌ;t^ͲdϭͿ ϱDs͕ϭϯϴͲϮϰ͘ϵzͬϭϰ͘ϰ<sǁŝƚŚ>d͕ϲϬ,
ϯŝƌĐƵŝƚƌĞĐůŽƐĞƌƐ;t^ͲϭZϭ͕t^ͲϭZϮ͕t^ͲϭZϯͿ Ϯϰ͘ϵ<s͕ϱϲϬ͕ϯƉŚĂƐĞ͕ϲϬ,͕DĐ'ƌĂǁͲ ĚŝƐŽŶ
ŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞĨŽƵŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ
ŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶĞůĞĐƚƌŝĐĂůďƵƐ
ŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶƐƵƉƉŽƌƚƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞƐ
ŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶĞůĞĐƚƌŝĐĂůŝŶƐƵůĂƚŽƌƐ
ŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶĂƌƌĞƐƚĞƌƐ
WƌŽƚĞĐƚŝǀĞƌĞůĂLJƐ;ŵŽƐƚůLJĨŽƌƚƌĂŶƐĨŽƌŵĞƌͿ
ϮϱŬsWdƐ
ϮϱŬsdƐ
^ǁŝƚĐŚĞƐt^ϯ^ϱ͕t^ϯ^ϲ͕t^ϯ^ϳ͕t^Ϯ^ϴ͕t^ϯ^ϭϮ͕t^ϯ^ϭϯ͕t^Ϯ^ϭϰ͕t^ϯ^ϵ͕t^ϯ^ϭϬ͕t^Ϯ^ϭϭ͕t^ϯ^ϭϱ͕t^ϯ^ϭϲ͕t^Ϯ^ϭϳ
^ƚĂƚŝŽŶƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƚƌĂŶƐĨŽƌŵĞƌ
dŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚůŝƐƚĞĚďĞůŽǁƐŚĂůůƌĞŵĂŝŶĂ^ƚĂƚĞŽǁŶĞĚĂƐƐĞƚƐ͗
d ϮDŽƚŽƌŽƉĞƌĂƚĞĚĚŝƐĐŽŶŶĞĐƚƐǁŝƚĐŚĞƐ;t^Ͳϰ^ϭ͕t^Ͳϰ^ϮͿ ϯϰϱŬs͕ϭϮϬϬ͍͕ϯƉŚĂƐĞ͕ϲϬ,
d dƌĂŶƐŵŝƐƐŝŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞĨŽƵŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ
d dƌĂŶƐŵŝƐƐŝŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞƐ
d dƌĂŶƐŵŝƐƐŝŽŶĞůĞĐƚƌŝĐĂůďƵƐ
d dƌĂŶƐŵŝƐƐŝŽŶĞůĞĐƚƌŝĐĂůŝŶƐƵůĂƚŽƌƐ
d dƌĂŶƐŵŝƐƐŝŽŶƌƌĞƐƚĞƌƐ
d ϭϯϴŬsWd
dΘ ϭŽŶƚƌŽůƵŝůĚŝŶŐ ŽŶƚƌŽůƉĂŶĞůƐ͕ďĂƚƚĞƌLJĂŶĚďĂƚƚĞƌLJĐŚĂƌŐĞƌͲĂŶĚƉĂŶĞůďŽĂƌĚƐ͕ƌĞŵŽƚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĂůƵŶŝƚ͕ĂŶĚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚ
dΘ ^ƚĂŶĚďLJ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŽƌ
dΘ ^ƵďƐƚĂƚŝŽŶĨĞŶĐĞ
dΘ 'ƌŽƵŶĚ'ƌŝĚ
dΘ ZdhĂŶĚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ
y,//d
IMC RESOLUTION NO. 22-01
3
Page 1 of 3 – BPMC RESOLUTION 22-03 PROVIDING FOR ADVANCED PAYMENT FOR REQUIRED PROJECT WORK
BRADLEY LAKE PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
RESOLUTION NO. 22- 03
PROVIDING FOR ADVANCE PAYMENT FOR REQUIRED PROJECT WORK
INTRODUCTION
The Bradley Lake Project Management Committee (“BPMC”) is responsible for
the management, operation, maintenance, and improvement of the Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project (the “Project”), subject to the non-delegable duties of the
Alaska Energy Authority (the “Authority”).
At its December 10, 2021 meeting, the BPMC approved Resolution No. 21 -02 that
endorsed a plan to unconstrain the benefits of the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric
Project (the “Project”) through the development of a series of projects, and related
financing to increase the energy available to the Project’s utility purchases
(“Purchasers”).
The recent purchase by the Authority of the Sterling Substation to Quartz Creek
Substation transmission line (“SSQ Line”) and its related financing is o ne of the
initial steps taken by the BPMC and the Authority to resolve some of the Project’s
transmission-related issues.
Shovel-ready projects like the SSQ Line are designed to optimize the use of the
Project with the goal being to minimize costs and stabilize rates for consumers
while providing jobs and other economic development opportunities from the Kenai
to Fairbanks; without a burden on the State’s budget. The BPMC and the Authority
have determined that it is in the best interest of the Project, the Purchasers and
the customers served by the Project to advance pay certain debt obligations on
the SSQ Line transaction.
PURPOSE OF BPMC RESOLUTION 22-03
BPMC Resolution 22-03 sets forth the intent of the BPMC to allow the prepayment
of certain debt obligations that were necessary to purchase the SSQ Line.
BPMC RESOLUTION NO. 22-03
WHEREAS, the Bradley Lake Project Management Committee (“BPMC”) receives
its authority under the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project A greement for the Sale
and Purchase of Electric Power (“Power Sales Agreement”).
Page 2 of 3 – BPMC RESOLUTION 22-03 PROVIDING FOR ADVANCED PAYMENT FOR REQUIRED PROJECT WORK
WHEREAS, the BPMC is responsible for the management, operation,
maintenance, and improvement of the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project (the
“Project”), subject to the non-delegable duties of the Alaska Energy Authority (the
“Authority”).
WHEREAS, the Project provides some of the lowest cost renewable energy on
the Railbelt Electric System (“System”).
WHEREAS, the BPMC has determined that it is prepared to take specific steps in
order to begin the improvements and upgrades to the System that will cost
effectively enable the development of resources that will enhance the deliverability
of energy produced by the Project.
WHEREAS, BPMC Resolution No. 20-05 and Resolution No. 20-06 collectively
authorized the purchase of certain transmission rights and facilities including the
Sterling to Quartz Creek transmission line (“SSQ Line”), which became part of the
Project.
WHEREAS the Department of Law (“DOL”) issued a memorandum dated
November 10, 2020, and found that the definition of Required Project Work is
broad enough to allow for the SSQ Line upgrades to be considered Required
Project Work under the Power Sales Agreement, confirming the BPMC’s
proposals.
WHEREAS, the BPMC believes the transaction involving the purchase of the
SSQ Line was an important initial step to enhance the deliverability of energy
produced by the Project.
WHEREAS, in order to advance the upgrade to the SSQ line, the BPMC
considered and approved a budget amendment to its fiscal year 2022 budget
providing a prepayment on the debt obligations for the SSQ Line.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the aforementioned comments and
Recitals are incorporated and made part of this Resolution No. 22-03;
BE IT ALSO RESOLVED THAT, Resolution 21-02 and its Recitals are
incorporated into this Resolution 22-03 as if fully set forth;
BE IT ALSO RESOLVED THAT, as part of the BPMC’s responsibilities for the
management and improvement of the Project, the BPMC will use the funds
available for essential and agreed-upon Required Project Work to fund the
advanced debt payment;
BE IT ALSO RESOLVED THAT, the BPMC approves the fiscal year 2022 budget
amendment to provide the advanced debt payment, that such payment is
considered debt service to be included in Annual Project costs, and such a
payment be made before the end of fiscal year 2022;
25th
MEMORANDUM State of Alaska
Department of Law
TO:
FROM:
Curtis Thayer
Executive Director
Alaska Energy Authority
Stefan A. Saldanha
Senior Assistant Attorney General
Public Corporations and
Governmental Affairs Section
DATE:
FILE NO.:
TEL. NO.:
SUBJECT:
April 5, 2022
AN2015102406
(907) 269-6612
Bradley Lake Project -
Whether early pay-down of
financing for required project
work can reduce excess
payments to the state
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The Alaska Energy Authority (“AEA”) has asked the Department of Law how the
early pay-down of financing for the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project (“Bradley Lake
Project”) should be considered under the Power Sales Agreement (“PSA”). This is
relevant for the calculation of payments to the state under the PSA (“Excess Payments”).
For this question, we review the language of the PSA, legal advice provided by the legal
counsel of the Bradley Project Management Committee (“BPMC”) and representations
from AEA’s bond counsel.
1. Early pay-down of Financing
Issue: Does the early pay-down of financing, with related fees and costs for
required project work reduce Excess Payments under the PSA? In other words, may the
utilities pay down the existing financing on the SQ line acquisition to avoid paying the
state Excess Payments in this fiscal year?
Short Answer: The PSA allows the BPMC to include debt service and related fees
and costs in the annual project costs. As a result, since this debt service and the
corresponding annual project costs are related to required project work, all amounts paid
for the early pay-down can reduce the Excess Payments to zero pursuant to the PSA.
2. Excess payment calculation under PSA
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 5, 2022
Re: Does the early pay-down reduce Excess Payments? Page 2 of 4
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The PSA provides explicit rules for calculation of the Excess Payments which
were intended:
In recognition of the Railbelt Energy Council's commitment to
continue efforts to obtain a satisfactory transmission intertie between
Fairbanks and the Kenai Peninsula, and the Railbelt Energy Council's
recognition of the importance of such an intertie to the well-being of the
Railbelt region and the Purchasers' ratepayers, and in anticipation of
legislative funding of such an Intertie.1
In addition, these payments were seen as a re-payment of the State’s
appropriations totaling $163 million between 1979 and 1993 for design and construction
costs of the Bradley Lake Project.
As outlined in the PSA, the Excess Payments only begin once the initial project
bonds are terminated and are designed to be in roughly the same annual amounts as paid
by the Bradley Lake Project for the initial project bonds – “average annual debt service.”
However, in recognition of certain circumstances, there are ways to reduce the Excess
Payments. For example, there can be an Excess Payment reduction where the kilowatt
hour rate, i.e., the power cost, from the Bradley Lake Project is high.
The reduction in Excess Payments we analyze here has to do with other debt
issued for the Bradley Lake Project. The PSA allows for the financing costs for certain
critical, necessary, or required developments (“Required Project Work”) to reduce the
Excess Payments. The language of the PSA explaining the annual calculation is
there shall be added to and included in Annual Project Costs an amount
(the "Excess Payment Amount") calculated as follows:
(i) The average annual Debt Service on such retired Bonds, less
(ii) any debt service included in Annual Project Costs that is associated
with bonds or other debt issued to fund Required Project Work.
In no event shall the Excess Payment Amount be negative.2
In the above section of the PSA, debt service is not a defined term, and we can use
its general usage, which is according to Black’s Law Dictionary:
1. The funds needed to meet a long-term debt's annual interest expenses,
principal payments, and sinking-fund contributions.
1 PSA, Sec. 29(a), p.28-29.
2 PSA, Sec. 29(b), p.29,
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 5, 2022
Re: Does the early pay-down reduce Excess Payments? Page 3 of 4
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
2. Payments due on a debt, including interest and principal.3
Additionally, Annual Project Costs is a defined term in the PSA meaning all of the
costs resulting from the ownership, operation, maintenance of and renewals and
replacements to the Project, properly incurred or paid during each Fiscal Year.4 The
definition of Annual Project Costs includes a catch all: “Other amounts determined by the
Committee to be necessary or appropriate to supplement and to be paid into the Funds
established under the Bond Resolution.”5
3. The early pay-down with fees can reduce the Excess Payment to zero.
On December 17, 2020, AEA issued $17 million in bonds to finance its
transaction to purchase the Sterling to Quartz Creek transmission line (“SQ Line”) and
other assets and agreements. In this case, the Department of Law concluded that this
transaction was Required Project Work on May 20, 2020, and there was additionally an
engineer’s opinion from EES Consulting, which supported this characterization, dated
October 26, 2020.
Under the financing terms for this transaction, there are several possible
components to the prepayment of principal: prepaid principal, corresponding interest,
prepayment fees and a make-whole premium. The make-whole premium is designed to
cover the lender’s reinvestment losses.
The participating utilities are proposing to make an early payment of principal,
along with the corresponding fees and costs during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022
(“FY22”). These amounts would equal the average annual debt service of $12.45 million
so that the Excess Payment to the State would be zero in FY22.
Based on the PSA’s language, debt service that is included in annual project costs
that is associated with bonds issued to fund Required Project Work will reduce Excess
Payments accordingly.
It is our opinion that debt service included in Annual Project Costs as used in the
PSA can also be considered to include prepayment fees and costs, assuming that the
BPMC includes it in annual project costs, as allowed under the PSA. These fees are
3 Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).
4 Sec. 8, PSA, p.13-14.
5 Sec. 8(a)(v), PSA, p.13.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 5, 2022
Re: Does the early pay-down reduce Excess Payments? Page 4 of 4
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
inherently part of the financing package and can be seen to be part of the servicing costs
for this financing. As a result, we conclude that the early pay-down of this financing can
be considered debt service that reduces the Excess Payment to zero.
4. Conclusion
The early re-payments, including prepayment fees and costs, on the debt financing
for the SQ line can be considered as debt service included in Annual Project Costs.
Additionally, this financing funds Required Project Work on the Bradley Lake Project.
So, this early payment amount could reduce the Excess Payments to zero for this fiscal
year pursuant to the PSA.
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
RGYAUTHORITY.ORG
Board Questions from March 3, 2022 AEA Board Meeting
1.Regarding BESS Batteries:
Depreciation period for batteries.
Lifespan.
Battery worth
Disposal Cost
Attached :
Grid Scale Battery Storage Article
Cost Projections Article
Spreadsheet of Alaska Energy Storage Systems, including Batteries and
Flywheels
Interesting Alaska specific data points:
Homer Electric’s Soldotna BESS is rated at 96MWh/47MW. It was commissioned over the
past few months and is now operating and responding to frequency deviations.
Bradley Lake hydro has over 200GWh of energy storage between maximum and
minimum lake levels. This is more than 2,000 as much as the Soldotna BESS.
The Soldotna BESS can respond in fractions of a second, almost instantaneously, and at
close to full capacity. Bradley Lake responds in minutes and at lower ramp
rates. Combining these two response rates can be very valuable to Railbelt reliability and
the potential for renewable energy integration.
Chugach Electric anticipates installing a BESS of about 70MW capacity in the next year or
two.
GVEA, which installed its nominal 40MW Ni-Cad BESS in 2003, is planning an upgrade or
replacement with a new lithium-ion BESS.
There are more than 10 utility BESS systems in operation around Alaska, many of them
funded by the Renewable Energy Fund.
www.greeningthegrid.org | www.nrel.gov/usaid-partnership
GRID INTEGRATION TOOLKIT
Grid-Scale Battery Storage
Frequently Asked Questions
1. For information on battery chemistries and their relative advantages, see Akhil et al. (2013) and Kim et al. (2018).
2. For example, Lew et al. (2013) found that the United States portion of the Western Interconnection could achieve a 33% penetration of wind and solar without additional storage resources.
Palchak et al. (2017) found that India could incorporate 160 GW of wind and solar (reaching an annual renewable penetration of 22% of system load) without additional storage resources.
What is grid-scale battery storage?
Battery storage is a technology that enables power system operators and
utilities to store energy for later use. A battery energy storage system
(BESS) is an electrochemical device that charges (or collects energy) from
the grid or a power plant and then discharges that energy at a later time
to provide electricity or other grid services when needed. Several battery
chemistries are available or under investigation for grid-scale applications,
including lithium-ion, lead-acid, redox flow, and molten salt (including
sodium-based chemistries).1 Battery chemistries differ in key technical
characteristics (see What are key characteristics of battery storage
systems?), and each battery has unique advantages and disadvantages.
The current market for grid-scale battery storage in the United States and
globally is dominated by lithium-ion chemistries (Figure 1). Due to tech-
nological innovations and improved manufacturing capacity, lithium-ion
chemistries have experienced a steep price decline of over 70% from
2010-2016, and prices are projected to decline further (Curry 2017).
Increasing needs for system flexibility, combined with rapid decreases
in the costs of battery technology, have enabled BESS to play an
increasing role in the power system in recent years. As prices for BESS
continue to decline and the need for system flexibility increases with
wind and solar deployment, more policymakers, regulators, and utili-
ties are seeking to develop policies to jump-start BESS deployment.
Is grid-scale battery storage needed for
renewable energy integration?
Battery storage is one of several technology options that can enhance
power system flexibility and enable high levels of renewable energy
integration. Studies and real-world experience have demonstrated that
interconnected power systems can safely and reliably integrate high
levels of renewable energy from variable renewable energy (VRE)
sources without new energy storage resources.2 There is no rule-of-
thumb for how much battery storage is needed to integrate high levels
of renewable energy. Instead, the appropriate amount of grid-scale
battery storage depends on system-specific characteristics, including:
•The current and planned mix of generation technologies
•Flexibility in existing generation sources
•Interconnections with neighboring power systems
•The hourly, daily, and seasonal profile of electricity
demand, and
•The hourly, daily, and seasonal profile of current and
planned VRE.
In many systems, battery storage may not be the most economic
resource to help integrate renewable energy, and other sources of
system flexibility can be explored. Additional sources of system
flexibility include, among others, building additional pumped-hydro
storage or transmission, increasing conventional generation flexibility,
and changing operating procedures (Cochran et al. 2014).Figure 1: U.S. utility-scale battery storage capacity by
chemistry (2008-2017). Data source: U.S. Energy Information
Administration, Form EIA-860, Annual Electric Generator ReportAnnual Installed CapacityChemistry
Energy (MWh) Power (MW)
Year Installed
0
50
100
150
200
250
'17'16'15'14'13'12'11'10'09'08 '17'16'15'14'13'12'11'10'09'08
Lithium-Ion Other
Redox FlowLead-acid Sodium-based
2Grid-Scale Battery Storage: Frequently Asked Questions
What are the key characteristics of battery
storage systems?
• Rated power capacity is the total possible instantaneous discharge
capability (in kilowatts [kW] or megawatts [MW]) of the BESS, or
the maximum rate of discharge that the BESS can achieve, starting
from a fully charged state.
• Energy capacity is the maximum amount of stored energy (in
kilowatt-hours [kWh] or megawatt-hours [MWh])
• Storage duration is the amount of time storage can discharge at its
power capacity before depleting its energy capacity. For example, a
battery with 1 MW of power capacity and 4 MWh of usable energy
capacity will have a storage duration of four hours.
• Cycle life/lifetime is the amount of time or cycles a battery storage
system can provide regular charging and discharging before failure or
significant degradation.
• Self-discharge occurs when the stored charge (or energy) of the
battery is reduced through internal chemical reactions, or without
being discharged to perform work for the grid or a customer.
Self-discharge, expressed as a percentage of charge lost over a certain
period, reduces the amount of energy available for discharge and is an
important parameter to consider in batteries intended for longer-dura-
tion applications.
• State of charge, expressed as a percentage, represents the battery’s
present level of charge and ranges from completely discharged to
fully charged. The state of charge influences a battery’s ability to
provide energy or ancillary services to the grid at any given time.
• Round-trip efficiency, measured as a percentage, is a ratio of the
energy charged to the battery to the energy discharged from the
battery. It can represent the total DC-DC or AC-AC efficiency of
the battery system, including losses from self-discharge and other
electrical losses. Although battery manufacturers often refer to the
DC-DC efficiency, AC-AC efficiency is typically more important to
utilities, as they only see the battery’s charging and discharging from
the point of interconnection to the power system, which uses AC
(Denholm 2019).
What services can batteries provide?
Arbitrage: Arbitrage involves charging the battery when energy prices
are low and discharging during more expensive peak hours. For the
BESS operator, this practice can provide a source of income by taking
advantage of electricity prices that may vary throughout the day. One
extension of the energy arbitrage service is reducing renewable energy
curtailment. System operators and project developers have an interest
in using as much low-cost, emissions-free renewable energy generation
as possible; however, in systems with a growing share of VRE, limited
flexibility of conventional generators and temporal mismatches between
renewable energy supply and electricity demand (e.g., excess wind
3. See Mills and Wiser (2012) for a general treatment on the concept of capacity credit.
generation in the middle of the night) may require renewable generators
to curtail their output. By charging the battery with low-cost energy
during periods of excess renewable generation and discharging during
periods of high demand, BESS can both reduce renewable energy
curtailment and maximize the value of the energy developers can sell
to the market. Another extension of arbitrage in power systems without
electricity markets is load-leveling. With load-levelling, system opera-
tors charge batteries during periods of excess generation and discharge
batteries during periods of excess demand to more efficiently coordinate
the dispatch of generating resources.
Firm Capacity or Peaking Capacity: System operators must ensure
they have an adequate supply of generation capacity to reliably meet
demand during the highest-demand periods in a given year, or the peak
demand. This peak demand is typically met with higher-cost generators,
such as gas plants; however, depending on the shape of the load curve,
BESS can also be used to ensure adequate peaking generation capacity.
While VRE resources can also be used to meet this requirement, these
resources do not typically fully count toward firm capacity, as their
generation relies on the availability of fluctuating resources and may not
always coincide with peak demand. But system operators can improve
VRE’s ability to contribute to firm capacity requirements through pairing
with BESS. Pairing VRE resources with BESS can enable these resources
to shift their generation to be coincident with peak demand, improving
their capacity value (see text box below) and system reliability.3
Operating Reserves and Ancillary Services: To maintain reliable
power system operations, generation must exactly match electricity
demand at all times. There are various categories of operating reserves
and ancillary services that function on different timescales, from subsec-
onds to several hours, all of which are needed to ensure grid reliability.
BESS can rapidly charge or discharge in a fraction of a second, faster
Firm Capacity, Capacity Credit, and Capacity
Value are important concepts for understanding
the potential contribution of utility-scale energy
storage for meeting peak demand.
Firm Capacity (kW, MW): The amount of installed
capacity that can be relied upon to meet demand
during peak periods or other high-risk periods. The
share of firm capacity to the total installed capacity of a
generator is known as its capacity credit (%).3
Capacity Value ($): The monetary value of the
contribution of a generator (conventional, renewable,
or storage) to balancing supply and demand when
generation is scarce.
3Grid-Scale Battery Storage: Frequently Asked Questions
than conventional thermal plants, making them a suitable resource for
short-term reliability services, such as Primary Frequency Response
(PFR) and Regulation. Appropriately sized BESS can also provide
longer-duration services, such as load-following and ramping services,
to ensure supply meets demand.
Transmission and Distribution Upgrade Deferrals: The electricity
grid’s transmission and distribution infrastructure must be sized to meet
peak demand, which may only occur over a few hours of the year. When
anticipated growth in peak electricity demand exceeds the existing
grid’s capacity, costly investments are needed to upgrade equipment and
develop new infrastructure. Deploying BESS can help defer or circum-
vent the need for new grid investments by meeting peak demand with
energy stored from lower-demand periods, thereby reducing congestion
and improving overall transmission and distribution asset utilization.
Also, unlike traditional transmission or distribution investments, mobile
BESS installations can be relocated to new areas when no longer needed
in the original location, increasing their overall value to the grid.
Black Start: When starting up, large generators need an external source
of electricity to perform key functions before they can begin generating
electricity for the grid. During normal system conditions, this external
electricity can be provided by the grid. After a system failure, however,
the grid can no longer provide this power, and generators must be started
through an on-site source of electricity, such as a diesel generator, a
process known as black start. An on-site BESS can also provide this
service, avoiding fuel costs and emissions from conventional black-start
generators. As system-wide outages are rare, an on-site BESS can
provide additional services when not performing black starts.
Table 1 below summarizes the potential applications for BESS in
the electricity system, as well as whether the application is currently
valued in U.S. electricity markets (Denholm 2018). Figure 2 shows the
cumulative installed capacity (MW) for utility-scale storage systems in
the United States in 2017 by the service the systems provide.
Where should batteries be located?
Utility-scale BESS can be deployed in several locations, including: 1)
in the transmission network; 2) in the distribution network near load
centers; or 3) co-located with VRE generators. The siting of the BESS
has important implications for the services the system can best provide,
and the most appropriate location for the BESS will depend on its
intended-use case.
In many cases, a BESS will be technically capable of providing a broad
range of services in any of the locations described in the next section.
Therefore, when siting storage, it is important to analyze the costs and
benefits of multiple locations to determine the optimal siting to meet
system needs. Considering all combinations of services the BESS can
provide at each potential site will provide a better understanding of the
expected revenue streams (see What is value-stacking?) and impact on
the grid.
In the Transmission Network
BESS interconnected to the transmission system can provide a broad
range of ancillary and transmission-related services. These systems can
be deployed to replace or defer investments of peaking capacity, provide
operating reserves to help respond to changes in generation and demand,
or they can be used to defer transmission system upgrades in regions
experiencing congestion from load or generation growth. Figure 3 below
shows the configuration of a utility-scale storage system interconnected
at the transmission substation level.
In the Distribution Network Near Load Centers
Storage systems located in the distribution network can provide all of
the services as transmission-sited storage, in addition to several services
related to congestion and power quality issues. In many areas, it may be
difficult to site a conventional generator near load in order to provide
peaking capacity, due to concerns about emissions or land use. Due to
their lack of local emissions and their scalable nature, BESS systems can
be co-located near load with fewer siting challenges than conventional
generation. Placing storage near load can reduce transmission and
distribution losses and relieve congestion, helping defer transmission
and distribution upgrades. Distribution-level BESS systems can also
provide local power quality services and support improved resilience
during extreme weather events.
Most storage systems in the United States provide
operating reserves and ancillary services. Despite this
current focus, the total U.S. market for these services is
limited, and utility-scale storage may begin providing more
firm and peak capacity in the near future.
Nameplate Capacity
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Operating
Reserves and
Ancillary Services
Arbitrage,
RE Curtailment
Reduction and
Load-levelling
Firm Capacity
or Peaking
Capacity
Transmission
and Distribution
Upgrade Deferrals
Black Start
Figure 2: U.S. Utility-scale battery storage capacity by
service. Data source: U.S. Energy Information Administration,
Form EIA-860, Annual Electric Generator Report
4Grid-Scale Battery Storage: Frequently Asked Questions
Co-Located with VRE Generators
Renewable resources that are located far from load centers may require
transmission investments to deliver power to where it is needed. Given
the variable nature of VRE resources, the transmission capacity used to
deliver the power may be underutilized for large portions of the year.
A BESS can reduce the transmission capacity needed to integrate these
resources and increase the utilization of the remaining capacity by using
storage to charge excess generation during periods of high resource
availability and discharge during periods of low resource availability.
The same BESS can be used to reduce the curtailment of VRE gen-
eration, either due to transmission congestion or a lack of adequate
demand, as well as provide a broad range of ancillary services.
What is value-stacking? What are some
examples of value-stacking opportunities
and challenges?
BESS can maximize their value to the grid and project developers by
providing multiple system services. As some services are rarely called
for (i.e., black start) or used infrequently in a given hour (i.e., spinning
reserves), designing a BESS to provide multiple services enables a
higher overall battery utilization. This multi-use approach to BESS
is known as value-stacking. For example, a BESS project can help
defer the need for new transmission by meeting a portion of the peak
demand with stored energy during a select few hours in the year. When
not meeting peak demand, the BESS can earn revenue by providing
operating reserve services for the transmission system operator.
Table 1: Applications of Utility-Scale Energy Storage
Application Description Duration of Service
Provision
Typically Valued in U.S. Electricity
Markets?
Arbitrage Purchasing low-cost off-peak energy
and selling it during periods of high
prices.
Hours Yes
Firm Capacity Provide reliable capacity to meet peak
system demand.
4+ hours Yes, via scarcity pricing and capacity
markets, or through resource adequacy
payments.
Operating Reserves
• Primary Frequency
Response
Very fast response to unpredictable
variations in demand and generation.
Seconds Yes, but only in a limited number of
markets.
• Regulation Fast response to random,
unpredictable variations in demand and
generation.
15 minutes to 1 hour Yes
• Contingency
Spinning
Fast response to a contingency such
as a generator failure.
30 minutes to 2
hours
Yes
• Replacement/
Supplemental
Units brought online to replace spinning
units.
Hours Yes, but values are very low.
• Ramping/Load
Following
Follow longer-term (hourly) changes in
electricity demand.
30 minutes to hours Yes, but only in a limited number of
markets.
Transmission
and Distribution
Replacement and
Deferral
Reduce loading on T&D system during
peak times.
Hours Only partially, via congestion prices.
Black-Start Units brought online to start system
after a system-wide failure (blackout).
Hours No, typically compensated through
cost-of-service mechanisms.
5Grid-Scale Battery Storage: Frequently Asked Questions
Some system services may be mutually exclusive depending on the
BESS design (e.g., a short duration storage device used to supply
regulating reserves would have limited value for deferring transmission
or distribution upgrades). Even if a BESS is technically capable of pro-
viding multiple services, the additional cycling of the battery (charging
and discharging) may degrade the battery and shorten its lifetime
and economic viability. Finally, a BESS can only provide a limited
duration of any set of services before it runs out of charge, which means
batteries must prioritize the services they provide.4
Regulators have a variety of options to enable BESS to maximize its
economic potential through val ue-stacking. For example, the California
Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) developed categories of services
BESS can provide based on their importance for reliability and location
on the grid, as well as 12 rules for utilities when procuring services
from BESS (CPUC 2018). The CPUC rules:
• Dictate that BESS projects can only provide services at the voltage
level to which they are interconnected or higher, but not lower5;
• Prioritize reliability services over non-reliability services and ensure
storage cannot contract for additional services that would interfere
with any obligation to provide reliability services;
• Require that a BESS project comply with all performance and avail-
ability requirements for services it provides and that noncompliance
penalties be communicated in advance;
• Require that a BESS project inform the utility of any services it
currently provides or intends to provide; and
• Take measures to prevent double compensation to BESS projects for
services provided.
4. ANSI C84.1: Electric Power Systems and Equipment–Voltage Ratings (60 Hz) defines a low-voltage system as having a nominal voltage less than 1 kV and medium voltage as having a
nominal voltage between 1 kV and 100 kV.
5. BESS interconnected at the distribution level can provide distribution or transmission level services, but BESS interconnected at the transmission level can only provide transmission-level
services.
These CPUC rules are just one example of how regulators can help ensure
BESS projects can select the most cost-effective combinations of services
to provide without negatively impacting the reliability of the grid.
How are BESS operators compensated?
BESS operators can be compensated in several different ways,
including in the wholesale energy market, through bilateral contracts,
or directly by the utility through a cost-of-service mechanism. In
a wholesale energy market, the BESS operator submits a bid for a
specific service, such as operating reserves, to the market operator, who
then arranges the valid bids in a least-cost fashion and selects as many
bids as necessary to meet the system’s demands. If the BESS operator’s
bid is selected and the BESS provides the service, the operator will
receive compensation equal to the market price. This process ensures
transparent prices and technology-agnostic consideration; however,
many services are currently not available in the market, such as black
start or transmission and distribution upgrade deferrals. Alternatively,
BESS operators can enter into bilateral contracts for services directly
with energy consumers, or entities which procure energy for end-con-
sumers. This process does not ensure transparency and contracts can
differ widely in both prices and terms. Finally, some BESS are owned
directly by the utilities to whom they provide services, such as upgrade
deferrals. In these cost-of-service cases, the utility pays the BESS
operator at the predetermined price and recovers the payments through
retail electricity rates. In some jurisdictions, however, BESS may be
prevented from extracting revenues through both wholesale markets
and cost-of-service agreements (Bhatnagar et al. 2013).
-
+
batteries
=~~~
inverter/charger
set-up
transformer tie-line
status info
BMS*
*Battery Management System
systemoperator
set points
DC LV AC MV AC
Figure 3: Key components of BESS interconnected at the transmission substation level. LV AC represents a low-voltage
AC connection, while MV AC represents a medium-voltage AC connection.4 Source: Denholm (2019)
6Grid-Scale Battery Storage: Frequently Asked Questions
How does the value of batteries change with
renewable energy deployment and increased
VRE penetration?
The amount of renewable energy on the grid can influence the value and
types of the services provided by a BESS. Increased levels of renewable
energy may increase the need for frequency control services to manage
increased variability and uncertainty in the power system. Increased
levels of VRE penetration can also change the shape of the net load,
or the load minus the VRE generation, influencing BESS projects that
provide load following, arbitrage, peaking capacity, or similar services.
Models of the California system have shown a strong relationship
between solar PV deployment and BESS’ ability to replace conventional
peaking capacity, also known as the BESS capacity credit (Denholm
and Margolis 2018). As the shape of the load curve affects the ability of
storage to provide peaking capacity, resources such as PV that cause load
peaks to be shorter will enable shorter duration batteries, which are less
expensive, to displace conventional peaking capacity.
Initially, low levels of PV penetration may flatten the load curve, reducing
BESS’ ability to cost-effectively offset the need for conventional peaking
plants.6 At higher levels of solar PV penetration, however, the net load
curve becomes peakier, increasing the ability and value of BESS to
reduce peak demand. Figure 4 illustrates how increasing levels of PV
generation change the shape of the net load, causing it to become peakier.
The shaded areas above and under the net load curves indicate BESS
charging and discharging, while the text boxes show the amount of net
load peak reduction (MW) and the total amount of energy met by BESS
during the net load peak (MWh).
6. This is demonstrated by Denholm and Margolis (2018) for the California system.
What are the key barriers
to BESS deployment?
Barriers to energy storage deployment can be broadly grouped into three
different categories: regulatory barriers, market barriers, and data and
analysis capabilities.
1. Regulatory Barriers
• Lack of rules and regulations to clarify the role of BESS.
Although storage may be technically able to provide essential
grid services, if no regulations or guidelines explicitly state that
storage can provide these services, utilities and market operators
may be unwilling to procure services from BESS. Furthermore,
without a guarantee that services provided by a BESS project will
be compensated, storage developers and financing institutions may
be unwilling to make the necessary capital investments. Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order 841 addressed this
issue in U.S. wholesale markets and directed market operators to
develop rules governing storage’s participation in energy, capacity,
and ancillary service markets. Among other requirements, the
rules must ensure open and equal access to the market for storage
systems, taking into consideration their unique operating and
technical characteristics (FERC 2018).
• Restrictions or lack of clarity around if and how storage
can be used across generation, transmission, and
distribution roles. The variety of different services storage can
provide often cuts across multiple markets and compensation
sources. For instance, frequency regulation may be compensated
in a wholesale market, but transmission or distribution investment
deferrals may be compensated as a cost of service by the utility or
system operator. In some jurisdictions, providing services across
different compensation sources is restricted by regulation. Limiting
the services batteries can provide based on where the service is
provided or how it is compensated can influence how often they
are utilized and whether they remain an economic investment
(Bhatnagar 2013).
2. Market Barriers
• Lack of markets for system services. A lack of markets for
services that batteries are uniquely suited to provide can make
it difficult for developers to include them as potential sources
of income when making a business case, deterring investment.
For example, in most U.S. Independent System Operator (ISO)
markets, generators are currently expected to provide inertial and
governor response during frequency excursions without market
compensation. Although BESS can provide the same services,
currently there is no way for BESS to seek market compensation
for doing so. Furthermore, the price formation for a service may
have evolved for conventional generators, meaning the presence
0 6 12 18 24
60,000
50,000
Net Demand (MW)Hour of Day
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
PV Penetration
0% PV 20% PV
10,385 MWh,
4296 MW
4,841 MWh,
2019 MW
Figure 4: Change in California net load shape due to PV.
Adapted from Denholm and Margolis (2018)
7Grid-Scale Battery Storage: Frequently Asked Questions
of batteries in the market could distort prices, affecting storage
systems and conventional generators alike (Bhatnagar 2013).
• Lack of discernment in quality and quantity of services
procured. For some services, such as frequency regulation, the
speed and accuracy of the response is correlated to its overall
value to the system. Battery systems can provide certain services
much faster and more accurately than conventional resources,
which may not be reflected in compensation for the service.
Markets can provide fair compensation to BESS by aligning
compensation schemes with the quality of service provided, as is
mandated by FERC Order 755, which requires compensation for
frequency regulation that reflects “the inherently greater amount
of frequency regulation service being provided by faster-ramping
resources” (FERC 2011). Similarly, BESS can be uniquely suited
to provide up- or down-regulation, given their larger operating
range over which to provide regulating reserves (due to their
lack of a minimum stable level and ability to provide up- and
down-regulation in excess of their nameplate capacity, based
on whether they are charging or discharging) (Denholm 2019).
These unique features of BESS are not necessarily reflected in the
procurement requirements and compensation of such services,
diminishing BESS’ economic viability.
3. Data and Analysis Capabilities
Battery storage systems are an emerging technology that exhibit
more risk for investors than conventional generator investments.
These risks include the technical aspects of battery storage systems,
which may be less understood by stakeholders and are changing
faster than for other technologies, as well as potential policy
changes that may impact incentives for battery deployment.
Given the relatively recent and limited deployment of BESS,
many stakeholders may also be unaware of the full capabilities
of storage, including the ability of a BESS to provide multiple
services at both the distribution and transmission level. At the
same time, traditional analysis tools used by utilities may be
inadequate to fully capture the value of BESS. For example,
production cost models typically operate at an hourly resolution,
which does not capture the value of BESS’ fast-ramping capa-
bilities. The gaps in data and analysis capabilities and lack of
adequate tools can deter investments and prevent battery storage
from being considered for services that can be provided by better
understood conventional generators (Bhatnagar et al. 2013).
What are some real-world examples of
batteries providing services and value-
stacking?
There are several deployments of BESS for large-scale grid applications.
One example is the Hornsdale Power Reserve, a 100 MW/129 MWh
lithium-ion battery installation, the largest lithium-ion BESS in the
world, which has been in operation in South Australia since December
2017. The Hornsdale Power Reserve provides two distinct services:
1) energy arbitrage; and 2) contingency spinning reserve. The BESS
can bid 30 MW and 119 MWh of its capacity directly into the market
for energy arbitrage, while the rest is withheld for maintaining grid
frequency during unexpected outages until other, slower generators
can be brought online (AEMO 2018). In 2017, after a large coal plant
tripped offline unexpectedly, the Hornsdale Power reserve was able to
inject several megawatts of power into the grid within milliseconds,
arresting the fall in grid frequency until a gas generator could respond.
By arresting the fall in frequency, the BESS was able to prevent a likely
cascading blackout.
Another example of value-stacking with grid-scale BESS is the Green
Mountain Power project in Vermont. This 4 MW lithium-ion project
began operation in September 2015 and is paired with a 2 MW solar
installation. The installation provides two primary functions: 1) backup
power and micro-grid capabilities; and 2) demand charge reductions.
The solar-plus-storage system enables the utility to create a micro-grid,
which provides power to a critical facility even when the rest of the
grid is down. The utility operating the BESS also uses it to reduce two
demand charges: an annual charge for the regional capacity market and
a monthly charge for the use of transmission lines. Sandia National
Laboratories estimated that reducing the annual demand charge for a
single year saved the utility over $200,000 (Schoenung 2017).
References
AEMO (Australian Energy Market Operator). Hornsdale Wind Farm 2
FCAS Trial. Knowledge Sharing Paper. Melbourne, Australia: AEMO.
https://www.aemo.com.au/-/media/Files/Electricity/NEM/Strategic-
Partnerships/2018/HWF2-FCAS-trial-paper.pdf.
Akhil, Abbas, Georgianne Huff, Aileen Currier, Benjamin Kaun, Dan
Rastler, Stella Bingquing Chen, Andrew Cotter, et al. Electricity Storage
Handbook. SAND2013-5131. DOE, EPRI, NRECA. July 2013. https://
www.sandia.gov/ess-ssl/lab_pubs/doeepri-electricity-storage-handbook/.
Bhatnagar, Dhruv, Aileen Currier, Jacquelynne Hernandez, Ookie Ma,
and Kirby Brendan. Market and Policy Barriers to Energy Storage
Deployment. SAND2013-7606. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National
Laboratories. September 2013. https://www.sandia.gov/ess-ssl/publica-
tions/SAND2013-7606.pdf.
Cochran, Jaquelin, Mackay Miller, Owen Zinaman, Michael Milligan,
Doug Arent, Bryan Palmintier, Mark O’Malley, et al. “Flexibility in 21st
Century Power Systems.” NREL/TP-6A20-61721. 21st Century Power
Partnership. Golden, CO: NREL. May 2014. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/
fy14osti/61721.pdf.
CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission). Decision on
Multiple-Use Application Issues. Rulemaking 15-03-011. January 17,
2018. http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M206/
K462/206462341.PDF.
Curry, Claire. “Lithium-Ion Battery Costs and Market.” Market Report.
Bloomberg New Energy Finance. July 5, 2017. https://data.bloomberglp.
com/bnef/sites/14/2017/07/BNEF-Lithium-ion-battery-costs-and-
market.pdf.
8Grid-Scale Battery Storage: Frequently Asked Questions
Jennifer E. Leisch, Ph.D.
USAID-NREL Partnership Manager
U.S. Agency for International Development
Tel: +1-303-913-0103 | Email: jleisch@usaid.gov
Ilya Chernyakhovskiy
Energy Analyst
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Tel: +1-303-275-4306
Email: ilya.chernyakhovskiy@nrel.gov
The Grid Integration Toolkit provides state-of-the-art resources to assist developing countries in
integrating variable renewable energy into their power grids. Greening the Grid is supported by the
U.S. Agency for International Development.
The USAID-NREL Partnership addresses critical challenges to scaling up advanced energy systems
through global tools and technical assistance, including the Renewable Energy Data Explorer, Greening
the Grid, the International Jobs and Economic Development Impacts tool, and the Resilient Energy
Platform. More information can be found at: www.nrel.gov/usaid-partnership.
www.greeningthegrid.org | www.nrel.gov/usaid-partnership
This work was authored, in part, by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), operated by Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Funding provided by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under Contract No. IAG-17-2050. The views expressed in this report do not necessarily represent the views of the DOE or the
U.S. Government, or any agency thereof, including USAID.
Denholm, Paul. “Greening the Grid: Utility-Scale Battery
Storage.” Webinar. Clean Energy Solutions Center. February
28, 2019. https://cleanenergysolutions.org/training/
greening-grid-utility-scale-battery-storage.
Denholm, Paul. “Batteries and Storage: Truly a Game Changer?”
presented at the JISEA 2018 Annual Meeting in Golden, CO. April 4,
2018. https://www.jisea.org/assets/pdfs/denholm-jisea-2018.pdf.
Denholm, Paul, and Robert Margolis. The Potential for Energy Storage to
Provide Peaking Capacity in California under Increased Penetration of
Solar Photovoltaics. NREL/TP-6A20-70905. Golden, CO: NREL. March
2018. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy18osti/70905.pdf.
FERC. Electric Storage Participation in Markets Operated by Regional
Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators. Order
No. 841. Issued February 15, 2018. https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/
comm-meet/2018/021518/E-1.pdf.
FERC. Frequency Regulation Compensation in the Organized Wholesale
Power Markets. Order No. 755. Issued October 20, 2011. https://www.
ferc.gov/whats-new/comm-meet/2011/102011/E-28.pdf.
Kim, Dae Kyeong, Susumu Yoneoka, Ali Zain Banatwala, and Yu-Tack
Kim. Handbook on Battery Energy Storage System. Manila, Philippines:
Asian Development Bank. December 2018. https://www.adb.org/
publications/battery-energy-storage-system-handbook.
Lew, D., G. Brinkman, E. Ibanez, A. Florita, M. Heaney, B.-M. Hodge,
M. Hummon, et al. The Western Wind and Solar Integration Study Phase
2. NREL/TP-5500-55588. Golden, CO: NREL. September 2013. https://
www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/55588.pdf.
Mills, Andrew, and Ryan Wiser. Changes in the Economic Value of
Variable Generation at High Penetration Levels: A Pilot Case Study of
California. LBNL-5445E. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory. June 2012. https://emp.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/lbnl-5445e.pdf.
Palchak, David, Jaquelin Cochran, Ali Ehlen, Brendan McBennett,
Michael Milligan, Ilya Chernyakhovskiy, Ranjit Deshmukh, et al.
Pathways to Integrate 175 Gigawatts of Renewable Energy into India’s
Electric Grid, Vol. I—National Study. Golden, CO: NREL. June 2017.
https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/68530.pdf.
Schoenung, Susan, Raymond H. Byrne, Todd Olinsky-Paul, and Daniel
R. Borneo. Green Mountain Power (GMP): Significant Revenues from
Energy Storage. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. May
2017. https://www.sandia.gov/ess-ssl/publications/SAND2017-6164.pdf.
Written by Thomas Bowen, Ilya Chernyakhovskiy, Paul Denholm, National Renewable Energy Laboratory
NREL/TP-6A20-74426 | September 2019
NREL prints on paper that contains recycled content.
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308
Technical Report
NREL/TP-6A20-75385
June 2020
Cost Projections for Utility-Scale Battery
Storage: 2020 Update
Wesley Cole and A. Will Frazier
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
15013 Denver West Parkway
Golden, CO 80401
303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov
Technical Report
NREL/TP-6A20-75385
June 2020
Cost Projections for Utility-Scale Battery
Storage: 2020 Update
Wesley Cole and A. Will Frazier
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Suggested Citation
Cole, Wesley, and A. Will Frazier. 2020. Cost Projections for Utility-Scale Battery Storage:
2020 Update. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
NREL/TP-6A20-75385. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy20osti/75385.pdf
NOTICE
This work was authored by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, operated by Alliance for Sustainable
Energy, LLC, for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Funding
provided by the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Solar Energy
Technologies Office. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the DOE or the U.S.
Government.
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) reports produced after 1991
and a growing number of pre-1991 documents are available
free via www.OSTI.gov.
Cover Photos by Dennis Schroeder: (clockwise, left to right) NREL 51934, NREL 45897, NREL 42160, NREL 45891, NREL 48097,
NREL 46526.
NREL prints on paper that contains recycled content.
iii
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to ReEDS modeling team for their input on this work. We also thank David
Feldman (NREL), Ryan Hledik (Brattle), Cara Marcy (EPA), Vignesh Ramasamy (NREL), and
Daniel Steinberg (NREL) for providing input and feedback on this report. This report was jointly
funded by the EERE Office of Strategic Programs, Solar Energy Technologies Office, Water
Power Technology Office, and Wind Energy Technology Office, under contract number DE-
AC36-08GO28308. All errors and omissions are the sole responsibility of the authors.
iv
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Executive Summary
In this work we describe the development of cost and performance projections for utility-scale
lithium-ion battery systems, with a focus on 4-hour duration systems. The projections are
developed from an analysis of 19 publications that consider utility-scale storage costs. The suite
of publications demonstrates varied cost reductions for battery storage over time. Figure ES-1
shows the low, mid, and high cost projections developed in this work (on a normalized basis)
relative to the published values. Figure ES-2 shows the overall capital cost for a 4-hour battery
system based on those projections, with storage costs of $144/kWh, $208/kWh, and $293/kWh in
2030 and $88/kWh, $156/kWh, and $219/kWh in 2050. Battery variable operations and
maintenance costs, lifetimes, and efficiencies are also discussed, with recommended values
selected based on the publications surveyed.
Figure ES-1. Battery cost projections for 4-hour lithium-ion systems, with values relative to 2019.
The high, mid, and low cost projections developed in this work are shown as the bolded lines.
Figure ES-2. Battery cost projections for 4-hour lithium ion systems.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 20504-hr Battery Cost Projections (relative to 2019)High
Mid
Low
Published Values
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 20504-hour Battery Capital Cost (2019$/kWh)High
Mid
Low
v
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Table of Contents
1 Background ........................................................................................................................................... 1
2 Methods ................................................................................................................................................. 1
3 Results and Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 4
4 Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 11
References ................................................................................................................................................. 12
Appendix .................................................................................................................................................... 14
List of Figures
Figure ES-1. Battery cost projections for 4-hour lithium-ion systems, with values relative to 2019. ......... iv
Figure ES-2. Battery cost projections for 4-hour lithium ion systems. ........................................................ iv
Figure 1. Battery cost projections for 4-hour lithium-ion systems, with values relative to 2019. ................ 5
Figure 2. Battery cost projections for 4-hour lithium ion systems. ............................................................... 6
Figure 3. Battery cost projections developed in this work (bolded lines) relative to published cost
projections. ............................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 4. Current battery storage costs from studies published in 2018 or later. .......................................... 8
Figure 5. Cost projections for power (left) and energy (right) components of lithium-ion systems. ............ 9
Figure 6. Cost projections for 2-, 4-, and 6-hour duration batteries using the mid cost projection. ............. 9
Figure 8. Comparison of cost projections developed in this report (solid lines) against the values from the
2019 cost projection report (Cole and Frazier 2019) (dashed lines). ..................................... 15
Figure 9. Comparison of cost projections developed in this report (solid lines) the values from the 2019
cost projection report (Cole and Frazier 2019) (dashed lines), with all values normalized to
the “Mid” cost projection in the year 2019. ........................................................................... 15
List of Tables
Table 1. List of publications used in this study to determine battery cost and performance projections. .... 1
Table 2. Values from Figure 1 and Figure 2, which show the normalized and absolute storage costs over
time. Storage costs are overnight capital costs for a complete 4-hour battery system. .......... 14
1
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
1 Background
Battery storage costs have changed rapidly over the past decade. In 2016, the National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) published a set of cost projections for utility-scale
lithium-ion batteries (Cole et al. 2016). Those 2016 projections relied heavily on electric vehicle
battery projections because utility-scale battery projections were largely unavailable for
durations longer than 30 minutes. In 2019, battery cost projections were updated based on
publications that focused on utility-scale battery systems (Cole and Frazier 2019). This report
updates the cost projections published in 2019.
The projections in this work focus on utility-scale lithium-ion battery systems for use in capacity
expansion models. NREL utilizes the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) (Cohen et
al. 2019) and the Resource Planning Model (RPM) (Mai et al. 2013) for capacity expansion
modeling, and the battery cost projections developed here are designed to be used in those
models. Additionally, the projections are intended to inform the cost projections published in the
Annual Technology Baseline (NREL 2019).
2 Methods
The cost and performance projections developed in this work use a literature-based approach in
which projections are generally based on the low, median, and highest values from the literature.
Table 1 lists 19 publications that are used in this work, though the projections rely primarily on
those published in 2018 or 2019.
Table 1. List of publications used in this study to determine battery cost and performance
projections.
Author or Organization Citation
Avista Avista (2017)
BNEF BNEF (2019)
Brattle Hledik et al. (2018)
CAISO Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. (2017)
DNV GL DNV GL (2017)
EIA EIA (2020)
EPRI EPRI (2018)
IEA IEA (2019)
IRENA IRENA (2017)
Lazard Lazard (2018) and Lazard (2019)
Navigant Navigant (2017)
NIPSCO NIPSCO (2018)
NYSERDA NYSERDA (2018)
Platt River Power Authority Aquino et al. (2017)
PNNL Mongird et al. (2019)
PSE PSE (2017)
Schmidt et al. Schmidt et al. (2019)
Wood Mackenzie Wood Mackenzie & Energy Storage Association (2019)
2
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
There are a number of challenges inherent in developing cost and performance projections based
on published values. First among those is that the definition of the published values is not always
clear. For example, dollar year, duration, depth-of-discharge, lifetime, and O&M are not always
defined in the same way (or even defined at all) for a given set of values. As such, some of the
values presented here required interpretation from the sources specified. Second, many of the
published values compare their published projection against projections produced by others, and
it is unclear how much the projections rely upon one-another. Thus, if one projection is used to
inform another, that projection might artificially bias our results (toward that particular
projection) more than others. Third, because of the relatively limited dataset for actual battery
systems and the rapidly changing costs, it is not clear how different battery projections should be
weighted. For example, should projections published in 2018 be given higher weight than those
published in 2016? Or are some organizations better at making projections and therefore should
be given higher weight?
In the interest of providing a neutral survey of the current literature, all cost projections included
in this report are weighted equally. Only storage projections published in 2017 or later were
considered. Many of the newest projections, however, are simply a compilation of older
projections (just like this report). For example, Comello and Reichelstein (2019) relies on
publications produced in 2017 or earlier, and Nian, Jindal, an Li (2019) use Cole et al. (2016)
and IRENA (2017) for their cost projections. Thus, many of the latest papers with cost
projections would create known redundancies (per the second challenge listed above) and were
therefore excluded from this work. All cost values were converted to 2019$ using the consumer
pricing index. In cases where the dollar year was not specified, the dollar year was assumed to be
the same as the publication year.
We only used projections for 4-hour lithium-ion storage systems. We define the 4-hour duration
as the output duration of the battery, such that a 4-hour device would be able to discharge at
rated power capacity for 4-hours. In practice that would mean that the device would charge for
more than 4 hours and would nominally hold more than its rated energy capacity in order to
compensate for losses during charge and discharge.
We report our price projections as a total system overnight capital cost expressed in units of
$/kWh. However, not all components of the battery system cost scale directly with the energy
capacity (i.e., kWh) of the system (Feldman et al. Forthcoming). For example, the inverter costs
scale according to the power capacity (i.e., kW) of the system, and some cost components such
as the developer costs can scale with both power and energy. By expressing battery costs in
$/kWh, we are deviating from other power generation technologies such as combustion turbines
or solar photovoltaic plants where capital costs are usually expressed as $/kW. We use the units
of $/kWh because that is the most common way that battery system costs have been expressed in
published material to date. The $/kWh costs we report can be converted to $/kW costs simply by
multiplying by the duration (e.g., a $300/kWh, 4-hour battery would have a power capacity cost
of $1200/kW).
To develop cost projections, storage costs were normalized to their 2019 value such that each
projection started with a value of 1 in 2019. We chose to use normalized costs rather than
absolute costs because systems were not always clearly defined in the publications. For example,
it is not clear if a system is more expensive because it is more efficient and has a longer lifetime,
3
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
or if the authors simply anticipate higher system costs. With the normalized method, many of the
difference matter to a lesser degree. Additionally, as will be shown in the results section, the
2019 benchmark cost that we have chosen for our current cost of storage is lower than nearly all
the 2019 costs for projections published in 2017. By using normalized costs, we can more easily
use these 2017 projections to inform cost reductions from our lower initial point.
If a publication began its projections after 2019, the 2019 value was estimated using linear
extrapolation from the nearest value. For example, if the 2020 price was $500/kWh and the 2021
price was $480/kWh, then the 2019 price was assumed to be $520/kWh. Because projections
tend to have more rapid declines in the early years, the linear approach will tend to underestimate
the 2019 value, which in turn will overestimate the normalized values. If publications only
provided values for specific years (e.g., 2018, 2020, and 2030), linear interpolation was used to
fill in values for in-between years in order to create yearly projections.1
In order to define our low, mid, and high projections, we only considered cost projections
published in 2018 and later. Projections published in 2017 are still shown in many figures in the
results section, and we used the 2017-vintage data as a benchmark for the projections that we
developed. We felt that the later vintage publications would provide a better assessment on
anticipated storage cost reductions than those published in earlier years.
We defined our low, mid, and high projections as the minimum, median, and maximum point,
respectively in 2020, 2025, and 2030. Defining the 2050 points was more challenging because
only four datasets extended to 2050. Of the three datasets, they showed a 19%, 25%, 27%, and
39% cost reduction from 2030 to 2050. The 39% reduction was used from the low case, while
25% was used for the mid and high cases. In other words, the low case was assumed to decline
by 39% from 2030 to 2050, while the mid and high cases were assumed to decline by 25% from
2030 to 2050.
Points in between 2018, 2020, 2025, 2030, and 2050 were set based on linear interpolation
between years with values assigned. To convert these normalized low, mid, and high projections
into cost values, the normalized values were multiplied by the 4-hour battery storage cost from
Feldman et al. (Forthcoming) to produce 4-hour battery systems costs.
To estimate the costs for other storage durations (i.e., durations other than 4 hours), we assign
separate energy costs and power costs such that
Total Cost ($/kWh) = Energy Cost ($/kWh) + Power Cost ($/kW) / Duration (hr)
To break apart the total cost into energy and power components, we used the 4-hour and 2-hour
cost estimates from Feldman et al. (Forthcoming). By using the total cost for two distinct
durations, we could calculate the energy and power costs. We could also check these energy and
power costs against the 1-hour and 0.5-hour cost estimates that were also included in Feldman et
1 There was one exception to this linear interpolation. Because the projection from Schmidt et al. (2019) drove some
of the low-cost projection in this work, we interpolated their values using a fourth-order polynomial in order to get a
better estimates for their pre-2035 values.
4
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
al. (Forthcoming). We assume that the relative cost reductions developed for the total battery
system cost apply equally to the energy and power components of the battery.
The method employed in this work relies solely on literature projections. It does not take into
account other factors that might impact costs over time, such as materials availability, market
size, and policy factors. Unless these and other factors are not captured in the work surveyed,
then they will not be reflected in the projection produced here.
3 Results and Discussion
The normalized cost trajectories with the low, mid, and high projections are shown in Figure 1.
The high projection follows the highest cost trajectory (of 2018 vintage or newer) through 2030.
It then receives the 25% cost reduction from 2030 through 2050 as described in the methods
section. The mid and low projections have initial slopes being steeper than later slopes,
indicating that most publications see larger cost reductions in the near-term that then slow over
time. By 2030, costs are reduced by 63%, 47%, and 26% in the low, mid, and high cases,
respectively, and by 2050 are reduced by 78%, 60%, and 44%, respectively.
5
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Figure 1. Battery cost projections for 4-hour lithium-ion systems, with values relative to 2019. The
high, mid, and low cost projections developed in this work are shown as the bolded lines. The upper figure shows the
full range of cost projections used in this work, while the lower figure shows only those cost projections published
after 2017. Figure values are included in the Appendix.
The resulting total system cost for a 4-hour device is shown in Figure 2. The 2019 starting point
of $380/kWh is taken from Feldman et al. (Forthcoming). Although there is uncertainty in the
2019 cost (which is discussed later), we use a single cost for 2019 for convenience as we apply
these costs in our long-term planning models (applying the same costs in 2019 means that the
2019 solution will not change as we shift from a “high” to a “mid” to a “low” cost projection for
storage). By definition, the projections follow the same trajectories as the normalized cost values.
Storage costs are $124/kWh, $207/kWh, and $338/kWh in 2030 and $76/kWh, $156/kWh, and
$258/kWh in 2050. Costs for each year and each trajectory are included in the Appendix.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 20504-hr Battery Cost Projections (relative to 2019)High
Mid
Low
Published Values
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 20504-hr Battery Cost Projections (relative to 2019)High
Mid
Low
Published Values
2018-19 only
6
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Figure 2. Battery cost projections for 4-hour lithium ion systems.
These values represent overnight capital costs for the complete battery system. Figure values are included in the
Appendix.
Figure 3 shows how the absolute cost projections from Figure 2 compare to the published cost
projection values. Because we chose to develop our projections based on the normalized cost
values, they do not necessarily line up with the published cost projections. Many of the published
cost projections never even reach the starting point that we have selected, while a few others are
at some point lower than our low projection. Some of that discrepancy is due to the vintage of
the projection. Cost projections published in 2017 tend to be higher than those published in 2018
or later. The lower plot in Figure 3 shows that the cost projections tend to be better aligned on an
absolute basis when only the more recent cost projections are considered.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 20504-hour Battery Capital Cost (2019$/kWh)High
Mid
Low
7
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Figure 3. Battery cost projections developed in this work (bolded lines) relative to published cost
projections. The upper figure shows the full range of cost projections used in this work, while the lower figure
shows only those cost projections published after 2017. Cost values above $800/kWh are not shown.
One of the key assumptions in our projections is the choice of the starting point. A higher or
lower starting point would shift the set of projections up or down relative to the change in
magnitude of the starting point. To better assess the quality of our starting point, we compared
the value from Feldman et al. (Forthcoming) with other values published in 2018 or later (shown
in Figure 4). We did not consider older reported values because of the rapid changes in battery
costs. This comparison increases our confidence that the starting value we have selected is
reasonable, although it does demonstrate that there is considerable uncertainty (±$100/kWh) in
the current price of battery storage systems.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 20504-hour Battery Capital Cost ($/kWh)High
Mid
Low
Values Published
in 2017-2019
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 20504-hour Battery Capital Cost ($/kWh)Values Published
in 2018 or 2019
High
Mid
Low
8
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Figure 4. Current battery storage costs from studies published in 2018 or later. The NREL value
(Feldman et al. Forthcoming) was selected as the 2019 starting cost for this work.
One of the other challenges with using the normalized cost reductions to develop our projections
is that projections that start at a higher value than our starting point might see greater cost
reduction potential, and thus have a high percent reduction but still never have a low $/kWh cost.
Conversely, projections that start lower than our starting point might have smaller cost reduction
potential on a percentage basis but achieve very low $/kWh costs. However, we still prefer to use
the normalized cost reduction numbers because of the large discrepancy in starting costs across
published projections, and because it helps to obviate the challenge of different cost and system
definitions in the different publications.
Figure 5 shows the cost projections for the power and energy components of the battery. The
breakdown of power and energy is derived from Feldman et al. (Forthcoming) as described in the
methods section. These components are combined to give a total system cost, where the system
cost (in $/kWh) is the power component divided by the duration plus the energy component.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Current 4-hour battery cost ($/kWh)
9
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Figure 5. Cost projections for power (left) and energy (right) components of lithium-ion systems.
Note the different units in the two plots.
These power and energy costs can be used to specify the capital costs for other durations. Figure
6 shows the cost projections for 2-, 4-, and 6-hour duration batteries (using the mid projection
only). On a $/kWh basis, longer duration batteries have a lower capital cost, and on a $/kW
basis, shorter duration batteries have a lower capital cost. Figure 6 (left) also demonstrates why it
is critical to cite the duration whenever providing a capital cost in $/kWh or $/kW.
Figure 6. Cost projections for 2-, 4-, and 6-hour duration batteries using the mid cost projection.
Left shows the values in $/kWh, while right shows the costs in $/kW.
To fully specify the cost and performance of a battery storage system for capacity expansion
modeling tools, additional parameters besides the capital costs are needed. Figure 6 shows the
range of variable operations and maintenance (VOM), fixed operations and maintenance (FOM),
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2015 2025 2035 2045Cost of Capacity Components (2019$/kW)Low
High
Mid
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2015 2025 2035 2045Cost of Energy Components (2019$/kWh)High
Low
Mid
4-hour
0
100
200
300
400
500
2015 2025 2035 2045Battery Capital Cost (2019$/kWh)2-hour
6-hour
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
2015 2025 2035 2045Battery Capital Cost(2019$/kW)2-hour
4-hour
6-hour
10
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
lifetime, and round-trip efficiency 2 assumptions from the publications surveyed. The rightmost
point in the figure shows the value that we have selected to represent our 4-hour battery system.
The VOM is generally taken to be zero or near zero, and we have adopted zero for the VOM.
This VOM is defined to coincide with an assumed one cycle per day and a given calendar
lifetime. Cycling more than once per day might reduce that lifetime, so cycles beyond once per
day should see a non-zero VOM.
We have allocated the all operating costs (at the one-cycle-per-day level) to the FOM. By putting
the operations and maintenance costs in the FOM rather than the VOM we in essence assume
that battery performance has been guaranteed over the lifetime, such that operating the battery
does not incur any costs to the battery operator. The FOM has a much broader range of values.
One of the primary differences in the level of FOM was whether augmentation or performance
maintenance were included in the cost. For example, DNV GL (2017) reports a $6/kW-yr FOM
and a $7.5/kWh-yr capacity maintenance cost to address degradation (values in 2017$). Lower
FOM numbers typically include only simple maintenance while higher FOM numbers include
some capacity additions or replacements to deal with degradation. We have adopted a FOM
value from the high end and assume that the FOM cost will counteract degradation such that the
system will be able to perform at rated capacity throughout its lifetime. The FOM value selected
is 2.5% of the $/kW capacity cost for a 4-hour battery. We assume that this FOM is consistent
with providing approximately one cycle per day. If the battery is operating at a much higher rate
of cycling, then this FOM value might not be sufficient to counteract degradation.
2 Round-trip efficiency is defined as the system efficiency through a charge/discharge cycle. For example, it would
include losses associated with cooling systems or battery control equipment.
11
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Figure 7. Variable O&M (top right), fixed O&M (top left), lifetime (bottom right), and round-trip
efficiency (bottom left) from various published sources. The values selected for this study are the right-
most values shown.
The lifetime we selected is 15 years, which is near the median of the published values. The
round-trip efficiency is chosen to be 85%, which is well aligned with published values.
4 Summary
Battery storage costs have evolved rapidly over the past several years, necessitating an update to
storage cost projections used in long-term planning models and other activities. This work
documents the development of these projections, which are based on recent publications of
storage costs. The projections show a wide range of storage costs, both in terms of current costs
as well as future costs. Although the range in projections is considerable, all projections do show
a decline in capital costs, with cost reductions by 2025 of 6-48%.
The cost projections developed in this work utilize the normalized cost reductions across the
literature, and result in 26-63% capital cost reductions by 2030 and 44-78% cost reductions by
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
4-hr Battery VOM ($/MWh)0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
4-hr Battery FOM ($/kW-yr)0
5
10
15
20
25
Lifetime (years)60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%Round-trip Efficiency
12
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
2050. The cost projections are also accompanied by assumed operations and maintenance costs,
lifetimes, and round-trip efficiencies, and these performance metrics are benchmarked against
other published values.
References
Aquino, Todd, Mathew Roling, Chris Baker, and Lukas Rowland. 2017. “Battery Energy Storage
Technology Assessment.” https://www.prpa.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/HDR-
Battery-Energy-Storage-Assessment.pdf.
Avista. 2017. “2017 Electric Integrated Resource Plan.” AVISTA. https://www.myavista.com/-
/media/myavista/content-documents/about-us/our-company/irp-documents/2017-electric-
irp-final.pdf?la=en.
BNEF. 2019. “Long-Term Energy Storage Outlook.”
Cohen, Stuart, Jonathon Becker, David A. Bielen, Maxwell Brown, Wesley J. Cole, Kelly P.
Eurek, Allister Frazier, et al. 2019. “Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS)
Model Documentation: Version 2018.” NREL/TP-6A20-72023. Golden, CO: National
Renewable Energy Laboratory. https://doi.org/10.2172/1505935.
Cole, Wesley, and Will A. Frazier. 2019. “Cost Projections for Utility-Scale Battery Storage.”
Technical Report NREL/TP-6A20-73222. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy
Laboratory. https://doi.org/10.2172/1529218.
Cole, Wesley, Cara Marcy, Venkat Krishnan, and Robert Margolis. 2016. “Utility-Scale
Lithium-Ion Storage Cost Projections for Use in Capacity Expansion Models.” In 2016
North American Power Symposium (NAPS), 1–6. Denver, CO, United States: IEEE.
https://doi.org/10.1109/NAPS.2016.7747866.
Comello, Stephen, and Stefan Reichelstein. 2019. “The Emergence of Cost Effective Battery
Storage.” Nature Communications 10 (1): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-
09988-z.
DNV GL. 2017. “Energy Storage Potential Evaluation.” 10046409–R–01–E.
https://www.pacificpower.net/content/dam/pacific_power/doc/About_Us/Rates_Regulati
on/Oregon/Regulatory_Filings/Docket_UM_1857/7-14-
17_Filing/report/exhibits/Appendix_A_REDACTED.pdf.
EIA. 2020. “Annual Energy Outlook 2020 with Projections to 2050.” AEO2020. Annual Energy
Outlook. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Energy Information Administration.
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/AEO2019.pdf.
Energy and Environmental Economics. 2017. “RESOLVE Documentation: CPUC 2017 IRP:
Inputs & Assumptions.” Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc.
http://cpuc.ca.gov/uploadedFiles/CPUCWebsite/Content/UtilitiesIndustries/Energy/Energ
yPrograms/ElectPowerProcurementGeneration/irp/AttachmentB.RESOLVE_Inputs_Ass
umptions_2017-09-15.pdf.
EPRI. 2018. “Energy Storage Technology and Cost Assessment: Executive Summary.”
3002013958.
https://www.epri.com/#/pages/product/000000003002013958/&src=mail?lang=en-US.
Feldman, David, Ran Fu, Ashwin Ramdas, Jal Desai, and Robert Margolis. Forthcoming. “U.S.
Solar Photovoltaic System and Energy Storage Cost Benchmark: Q1 2019.” NREL/TP-
6A20-75161. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
13
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Hledik, Ryan, Judy Chang, Roger Lueken, Johannes Pfeifenberger, John Imon Pedtke, and
Jeremy Vollen. 2018. “The Economic Potential for Energy Storage in Nevada,” October,
92.
IEA. 2019. “World Energy Outlook 2019.” International Energy Agency.
IRENA. 2017. “Electricity Storage and Renewables: Costs and Markets to 2030.”
https://www.irena.org/publications/2017/Oct/Electricity-storage-and-renewables-costs-
and-markets.
Lazard. 2018. “Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Storage Analysis—Version 4.0.”
https://www.lazard.com/media/450774/lazards-levelized-cost-of-storage-version-40-
vfinal.pdf.
———. 2019. “Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Storage Analysis—Version 5.0.”
https://www.lazard.com/media/451087/lazards-levelized-cost-of-storage-version-50-
vf.pdf.
Mai, Trieu, Easan Drury, Kelly Eurek, Natalie Bodington, Anthony Lopez, and Andrew Perry.
2013. “Resource Planning Model: An Integrated Resource Planning and Dispatch Tool
for Regional Electric Systems.” TP-6A20-56723. National Renewable Energy
Laboratory. http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/56723.pdf.
Mongird, K, V Viswanathan, P Balducci, J Alam, V Fotedar, V Koritarov, and B Hadjerioua.
2019. “Energy Storage Technology and Cost Characterization Report.” PNNL-28866.
Richland, WA: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/07/f65/Storage%20Cost%20and%20Perfor
mance%20Characterization%20Report_Final.pdf.
Navigant. 2017. “Storage in the Northwest.” Presented at the Northwest Demand Response and
Energy Storage Summit, Portland, OR, September 28.
Nian, Victor, Gautam Jindal, and Hailong Li. 2019. “A Feasibility Study on Integrating Large-
Scale Battery Energy Storage Systems with Combined Cycle Power Generation – Setting
the Bottom Line.” Energy 185 (October): 396–408.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.07.028.
NIPSCO. 2018. “NIPSCO Integrated Resource Plan 2018: Appendix A.” Northern Indiana
Public Service Company LLC. https://www.nipsco.com/docs/librariesprovider11/rates-
and-tariffs/irp/2018-nipsco-irp-appendix-a.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
NREL. 2019. “2019 Annual Technology Baseline.” Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy
Laboratory. https://atb.nrel.gov/.
NYSERDA. 2018. “New York State Energy Storage Roadmap.” New York State Energy
Research and Development Authority.
http://documents.dps.ny.gov/public/Common/ViewDoc.aspx?DocRefId={2A1BFBC9-
85B4-4DAE-BCAE-164B21B0DC3D}.
Puget Sound Energy. 2017. “2017 PSE Integrated Resource Plan.”
https://www.pse.com/pages/energy-supply/resource-planning.
Schmidt, Oliver, Sylvain Melchior, Adam Hawkes, and Iain Staffell. 2019. “Projecting the
Future Levelized Cost of Electricity Storage Technologies.” Joule, January.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2018.12.008.
Wood Mackenzie & ESA. 2019. “U.S. Energy Storage Monitor: Q4 2018.”
14
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Appendix
Table 2 includes the values that are plotted in Figure 1 and Figure 2. Figure 9 and Figure 10
show the comparison of the projections developed in this work relative to the projections that
were produced in last year’s report (Cole and Frazier 2019). Although 4-hour costs did not
change much from last year’s report, the relative distribution between the power and energy
costs did change. Thus, 2-hour or 6-hour battery costs calculated using data from this year’s
report will show greater differences than the 4-hour batteries.
Table 2. Values from Figure 1 and Figure 2, which show the normalized and absolute storage
costs over time. Storage costs are overnight capital costs for a complete 4-hour battery system.
Normalized Cost Reduction 4-hour Storage Costs
(2019$/kWh)
Year Low Mid High Low Mid High
2019 1.00 1.00 1.00 393 393 393
2020 0.78 0.94 0.97 306 370 383
2021 0.73 0.89 0.95 286 351 372
2022 0.68 0.84 0.92 266 331 362
2023 0.62 0.79 0.90 245 312 352
2024 0.57 0.74 0.87 225 293 341
2025 0.52 0.70 0.84 205 273 331
2026 0.49 0.66 0.82 193 260 323
2027 0.46 0.63 0.80 181 247 316
2028 0.43 0.60 0.78 169 234 308
2029 0.40 0.56 0.76 156 221 300
2030 0.37 0.53 0.74 144 208 293
2031 0.36 0.52 0.74 142 205 289
2032 0.35 0.52 0.73 139 203 285
2033 0.35 0.51 0.72 136 200 282
2034 0.34 0.50 0.71 133 198 278
2035 0.33 0.50 0.70 130 195 274
2036 0.32 0.49 0.69 127 192 271
2037 0.32 0.48 0.68 125 190 267
2038 0.31 0.48 0.67 122 187 263
2039 0.30 0.47 0.66 119 185 260
2040 0.30 0.46 0.65 116 182 256
2041 0.29 0.46 0.64 113 179 252
2042 0.28 0.45 0.63 111 177 249
2043 0.27 0.44 0.62 108 174 245
2044 0.27 0.44 0.61 105 172 241
2045 0.26 0.43 0.60 102 169 238
2046 0.25 0.42 0.60 99 166 234
2047 0.25 0.42 0.59 96 164 230
15
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Normalized Cost Reduction 4-hour Storage Costs
(2019$/kWh)
2048 0.24 0.41 0.58 94 161 227
2049 0.23 0.40 0.57 91 159 223
2050 0.22 0.40 0.56 88 156 219
Figure 8. Comparison of cost projections developed in this report (solid lines) against the values
from the 2019 cost projection report (Cole and Frazier 2019) (dashed lines).
Figure 9. Comparison of cost projections developed in this report (solid lines) the values from the
2019 cost projection report (Cole and Frazier 2019) (dashed lines), with all values normalized to
the “Mid” cost projection in the year 2019.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 20504-hour Battery Capital Cost ($/kWh)Low Mid High
Low-2016 Mid-2016 High-2016
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 20504-hour Battery Capital Cost (normalized)Low Mid High
Low-2016 Mid-2016 High-2016
Alaska Energy Storage ProjectsProject Name City Owner ManufacturerCost in millions TechnologyAC‐AC Roundtrip Efficiency (estimated)Peak Charge/ Dis. Rate (MW)Energy Storage Capacity (kWh)Ratio of energy to power (MWh/MW)Design Discharge Rate and PeriodDeep discharge cyclesProjected life in years Purpose StatusYear Constructed CommentsBuckland Box Power ProjectBuckland City of Buckland Lithium Ion battery 80‐90% 0.5 196 2.3 10 Integrate wind turbines and Box Solar project into village grid.2019Cordova BESS Cordova Cordova Electric SAFT/ABB Lithium Ion battery 80‐90% 1.0 1,000 1.0 10 hydro integration and diesel savingsOperating 2019Deering City of Deering Lithium Ion battery 80‐90% 0.2 98 1.9 10 Integrate wind turbines and solar panels into village grid2019Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) Fairbanks GVEA Saft $35 13,760 Ni‐Cad batteries 73% 40.0 6,7505.927MW for 15 minutes 20‐30 spinning reserve Operating 2003 total weight 1,500 tonsUsibelli Flywheel Healy Usibelli Coal MineGE power converterlow‐speed flywheel 5.2 260 20.0 5.2MW for three secondsUnlimited 40 years and countingIntegrating a 6MW dragline into the GVEA gridOperating 1978 The flywheel weighs 40 tonsHughes Solar‐Diesel MicrogridHughes City of Hughes Lithium Ion battery 80‐90% 120kWh Integrate a 120kW solar PV systemKodiak Wind‐Diesel‐Hydro‐Battery SystemKodiak KEA Younikos lithium‐ion battery 80‐90% 3.0 750 4.0 3MW for 15 minutesWind integration Operating 2017 Lithium ion batteries replaced a 2012 valve‐regulated lead acid battery project. Jennifer Richcreek has more info.Kodiak Electric Flywheel SystemKodiak KEA ABB $3.0 Two 1.0 MWs flywheels80‐90% 2.0 Unlimited 20 Frequency support Operating 2015 powers and stores energy from one of the largest port cranes in Alaska. Also provides frequency support for wind farm.Kokhanok wind‐diesel‐battery systemKokhanok Kokhanok Village CouncilEnersys DM $0.1 valve‐regulated lead‐acid battery75‐85% 1.3 336 3.9 1,200 8 Integration of wind system. Diesels off operation.Not operating 2010 diesel off operation intended but not achieved aside from under test conditions. KEA Battery System #1 Kotzebue Kotzebue Electric Assoc.Premium Power$1.0 zinc‐bromine flow battery63% 0.5 3,700 0.1 10,000 Not operating 2011/12 This battery was installed but did not function as intended. It was shipped back to the manufacturer.KEA Battery System #2 Kotzebue Kotzebue Electric Assoc.SAFT/ABB lithium‐ion battery 80‐90% 1.2 950 1.3 1MW for 40 minutes10 provide grid stability and time shift electrical generationOperating 2015 Operational in 2016. KEA considering diesels off operation 8/16 but not done yet.Metlakatla battery systemMetlakatla MP&L Exide valve‐regulated lead‐acid battery75‐85% 1.0 1,400 0.7 1MW for 75 minutes8 hydro backup Operating 1997 batteries replaced in 2009 after 12 years of operationHEA BESSSoldotna HEA Tesla $38? lithium‐ion battery 80‐90% 46.5 93,000 0.5 spinning reserve Construction 2021 Tesla Megapack BatteriesSt. Paul Flywheel Energy Storage ProjectSt. Paul TDX Corp Beacon $0.4 flywheel 95% 0.2 30 5.3 160kW for 11 minutesUnlimited 20 Improve Not operating2012 Flywheel suffered bearing failureWales Wind‐Battery SystemWales AVEC Saft Nickel‐Cadmium battery65% 156 0.0 Stabilize the grid and allow diesels off operationNot operating 2001 diesel off operation intended but not achieved aside from under test conditionsFuture projectsAnchorage Area Battery Anchorage Lithium Ion 80‐90% 69.0 Contingency reserves for the loss of the Kenai intertie and other N‐1 events. Also system regulating reserves.Proposed Proposed BESS is described in the 2017 Railbelt Transmission Plan, which is available on the AEA website.
AEA LOAN DASHBOARD REPORTAEA POWER PROJECT LOAN FUNDYEAR TO DATE07/01/2021LOAN ACTIVITY EARNINGSSTART DATELOAN CATEGORYSTARTING BALANCEFUNDS DISBURSEDPAYMENTS RECEIVEDENDING BALANCEINTEREST RECEIVEDLATE FEES RECEIVEDINTEREST + LATE FEES20AEA POWER PROJECT FUND LOANS 26,505,547 1,402,659 (643,157) 27,265,049 178,671 3,270 181,941 TOTAL # OF PPF LOANS0LOAN PROGRAM SUMMARY# OF DELINQUENT PPF LOANSOutstanding Loans per Trial Balance27,265,048.54$ -$ Uncommitted Cash Balance10,089,334.45$ LOANS DELINQUENT AMOUNT ($)Loan Commitments1,319,508.21$ 0.000%Total Loan Program38,673,891.20$ % OF DELINQUENT LOANS TO PORTFOLIO BALANCE02/28/2022END DATE FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE LOAN PORTFOLIO ACTIVITY (07/01/2021 - 02/28/2022 )Waterfall Creek Hydro - King Cove, AlaskaPrint Date: 3/7/2022Page 1 of 2
AEA POWER PROJECT FUND LOANS BY ENERGY REGION & PROJECT TYPEOUTSTANDING BALANCES & NEW ACTIVITYENERGY REGIONAEA PPF LOAN BALANCEREMAINING LOAN COMMITMENTSNEW APPLICATIONS IN PROCESS# OF AEA PPF LOANSTOTALALEUTIANS2,434,397 - 65,000 4 2,499,397 BERING STRAITS- - - - - BRISTOL BAY433,129 - 514,500 2 947,629 COPPER RIVER/ CHUGACH- - - - - FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE LOAN PORTFOLIO ACTIVITY ( - )KODIAK- - - 1 - LOWER YUKON-KUSKOKWIM591,734 341,465 - 3 933,199 NORTH SLOPE- - - - - NORTHWEST ARCTIC- - - - - RAILBELT3,500,880 - - 3 3,500,880 SOUTHEAST19,152,734 - - 2 19,152,734 27893070.2YUKON-KOYUKUK/ UPPER TANANA1,152,175 978,043 2,258,829 5 4,389,047 10422145.3758569.3627,265,049 1,319,508 2,838,329 20 31,422,886 TOTALBIOMASS$85,641DIESEL$1,444,237HYDRO$22,837,413SOLAR$530,003TRANSMISSION$1,966,667TANK FARM$2,258,829WIND$2,300,095AEA PPF LOANS BY PROJECT TYPE - NEW & OUTSTANDING BALANCEBIOMASS1DIESEL6HYDRO6SOLAR1TRANSMISSION1TANK FARM1WIND4AEA PPF LOANS BY PROJECT TYPEPrint Date: 3/7/2022Page 2 of 2
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
TO: Curtis Thayer, Executive Director THROUGH: TW, Patch, Director of Planning FROM: Conner Erickson, Planning Manager DATE: March 30, 2022
RE: Renewable Energy Fund Grant – Round 14 Update
Round 14 (FY2023)
As of the January 18th, 2022 deadline for applications, AEA received a total of 39 REF applications for a total request of $19.2 million in REF funds. On January 28th, 2022, and in accordance with Alaska Statute AS 42.45.045(d)(3), AEA provided an update regarding the status of the current Round 14 Renewable Energy Fund (REF) solicitation to the Alaska State Legislature. As per 3 AAC 107.635 – “Acceptance of applications for consideration; eligibility review”, AEA in its initial, stage 1 review of those received applications rejected 10 applications on the basis of ineligible applicants, late applications, and being substantially incomplete, as summarized in Table 1 below.
Upon AEA’s issuance of the rejection letters to those 10 applicants in late January, AEA received
an appeal from a sole applicant. AEA’s decision to cease further consideration of the
application, upon further review and agreement from AEA’s Executive Director as allowed per 3
AAC 107.650(b), was upheld owing to the application being duplicative and substantially
incomplete. The remaining 29 applications account for a total request of $18.7 million in REF funds, as indicated in Table 2 below.
Table 1
Rd 14 Rejections - Per 3 AAC 107.635 - Eligibility Review
Reason for Denial No. of Applications REF Funding Requested ($)
Ineligible Applicant 4 532,500$
Late Application 4 735,000$
Substantially Incomplete 2 342,525$
Total 10 1,610,025$
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2
The evaluation process is now in the stage 2 (3 AAC 107.645) and stage 3 (3 AAC 107.655)
scoring reviews. All reviews by the State of Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR) have been
completed. The DNR reviews those submitted applications for their potential impact on State
owned land and resources. All reviews have also been completed by the contracted
economists. The contracted economists provide cost-benefit analyses and reviews concerning
the economic feasibility of those submitted applications. Owing to those stage 2 and 3 scoring reviews which have been completed, one application has been subject to a reduction in its grant request by $1 million, reducing overall grants funds requested to $17.7 million. The per project cap for REF funding is $2 million for high cost energy areas and this project was awarded $1 million in grant funds in round 13, thus limiting its request for the current Round 14 to $1 million. Additionally, owing to further review of the applications, one application was found to be an ineligible project. The applicant was sent a notice of rejection and has since appealed. This appeal is currently under review. Should the appeal be denied, this will reduce the overall grant request by $375,000. The remaining stage 2 and 3 scoring reviews will take place through April 11th, and it is anticipated, based on past rounds, that a portion of those remaining applications will be rejected owing to items concerning economic and/or technical feasibility. Consultation with REFAC on AEA’s Recommendations of Applications to the Legislature AEA is currently coordinating a meeting with the REFAC members for April 14th or April 15th, in fulfillment of AS 42.45.045(e). Upon the solicitation of the REFAC’s counsel, AEA will forward on
its recommendations to the Legislature for their consideration of award and appropriation
within the FY2023 budget. AEA’s transmittal of its recommendations to the Legislature is
anticipated for April 18th. It should be noted that any and all REF appropriations are at the full discretion of the Legislature.
Attachments
• Round 14 Project Description Summaries
Table 2
Rd 14 Summary of Applications by Energy Region - Post Stage 1 Review
Energy Region No. of Applications REF Funding Requested ($)
Aleutians 1 321,000$
Bering Straits 1 2,000,000$
Bristol Bay 2 2,495,500$
Kodiak 1 172,600$
Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim 7 1,988,392$
Northwest Arctic 3 3,192,435$
Railbelt 11 6,334,707$
Southeast 1 62,368$
Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana 2 2,135,000$
Total 29 18,702,002$
App NumberApplicant NameProject Title Community (Nearest)Project Phase(s) Applicant TypeEnergy Region Election District Grant Funds RequestedTechnologyProject Description14001Nushagak Electric & Telephone Cooperative Nuyakuk River Hydroelectric Project DillinghamFeasibility and Conceptual Design Utility Bristol Bay 37-S $ 2,000,000.00 HydroThe proposed Project is a new 10-12 MW run of river hydropower project consisting of an intake structure, power conduit, powerhouse forebay, powerhouse, and tailrace channel approximately 4 miles downstream of the Tikchik Lake outlet above a natural fall on the Nuyakuk River. Power from the Project would be available to the customers of the Cooperative and potentially other areas in the region. The renewable power provided by the Project would represent a significant upgrade to the current distribution system and minimize the reliance of local communities on fossil fuels as their primary source of electricity. Currently, the population that would be served by this Project relies wholly on diesel generation, which is barged upstream through the Nushagak River drainage to requisite locations. The reduction (or elimination) of water transport of fuels will reduce the potential for negative environmental impacts due to spills. The primary industry in the Project service area is related to commercial harvest and processing of salmon. The long-term demand for more reliable, efficient, and cost-effective renewable electric power, dispatchable renewable thermal heat, high-speed broadband, along with the likely limited resource impacts makes this Project a highly viable opportunity14002Alaska Village Electric CooperativeHoly Cross Solar Energy & Battery Storage Feasibility Study Project Holy CrossFeasibility and Conceptual Design UtilityYukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana 37-S $ 135,000.00 SolarAlaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is requesting $135,000 through an Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Renewable Energy Fund (REF) grant to conduct a feasibility study for local solar energy and battery storage potential in Holy Cross, Alaska. The proposed project involves analyzing solar data, examining potential location alternatives, and creating a conceptual design for local solar energy and battery storage. Like many communities in Alaska, Holy Cross experiences high and unstable energy costs. The community depends on diesel fuel to power the three local generators responsible for all available energy in Holy Cross. Solar energy has proven a viable energy resource through projects in the similar communities of Eagle and Kaltag. Dependent on the results of the proposed feasibility study, AVEC would secure funding to prepare a final design, complete permitting, and develop solar energy in Holy Cross.14003 Point MacKenzie Solar Point MacKenzie Solar Point MackenzieReconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; ConstructionIndependent Power Producer Railbelt 8-D $ 1,000,000.00 SolarThis will be a Solar PV Facility, with installed capacity of 5.9 MW, highly reliable and most available in the summer months, with 500 MWh average to be delivered each month. A 6 MegaWatt DC/5 Megawatt AC utility-scale solar farm is planned for the proposed system. The system will be interconnected to the CEA power grid via a medium-voltage line extension to the site feeding the two Y-Y 2.5 MVA transformers. Each of the two transformers will feed one of the two 4,000 Amp service MDP’s with backfeed rated circuit breakers for collecting solar inverters. The 5 Megawatt of AC rated inverters will be interconnected to the MDP’s by 480V 3 phase. The solar inverters will collect the 6 MegaWatt of 480 Watt solar modules for conversion to AC power. The solar modules will be mounted in a fixed position on a ground-mounted racking system positioned in rows to maximize the use of the land available for the greatest overall efficiency. The DC wiring will be operating at approximately 1,200 Volts DC per string providing 6 million KWh annually.14004Alaska Village Electric CooperativePilot Station Wind Energy Feasibility Study & Conceptual Design Project Pilot StationFeasibility and Conceptual Design UtilityLower Yukon-Kuskokwim 39-T $ 229,500.00 WindAlaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC) is requesting $229,500 and will provide a match of $25,500 to conduct a wind power and wind-to-heat feasibility and conceptual design project for the community of Pilot Station. AVEC, with the cooperation of the community, would assess the feasibility of wind resources suited to provide power to the community and prepare a conceptual design of a wind facility.14005 City of OuzinkieOuzinkie Wind Energy Feasibility and Conceptual Design Project OuzinkieFeasibility and Conceptual Design Local Government Kodiak 32-P $ 172,600.00 WindThe City of Ouzinkie is requesting $172,600 to conduct a wind power feasibility and conceptual design project for the community of Ouzinkie. The City proposes to assess the feasibility of wind resources suited to provide power to the community and to prepare a conceptual design of a wind facility. The City would provide an in-kind match of $14,400 and Ouzinkie Tribe will provide $50,000 cash match for the project. Ouzinkie Native Corporation (ONC) would provide contracting and project management assistance at no cost.14006City of Homer, Department of Public Works Homer Energy Recovery Project HomerFinal Design and Permitting; Construction Local Government Railbelt 31-P $ 492,500.00 HydroIn the City of Homer, there exist three pressure control facilities located in the City's distribution system. This a mission critical pipeline where the City manages pressure for the potable water supply from the treatment plant to residences and business customers. These pressure control facilities are currently venting excess pressure that the City wants to recover and use to produce renewable energy. The proposed project will create a flow bypass around the existing pressure control valve at each site to flow through an energy recovery system. This system shall utilize an integrated solution, a pressure recovery valve that will generate a new source of renewable energy, reduce Homer's carbon footprint, save water and extend the life of its infrastructure. The proposed project shall have a capacity of 19 kW and generate 93,000 kwh that will be used to reduce operating costs for the City's Department of Public Works.14007 Northwest Arctic BoroughDesign and Permitting for Solar PV and Battery Storage for Ambler, Kiana, Noorvik, and SelawikAmbler /Kiana /Noorvik /Selawik Final Design and Permitting Local Government Northwest Arctic 40-T $ 590,000.00 SolarThe Northwest Arctic Borough (NAB) is requesting $590,000 for the Phase Ill Final Design and Permitting for four high penetration distributed solar PV, Battery, and diesel hybrid systems for the communities of Ambler, Kiana, Noorvik, and Selawik. The intent of this project is to leverage the economies of scale for the design of the systems to significantly reduce the project development costs and improve the project economics. The economies of scale will also be leveraged in the future construction phase of the systems through equipment procurement and construction contracts. Based on Hybrid Optimization for Multiple Energy Resources (HOMER) software modeling and AEA's B/C Ratio model, when constructed these systems will displace about 102,099 gallons of imported diesel fuel annually and will result in about 3717 hours of diesels-off operation in the communities, saving the communities about $486,152 during the 1 ˢᵗ year of operation. Lifetime savings for the project are estimated at $13,458,097. In addition to reducing the cost of electrical generation, the installation of the batteries will dramatically increase the efficiency and resilience of the power generation system by providing spinning reserve and significantly reducing brown-outs and black-outs. This project will leverage the key learnings from other high penetration systems operating and in development in the Northwest Arctic Borough, including Kotzebue, Deering, Buckland, Shungnak, and Noatak.14008Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. AEEC Ninilchik Wind NinilchikFeasibility and Conceptual Design Utility Railbelt 31-P $ 192,000.00 WindHomer Electric Association, Inc. (HEA) through its generation subsidiary Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. (AEEC) plans to construct a 30 MW wind energy generation facility located on the Kenai peninsula. The project will consist of 9 wind turbines disbursed throughout the site and electrically interconnected to the HEA transmission system. In addition to turbines, the project will need to construct turbine access roads and crane pads, plus connect the turbines through an electrical collector system. The proposed project will study the feasibility of locating the wind energy generation facility in the western Kenai Peninsula south of Ninilchik and north of Happy Valley.14009Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. AEEC Summit Lake Wind Moose PassFeasibility and Conceptual Design Utility Railbelt 29-O $ 232,000.00 WindHomer Electric Association, Inc. (HEA) through its generation subsidiary Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. (AEEC) plans to construct a 30-MW wind energy generation facility located on the Kenai peninsula. The project will consist of 9 wind turbines disbursed throughout the site and electrically interconnected to the HEA transmission system. In addition to turbines, the project will need to construct turbine access roads and crane pads, plus connect the turbines through an electrical collector system. The proposed project will study the feasibility of locating the wind energy generation facility in the northeastern Kenai Peninsula on the mountain ridgelines above Summit Lake to the east of the Seward Highway.14010Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. AEEC East Foreland/Nikiski Wind NikiskiFeasibility and Conceptual Design Utility Railbelt 29-O $ 200,000.00 WindHomer Electric Association, Inc. (HEA) through its generation subsidiary Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. (AEEC) plans to construct a 30 MW wind energy generation facility located on the Kenai peninsula. The project will consist of 9 wind turbines disbursed throughout the site and electrically interconnected to the HEA transmission system. In addition to turbines, the project will need to construct turbine access roads and crane pads, plus connect the turbines through an electrical collector system. The proposed project will study the feasibility of locating the wind energy generation facility in the East Foreland / Nikiski Industrial Area, in Nikiski, Alaska. 14011Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. AEEC Caribou Hills Wind Ninilchik/Fox RiverFeasibility and Conceptual Design Utility Railbelt 31-P $ 209,600.00 WindHomer Electric Association, Inc. (HEA) through its generation subsidiary Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. (AEEC) plans to construct a 30 MW wind energy generation facility located on the Kenai peninsula. The project will consist of 9 wind turbines disbursed throughout the site and electrically interconnected to the HEA transmission system. In addition to turbines, the project will need to construct turbine access roads and crane pads, plus connect the turbines through an electrical collector system. The proposed project will study the feasibility of locating the wind energy generation facility in the Caribou Hills on the southern Kenai Peninsula.14012Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. AEEC/KPB CPL Landfill Gas CHP Project Soldotna Final Design and Permitting Utility Railbelt 31-P $ 884,986.00 Biomass,() gg y gyp ,( ) p g()ppthe installation of a Combined Heat & Power Project at the KPB’s Central Peninsula Landfill (CPL). The proposed Project would generate electricity from collected landfill gas and initially supplemented with pipeline natural gas to generate up to 1.6 MW of power. The waste heat fromthe electric reciprocating engine generator would be captured and utilized to operate the CPL’s leachate evaporator which is currently fueled by natural gas from the ENSTAR system. Thus, eliminating or significantly reducing the CPL’s natural gas bill required to evaporate leachate.14015 City of Kotzebue Kotzebue Wind to Heat System KotzebueFeasibility and Conceptual Design; Final Design and Permitting; Construction Local Government Northwest Arctic 40-T $ 702,435.00 Wind (to heat)This project would utilize 213,000 KWH of excess wind energy from the non-profit Kotzebue Electric Association, Inc.’s (KEA) wind turbines in the form of heat delivered to the Water Treatment Plant (WTP). This utilizes wind energy that would otherwise be wasted. The proposed project will provide public benefits to both the local electric utility and individual rate payers in the form of additional revenue for KEA and reduced water utility bills for community members due to the avoided diesel fuel use. This project would make the local utility financially stronger, keep money that would have otherwise have gone to the fuel provider circulating within the community,and reduce both fuel costs and fuel use. As KEA adds more turbines, solar, and batteries to their grid over the next two to three years, the amount of recovered heat available from the power plant will decrease significantly, raising the price of operating the WTP. This rise in costs can be mitigated and reversed with the addition of an electric boiler, control panels, and a transformer to allow curtailed wind to be utilized and sold at a discounted rate to the city. The newly constructed WTP includes space for a future electric boiler with hydronics already installed to accommodate a project like this.14016 Kwig Power Company Kwigillingok Wind Turbine Upgrade Kwigillingok Construction UtilityLower Yukon-Kuskokwim 38-S $ 278,176.00 WindKwig Power Company s existing hybrid renewable system is due for upgrades and expansion. Its five wind turbines still have 1980s era blades installed, which are inefficient and not optimized for the rough conditions of southwest Alaska. KPC proposes to upgrade these turbines by acquiring four (4) sets of SERI Thin Airfoil blades. The new blades will increase energy production through improved aerodynamic efficiency allowing the rotors to harvest more energy from a given rotor area and through improved peak stall characteristics which will allow an increase of rotor RPM from 50 to 56 or 60 RPM. In addition, we must purchase our own up-tower crane to service our turbines/blades.14017Native Village of Kwinhagak Kwinhagak Reconnaissance Study Quinhagak Reconnaissance Local GovernmentLower Yukon-Kuskokwim 38-S $ 81,000.00 SolarReconnaissance Study will focus on collecting and analyzing Kwinhagak s solar resources along with its current electric and thermal load data and diesel-wind system. This baseline data will then be used to create a conceptual design for an energy system that incorporates wind/solar/battery with the current wind-diesel system. Estimated costs and financing will also be included in the final Reconnaissance Study Report.14018Kotzebue Electric Association, Inc.Kotzebue Wind to PV Transition Utilizing Existing Wind Infrastructure Kotzebue Construction Utility Northwest Arctic 40-T $ 1,900,000.00 SolarKotzebue Electric Association (KEA) built the first utility-scale wind farm in Alaska beginning in the late-1990s. KEA has been operating a fleet of 66kW wind turbines that are now obsolete and not cost effective to operate and maintain in comparison to the two EWT 900kW turbines. The nonfunctioning 66kW turbines are a negative aspect of renewable energy and KEA is planning to retire the fleet. Unfortunately there is not a suitable small-scale (~50kW) wind turbine available on the US market to replace the 66kW turbines.Though the existing 66kW wind turbines are being retired, the installed power transformers, underground power lines, fiber optic communications, control shelters, SCADA and access roads are still useful for a PV power installation. KEA will convert eight, existing 66kW wind turbine installations into 66kW PV arrays.KEA intends to leave the wind turbine 12” steel piling foundations in place to allow for future testing of small scale (~50-300kW) wind turbines and other energy technologies in a true Arctic environment in cooperation with NREL, UAF-ACEP and other interested entities.14019 Native Village of EklutnaEklutna Village Solar Energy Project - Feasibility StudyNative Village of Eklutna (Palmer proxy)Feasibility and Conceptual Design Local Government Railbelt 12-F $ 22,500.00 Solarg,gg g y , yVillage of Eklutna, with assistance from Eklutna, Onc., are pursuing a “next use” of these properties to incorporate a long-term, renewable energy source providing income to NVE and Eklutna, Inc by increasing benefits to shareholders and providing employment to tribal member within walking distance from their homes. This project would be a source of pride for shareholders and would allow Eklutna to expand its ongoing relationship with Matanuska Electric Association. NVE is requesting support to assess Eklutna, Inc. lands for redevelopment for solar energy deployment.
14020Puvurnaq Power CompanyKongiganak Wind Upgrade with Airfoil Blades for Turbines Kongiganak Construction UtilityLower Yukon-Kuskokwim 38-S $ 328,716.00 Windqpygy y pg p ,optimized for the rough conditions of southwest Alaska. PPC proposes to upgrade these turbines by acquiring four (4) blade sets of SERI Thin Airfoil blades to add to the two it has already received funding to purchase. The new blades will increase energy production through improved aerodynamic efficiency allowing the rotors to harvest more energy from a given rotor area and through improved peak stall characteristics which will allow an increase of rotor RPM from 50 to 56 or 60 RPM. In addition, we must purchase our own up-tower crane to service our turbines/blades.14021Akiachak Native Community Akiachak Wind Feasibility AkiachakReconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design Local GovernmentLower Yukon-Kuskokwim 38-S $ 371,000.00 WindThe Reconnaissance Study phase of this project will focus on collecting data and analyzing Akiachak’s current diesel system and wind and solar resources along with electric and thermal load data. These baseline data will then be used to create a conceptual design for an energy system that integrates wind/solar/battery with the current diesel system. A detailed cost estimate and financing plan will also be included in the final Reconnaissance Study Report.For the Phase II portion, we seek to investigate the economic viability of installing wind turbine generators for electrical generation facilities. AC is proposing to install a reference 50-meter meteorological tower as well as a LIDAR meterological unit to simultaneously collect and correlate wind data across the community at heights greater than or equal to 50 meters. The monitoring program will evaluate specific sites in and around Akiachak and can be easily expanded to surrounding communities through redeployment of the Lidar unit, and continued use of the Akiachak reference station. The monitoring program in Akiachak will continue for 12 months. Monthly wind resource reports will be produced with a final report summarizing the data 14022Chugach Electric Association, Inc. On behalf of the Bradley Lake Management Committee (BPMC) Dixon Diversion Feasibility Project Fritz Creek/ Fox RiverFeasibility and Conceptual Design Utility Railbelt 32-P $ 1,000,000.00 HydroDixon Diversion would be an expansion to the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. Two project alternatives are currently being studied. The primary option would build a tunnel to divert water from the Dixon Glacier watershed to Bradley Lake to increase the energy output of the existing Bradley Lake power plant. The other alternative would transport water by tunnel to a new power plant located on the Lower Martin River. Either alternative would generate enough energy annually to be among the largest hydroelectric projects in Alaska. The diversion project would generate an estimated 168,000 MWh annually, which would increase Bradley Lake’s energy output by about 44 percent. This application uses the first option of diverting water to Bradley Lake for the estimated project costs and energy generation. The Martin River alternative is likely to have similar but higher costs and energy generation.14024 Naterkaq Light PlantNaterkaq Light Plant Battery Installation and Integration Chefornak Construction UtilityLower Yukon-Kuskokwim 38-S $ 325,000.00 StorageNaterqak Light Plant (NLP) is constructing a high penetration wind diesel battery system. NLP is requesting a grant of $355,000 to complete and improve the battery installation and optimize its performance. Intelligent Energy Systems (iES) has teamed with Hatachi Energy Grid Edge Solutions to furnish, install and integrate a 500kW/713 kWh battery energy storage system into the community of Chefornak’s electrical grid. NLP has contracted with Intelligent Energy Systems (iES) of Anchorage, which haS in turn teamed with Hatachi Energy Grid Edge Solutions to furnish, install, and integrate a 500kW/713 kWh battery energy storage system into the community of Chefornak’s electrical grid. Combined iES and Hatachi Energy represent the most experienced team in Alaska to successfully deliver this project successfully. NLV is requesting a grant of $352,000 from round 14 of the REF to complete and improve the performance of the overall project.14025 City of Pilot PointPilot Point Comprehensive Community Wind/Solar/Storage & Heat Project Pilot Point Construction Local Government Bristol Bay 37-S $ 495,500.00 StoragePurchase and install 16 Xalt Energy XPANDXMP111E Battery modules (180kW/176 kWh battery system, with expansion to 300 kW/352 kWh+) energy storage system (BESS). This will be integrated into and accommodates existing infrastructure installed in 2019 consisting of two 100 kW XANT wind turbines and 16 installed ETS heaters in community. Another 10 ETS already purchased by the community will be installed/integrated in homes in Pilot Point. Due to the remoteness and complex integration of this system, post-installation support is required and included in this project.14026 Nome Joint Utility System Nome Battery Energy Storage System Nome Construction Utility Bering Straits 39-T $ 2,000,000.00 StorageNome Joint Utility System (NJUS) proposes construction of a 2 MW/2 MWh battery energy storage system (BESS) to improve utilization (net capacity factor) of its two EWT DW52-900 wind turbines and to enable future expansion of renewable energy, including additional wind turbine, and wind-to-heat systems in the community. A BESS will allow NJUS to operate a smaller and more efficient diesel generator with the wind turbines and will eventually enable occasional diesels-off operation where power will be provided solely by wind turbines and the BESS.14027Inside Passage Electric CooperativeJenny Creek Hydro Reconnaissance - Kake IPEC Kake Reconnaissance Utility Southeast 35-R $ 62,368.00 HydroInside Passage Electric Cooperative (IPEC) is the local electric provider for Kake, AK. We recently completed the Gunnuk Creek hydro project in Kake, and we are now looking to add additional renewable energy resources to IPEC's generation mix at Kake. IPEC has spent the past decade working to identify renewable energy projects for the benefit of its member-consumers in order to reduce rates, and to reduce carbon emissions from diesel generation. Jenny Creek, located approximately .75 miles from the Kake boat harbor, has long been identified as a potential site for a new run-of-river hydro project. IPEC desires to perform a reconnaissance level study to help decide if further investigation of Jenny Creek's potential is warranted. IPEC plans to work with HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR) to accomplish this. 14028 City of Nenana Nenana Biomass District Heat System Nenana Construction Local Government Railbelt 6-C $ 676,121.00 BiomassThe Nenana Biomass District Heat System will provide heat to the water treatment plant, fire department, K12 school, and the biomass facility itself. Each of these buildings provide services to the residents of the City of Nenana and the members of the Nenana Native Association. The boiler, a building frame, and structural insulated panels (SIP) have already been purchased for the project. The demolition, sitework, foundation work, installation of district heat piping, and engineering for the building have all been completed. Floor slabs have begun to be poured and work has commenced on erecting the building frame.14029Golden Valley Electric AssociationInterior Alaska Wind Energy Resource Assessmentpy ( )Deltana Area (Delta Junction)Donnelly Dome (Fort Greely)Pedro Dome (Fox)Wickersham Dome (Fox)Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design Utility Railbelt 9-E $ 1,425,000.00 WindFunds 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). Each location will host 1-2 masts with multiple sensors at various elevations to provide quality/representative data for use in a site resource model and bank ready feasibility study. Data collection will continue for a minimum of two years. Data and final reports will be used to document, model, support financing and encourage economically competitive development of utility scale wind projects with a target size of about to 100 MW per site.14031 Atmautluak Tribal UtilitiesAtmautluak Light Plant Battery, Thermal Stove, and Metering Installation Atmautluak Construction UtilityLower Yukon-Kuskokwim 38-S $ 375,000.00 StorageAtmautluak Light Plant (ALP) is a standalone diesel generating and electrical distribution utility which provides electricity to the Village of Atmautluak. In 2019, ALP received a grant of $2,900,000 from the USDA High Energy Cost Program to construct a 200 kW wind heat system and integrate the energy into their power system. This system is currently under construction and the funds have been used to install 2, Frontier 24-100 kW wind turbines on 40 meter tilt-up towers; upgrade .5 miles of electrical distribution to interconnect the wind farm; and install a wind diesel supervisory control system, a 200 kW load balancing boiler, and 20 electric thermal storage devices to capture surplus wind energy to displace heating fuel. Construction began in Fall 2021. The wind turbines and powerline have been constructed. The project was subjected to a number of unpredictable cost increases, mostly due to supply chain uncertainties. ALP is requesting $375,000 to complete the installation and integration of the 250kW/377kWh battery energy storage system and 20 electric thermal stoves to enable upwards of 3,200 hours of diesel off operation annually.This AEA funding will also provide ALP with two years of ongoing technical assistance and an advanced monitoring system to ensure overall power productivity, improve system reliability, grid stability, increase renewable availability and optimize overall power system operations. In sum, the award will enable ALP to produce 40,000 surplus kWh of wind energy annually, displace 30,000 gallons of diesel fuel used for power generation (equivalent to a savings of $105,000 at $3.50/gal), and generate deferred diesel operational savings of $28,800 annually (at $9 per operating hour). This is an annual benefit of $133,800. Additionally, the wind system has the potential to produce an additional 66,000 kWh of surplus electricity, which is available to displace 14034 City of GalenaGalena Community Scale Solar PV and Battery Project GalenaFinal Design and Permitting; Construction Local GovernmentYukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana 39-T $ 2,000,000.00 SolarGalena Community Scale Solar PV and Battery Project proposes to install a 1.2 MW solar photovoltaic (PV) and 500 kW/800 kWh battery energy storage system (BESS). This project will be integrated into the City of Galena's existing stand-alone diesel electric generation and distribution grid and save the community over 80,000 gallons of diesel fuel annually and over 2,000,000 gallons over the projected 25-year life of the installation. The project will be installed on City land above certified flood level and will use a combination of contracted and local labor. This clean energy initiative will build on recent efforts that include a large-scale biomass district heating system, powerplant upgrades to automated switchgear, improved diesel generator controls and higher efficiency engines, transformer upgrades and changeouts that have already saved several thousand gallons of fuel annually, LED lighting improvements, and a highly trained workforce. The community has already secured $1.5 million to initiate this project and is seeking $2 million from the AEA Renewable Energy Fund. If awarded, it is expected that final design, permitting, and long lead-time equipment procurement will occur in 2022 and early 2023, construction will commence in summer of 2023, and system performance verification and reporting 14035 City of False PassUNGA Man Creek Hydroelectric Project False Pass Final Design and Permitting Local Government Aleutians 37-S $ 321,000.00 HydroUnga Man Creek Hydro Project is a proposed 180 kW run-of-river project on Unga Man Creek north of False Pass. The recommended project configuration would include 4,400 feet of 24-inch HDPE penstock to convey 18 cubic feet per second of water from a diversion structure upstream of the east fork confluence at elevation 260 feet down to a powerhouse at elevation 70 feet, near the existing road bridge. The project would provide 83% of the utility’s electricity at generation or ~588,000 kWh annually based on a typical year.
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
MEMORANDUM
TO: Curtis W. Thayer, Executive Director FROM: TW patch, Director of Planning DATE: March 30, 2022 RE: Electric Utility Relief Program (EURP)
Below is an update on the Electric Utility Relief Program (EURP)
Round 1 – See attached Spreadsheet
Round 2
• Electric Utility Relief Program Round 2 opened on February 15, 2022 for accepting applications and closed on March 15, 2022 at 4:30 pm.
• 6 applications received from the following communities:
o Alaska Power & Telephone
o Alaska Village Electric
o Birch Creek Tribe
o Nanek Electric
o Chignik Lake
o Nelson Lagoon
• Total requested amount $42,860.14.
• Final Review for this round should be completed by March 29, 2022 barring any delay in response by applicants and approved amount paid shortly thereafter.
• Anticipated close to program by April 15, 2022.
UtilityName GrantNumberRequestedAmountStatusDisbursedAmountAkiachak Native Community Electric Company 9220019 6,773.42$ Disbursed 6,773.42$ Program Amount 6,830,000.00$ Alaska Electric Light and Power Company 9220025 192,283.53$ Disbursed 104,822.21$ Total Amount Requested 4,862,572.81$ Alaska Power Company 9220008 21,664.33$ Disbursed 15,134.89$ Number of Grants 35Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, INC. 9220018 10,689.16$ Disbursed 2,029.52$ Beaver Joint Utilities 9220012 3,551.14$ Denied‐$ Disbursed 31Chugach Electric Association 9220009 1,649,384.00$ Disbursed 1,023,269.64$ Disbursed Amount 2,956,178.49$ City and Borough of Wrangell, AK 9220023 11,559.12$ Disbursed 3,704.27$ City of Chignik 9220021 8,110.70$ Disbursed 8,110.70$ Withdrawn 2City of Hughes Power & Light Company 9220003 37,314.59$ Disbursed 8,775.51$ Withdrawn Amount 41,569.58$ City of Nikolai 9220013 9,408.47$ Disbursed 9,408.47$ Golden Valley Electric Association, Inc. 9220024 1,025,576.00$ Disbursed 403,574.10$ Denied 2Golovin Power 9220016 2,616.55$ Disbursed 2,616.35$ Denied Amount 27,023.80$ Homer Electric Association 9220022 711,053.06$ Disbursed 594,565.17$ Inside Passage Electric Cooperative 9220010 5,546.48$ Disbursed 5,315.95$ Total Funds Remaining 3,873,821.51$ Kotzebue Electric Association Inc. 9220011 7,354.65$ Disbursed 5,690.85$ Percentage Funds Remaining 57%Kwig Power Company 9220004 29,952.12$ Disbursed 29,952.12$ Manokotak Power Company 9220035 39,814.66$ Disbursed 21,152.21$ Matanuska Electric Association, Inc. 9220005 39,025.21$ Disbursed 37,802.96$ McGrath Light & Power 9220031 207,795.67$ Disbursed 41,402.45$ Middle Kuskokwim Electric Cooperative, Inc. 9220030 26,711.91$ Disbursed 5,589.81$ Naterkaq Light & Power 9220034 25,300.78$ Disbursed 19,091.51$ Nome Joint Utility System 9220028 41,349.28$ Withdrawn‐$ North Slope Borough 9220020 549,036.93$ Disbursed 503,134.37$ Nushagak Electric & Telephone Cooperative Inc. 9220036 7,703.18$ Disbursed 7,703.13$ Pedro Bay Village Council ‐ Electric Utility 9220029 3,721.11$ Disbursed 3,208.72$ Pelican Utility District 9220015 13,312.03$ Disbursed 13,312.03$ Petersburg Borough 9220007 32,250.49$ Disbursed 17,298.71$ Puvurnaq Power Company 9220017 23,472.66$ Denied‐$ Rampart Village Council 9220026 7,561.22$ Disbursed 7,120.65$ Takotna Community Assn. 9220014 23,142.17$ Disbursed 23,142.17$ TDX Adak Generating, LLC 9220033 1,071.66$ Disbursed 1,071.66$ TDX Manley Generating, LLC 9220027 220.30$ Withdrawn‐$ TDX Sand Point Generating, LLC 9220032 8,379.34$ Disbursed 1,526.84$ Twin Hills Village Council 9220006 61,225.00$ Disbursed 12,292.08$ Unalakleet Valley Electric Co‐operative 9220001 18,641.89$ Disbursed 17,586.02$ 4,862,572.81$ 2,956,178.49$ ELECTRIC UTILITY RELIEF PROGRAM Rnd 1AS OF 3/16/22 @ 9:00 am Disbursed Amount$2,956,178.49Total Funds Remaining$3,873,821.51 Disbursed AmountTotal Funds Remaining
Award No Project Name DC Funding Perf. Period Beg Perf. Period Thru Actions Since Last Report
Estimated Jobs
Created
Permanent Jobs
Created
01432-10 BFU - Tatitlek 1,472,000 6/1/2013 5/30/2022 None 30 2
01474-08 BFU - Chalkytsik 517,500 6/16/2015 12/31/2022 None 30 2
01485-05 START Communities Tech Asst 375,000 11/1/2015 3/30/2023 None 2 0
01492-09 BFU - Beaver 608,000 7/6/2016 12/31/2022 None 5 2
01500-07 Bulk Fuel Operator Training 1,010,000 9/1/2016 6/30/2022 None 3 0
01515-08 Circuit Rider Program 1,200,000 1/1/2017 12/31/2022 None 3 0
01516-07 RPSU - Maintenance & Improvement 748,776 10/1/2016 12/31/2022 None 20 0
01523-07 Miscellaneious Small M&I Projects 1,220,000 6/1/2017 12/31/2022 None 20 0
01525-06 Power Plant Operator Training 647,514 8/15/2017 6/30/2022 None 3 0
01544-04 Itinerant Utility Training 500,000 3/1/2018 6/30/2022 None 3 0
01548-07 RPSU M&I - Statewide 3,090,000 5/1/2018 9/30/2023 None 20 0
01551-06 RPSU - Venetie 250,000 5/1/2018 12/31/2022 None 5 2
01557-02 Barge Headers and Fill Lines 3,976,820 10/1/2018 12/31/2022 None 60 0
01571-02 BFU - Nunapitchuk 3,522,546 8/15/2019 12/31/2023 None 30 2
01574-02 RPSU - Nikolai 1,733,740 8/1/2019 3/31/2023 None 5 2
01575-04 RPSU - Nelson Lagoon 135,455 8/1/2019 12/31/2022 Extend Period of Performance 5 2
01576-03 RPSU - Rampart 1,733,740 8/1/2019 3/31/2023 None 5 2
01577-04 RPSU - Napaskiak 335,455 8/1/2019 9/30/2022 None 26 2
01592-02 BFU - Scammon Bay 300,000 2/17/2020 5/5/2022 Extend Period of Performance 5 2
01600-01 VEEP - Statewide 875,000 6/15/2020 12/31/2022 None 3 0
01610-03 BFU - Ekwok 100,000 9/1/2020 6/30/2022 Extend Period of Performance 30 2
01611-00 Engineering Library 100,000 9/1/2020 6/30/2022 None 1 0
01618-00 Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project 2,880,000 9/1/2020 12/31/2022 None 65 2
01628-01 Craig High School Biomass Project 440,417 11/1/2020 12/31/2022 None 8 2
01645-00 O&M Manual Conversion and Training 75,000 4/1/2021 9/30/2022 None 4 0
01646-00 Bulk Fuel Inventory and Assessment 480,000 4/1/2021 12/31/2023 None 20 0
01647-01 Port Heiden Electrical Distribution Upgrades 1,905,600 4/1/2021 12/31/2024 Extend Period of Performance / Add Funds 8 0
01666-00 DOE Littoral Power Systems Hydrokinetic Project 80,642 11/15/2021 12/31/2022 None 1 0
Total Funding for Active DC Awards:30,313,205
Less Total Spending on Active DC Awards:(11,559,060)
Total Funding Remaining on Active DC Awards:18,754,145
Active Denali Commission Awards
As of 04/04/2022
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
RGYAUTHORITY.ORG
TO: Curtis Thayer, Executive Director
FROM: Tim Sandstrom, Chief Operating Officer
DATE: April 13, 2022
SUBJECT: AEA Rural Programs & Projects Highlights
Training Highlight
AEA, with funding partner the Denali Commission, provided training at the Seward
AVTEC facility for 219 power plant and bulk fuel operators over the last five years. This
training is fundamental to maximizing the useful life of rural energy infrastructure. It also
develops well-paying local jobs in rural communities.
Two new powerhouse modules for 2022 - 23 construction
Powerhouse modules for Nikolai and Nelson Lagoon will be bid and constructed in
Anchorage. After completion and testing they will be shipped to the respective sites
installed and commissioned. Extensive onsite training is conducted with the local
operators and utility managers before turning the project over to the community. The
estimated cost is $11.25 MM for the two projects. This reflects a price increase of
approximately 50% over the last powerhouse modules. The cost increase can be directly
linked to inflation, logistics delays, and work force shortages.
Bulk Fuel Inventory & Assessment
Currently developing the survey questions and scoring methodology. RFP is in draft form
and will be published this spring. The project will also include a fuel sampling program to
gain data on what types of fuels are being used in each facility and a relative assessment
of the fuel quality available in rural Alaska (major concern for newer engines). Part of the
delay is developing a methodology to bring the expected costs down, in order to
facilitate a more comprehensive inventory. Initial community to be assessed will come
from the Denali Commission priority list we are currently working with, and others
identified through the M&I Program.
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
RGYAUTHORITY.ORG
MEMORANDUM
TO: Curtis W. Thayer, Executive Director
FROM: Bryan Carey, P.E., Director, Owned Assets
DATE: March 30, 2022
RE: Railbelt Reliability Council
After nearly two years of work by Railbelt stakeholders the first meeting of the Railbelt
Reliability Council (RRC) was held in March 2022 and the foundational documents were
submitted to the Regulatory Commission of Alaska on March 25 for certification. The
RRC Board contains Railbelt utilities, small & large consumers, Independent Power
Producers, environmental, non-affiliated, and Alaska Energy Authority representatives.
The voting Board members are: Julie Estey (Chair), Suzanne Settle (Vice-chair) Brian
Hickey, Frank Perkins, David B. Thomas, Dave Burlingame, Lou Florence, Bryan Carey,
Joel Groves, Verdi di Suvero, Paul Morrison, Chris Rose, and William Koegel .
It is expected that by the end of 2022 the RRC will be approved by the RCA and the
hiring of the Chief Executive Officer and staff be in process. The first significant item of
work will be the creation of an Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) for the Railbelt. The IRP
will take several years with input from stakeholders on various transmission and
generation projects along the Railbelt to determine the desired future mix of generation
and transmission projects. The RCA will be using the IRP project list for approving
future utility projects.
Standardization of interconnection requirements will more enable project development
in areas of resource rich (wind, solar, gas, hydro) to provide energy to the entire Railbelt.
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:David Scott; melissa.kookesh@alaska.gov
Cc:Jennifer L. Bertolini; Curtis W. Thayer
Subject:RE: Stedman request
Date:Thursday, March 31, 2022 1:46:29 PM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
Stedman Request PCE Data IPEC 2010-2021.xlsx
David,
This is likely more information then you needed---but let me know if you have any
questions.
Curtis
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
From: David Scott <David.Scott@akleg.gov>
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 4:15 PM
To: melissa.kookesh@alaska.gov
Cc: Curtis W. Thayer <cthayer@akenergyauthority.org>
Subject: Stedman request
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi Melissa & Curtis:
Senator Stedman is requesting to receive the data (in excel if possible) for IPEC that is in the
attached report.
Can we please get the data from 2010 up to the most recent available?
Thanks,
Dave
David Scott
Office of Senator Stedman
465-3712
PCE DATA - Inside Passage Electric (IPEC) - 2010 THRU 2021
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
A B C D H I K L M N O P Q R T
Year Utility/Community
Last Reported
Residential
Rate (based on
500 kWh)
Last PCE
Rate
Applied
Residential
Customers
Community
Facilities
Eligible PCE
kWh -
Residential
Eligible PCE
kWh -
Community
Facilities
Total Eligible
PCE kWh
PCE Payments
Made Total kWh Sold
Total Fuel
Used
Diesel
(Gallons)
Total Fuel Used
Diesel (Cost)
Avg Price of
Fuel ($/gal)
Total kWh
Generated (Diesel)
2021 Angoon PCE 0.61$ 0.32$ 200 8 613,324 169,634 782,958 209,942$ 1,598,471 125,526 249,274$ 1.99$ 1,804,812
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.61$ 0.32$ 218 1 592,612 22,474 615,086 165,859$ 1,170,440 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.61$ 0.32$ 410 27 1,438,885 589,378 2,028,263 545,184$ 4,338,853 220,011 431,834$ 1.96$ 3,202,358
Kake PCE 0.61$ 0.32$ 237 14 809,657 188,752 998,409 267,452$ 1,992,988 115,213 229,518$ 1.99$ 1,735,436
Klukwan PCE 0.61$ 0.32$ 50 9 176,215 79,800 256,015 68,649$ 430,716 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,115 59 3,630,693 1,050,038 4,680,731 1,257,086$ 9,531,468 460,750 910,626$ 1.98$ 6,742,606
2020 Angoon PCE 0.60$ 0.33$ 195 8 583,441 186,588 770,029 268,609$ 1,518,280 119,701 324,598$ 2.71$ 1,717,656
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.60$ 0.33$ 211 1 569,144 1,495 570,639 204,882$ 1,099,212 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.60$ 0.33$ 392 27 1,439,416 615,497 2,054,913 717,931$ 4,283,328 234,537 637,745$ 2.72$ 3,436,087
Kake PCE 0.60$ 0.33$ 237 15 766,406 180,127 946,533 330,644$ 1,967,777 148,456 402,756$ 2.71$ 2,276,881
Klukwan PCE 0.60$ 0.33$ 48 7 174,349 78,960 253,309 88,371$ 439,728 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,083 58 3,532,756 1,062,667 4,595,423 1,610,437$ 9,308,325 502,694 1,365,098$ 2.72$ 7,430,624
2020 Angoon PCE 0.60$ 0.34$ 196 8 596,805 227,406 824,211 285,268$ 1,525,400 124,458 351,176$ 2.82$ 1,717,656
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.60$ 0.34$ 214 1 543,983 1,372 545,355 189,202$ 1,102,959 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.60$ 0.34$ 382 27 1,359,108 608,052 1,967,160 681,485$ 4,026,944 263,981 740,627$ 2.81$ 3,436,087
Kake PCE 0.60$ 0.34$ 247 15 758,073 185,962 944,035 327,248$ 1,891,144 153,514 432,531$ 2.82$ 2,276,881
Klukwan PCE 0.60$ 0.34$ 47 9 178,361 78,120 256,481 88,731$ 436,887 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 60 3,436,330 1,100,912 4,537,242 1,571,934$ 8,983,334 541,953 1,524,334$ 2.81$ 7,430,624
2018 Angoon PCE 0.56$ 0.31$ 193 8 616,778 221,842 838,620 255,108$ 1,581,236 120,226 294,298$ 2.45$ 1,792,705
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.56$ 0.31$ 210 1 564,530 1,436 565,966 172,074$ 1,070,801 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.56$ 0.31$ 377 28 1,384,370 630,574 2,014,944 613,082$ 4,198,932 246,002 603,533$ 2.45$ 3,486,555
Kake PCE 0.56$ 0.31$ 238 15 787,631 192,659 980,290 298,322$ 1,968,818 152,721 372,245$ 2.44$ 2,242,369
Klukwan PCE 0.56$ 0.31$ 48 9 179,428 79,660 259,088 78,784$ 460,990 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,066 61 3,532,737 1,126,171 4,658,908 1,417,370$ 9,280,777 518,949 1,270,077$ 7.34$ 7,521,629
2017 Angoon PCE 0.53$ 0.29$ 199 8 637,647 201,605 839,252 237,010$ 1,598,233 126,487 271,940$ 2.15$ 1,832,776
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.53$ 0.29$ 214 1 561,013 1,399 562,412 159,481$ 1,108,722 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.53$ 0.29$ 387 28 1,401,108 618,634 2,019,742 573,051$ 4,228,766 233,786 496,226$ 2.12$ 3,546,296
Kake PCE 0.53$ 0.29$ 245 14 832,783 202,815 1,035,598 293,382$ 1,991,469 169,760 365,590$ 2.15$ 2,229,319
Klukwan PCE 0.53$ 0.29$ 49 9 179,816 78,120 257,936 73,012$ 438,378 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,094 60 3,612,367 1,102,573 4,714,940 1,335,936$ 9,365,568 530,033 1,133,756$ 2.14$ 7,608,391
PCE DATA - Inside Passage Electric (IPEC) - 2010 THRU 2021
1
A B C D H I K L M N O P Q R T
Year Utility/Community
Last Reported
Residential
Rate (based on
500 kWh)
Last PCE
Rate
Applied
Residential
Customers
Community
Facilities
Eligible PCE
kWh -
Residential
Eligible PCE
kWh -
Community
Facilities
Total Eligible
PCE kWh
PCE Payments
Made Total kWh Sold
Total Fuel
Used
Diesel
(Gallons)
Total Fuel Used
Diesel (Cost)
Avg Price of
Fuel ($/gal)
Total kWh
Generated (Diesel)
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
2016 Angoon PCE 0.47$ 0.24$ 196 8 646,158 230,281 876,439 237,341$ 1,587,342 126,011 322,921$ 2.56$ 1,826,961
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.47$ 0.24$ 216 1 536,941 1,198 538,139 145,774$ 1,129,877 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.47$ 0.24$ 391 28 1,431,233 556,575 1,987,808 538,322$ 4,197,469 223,262 579,792$ 2.60$ 3,307,649
Kake PCE 0.47$ 0.24$ 247 14 862,343 223,058 1,085,401 294,458$ 2,002,393 170,593 436,930$ 2.56$ 2,294,968
Klukwan PCE 0.47$ 0.24$ 48 9 168,423 66,998 235,421 63,712$ 382,281 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,098 60 3,645,098 1,078,110 4,723,208 1,279,606$ 9,299,362 519,866 1,339,643$ 2.58$ 7,429,578
2015 Angoon PCE 0.59$ 0.37$ 200 8 640,012 238,475 878,487 339,194$ 1,613,326 130,963 477,228$ 3.64$ 1,842,917
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.59$ 0.37$ 204 1 522,260 1,082 523,342 201,778$ 1,082,198 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.59$ 0.37$ 391 28 1,433,055 570,293 2,003,348 772,418$ 4,323,699 314,793 1,146,242$ 3.64$ 4,734,244
Kake PCE 0.59$ 0.37$ 229 16 854,510 212,208 1,066,718 412,721$ 2,379,443 201,609 736,280$ 3.65$ 2,739,418
Klukwan PCE 0.59$ 0.37$ 48 9 163,515 65,905 229,420 88,374$ 345,076 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,072 62 3,613,352 1,087,963 4,701,315 1,814,485$ 9,743,742 647,365 2,359,749$ 3.65$ 9,316,579
2014 Angoon PCE 0.62$ 0.40$ 196 8 645,313 207,929 853,242 343,660$ 1,571,232 130,625 507,538$ 3.89$ 1,797,775
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.62$ 0.40$ 207 1 517,848 949 518,797 208,570$ 1,065,433 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.62$ 0.40$ 372 28 1,419,497 584,832 2,004,329 805,765$ 4,265,453 314,168 1,224,178$ 3.90$ 4,654,869
Kake PCE 0.62$ 0.40$ 230 15 847,737 226,350 1,074,087 437,736$ 2,758,557 220,851 863,502$ 3.91$ 3,078,307
Klukwan PCE 0.62$ 0.40$ 49 9 157,706 64,362 222,068 89,235$ 352,516 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,054 61 3,588,101 1,084,422 4,672,523 1,884,966$ 10,013,191 665,644 2,595,218$ 3.90$ 9,530,951
2013 Angoon PCE 199 8 675,988 214,574 890,562 380,598$ 1,600,238 133,093 557,471$ 4.19$ 1,823,517
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.68$ 0.46$ 206 1 544,126 789 544,915 233,374$ 1,100,020 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.68$ 0.46$ 371 28 1,449,839 557,663 2,007,502 858,064$ 4,274,532 315,632 1,322,017$ 4.19$ 4,659,732
Kake PCE 0.68$ 0.46$ 236 15 905,211 230,706 1,135,917 485,361$ 2,672,032 205,961 862,556$ 4.19$ 2,952,396
Klukwan PCE 0.68$ 0.46$ 49 9 165,142 65,911 231,053 98,677$ 334,431 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,061 61 3,740,306 1,069,643 4,809,949 2,056,074$ 9,981,253 654,686 2,742,045$ 4.19$ 9,435,645
2012 Angoon PCE 198 8 693,284 248,094 941,378 397,755$ 1,815,648 139,419 553,914$ 3.97$ 2,033,389
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.63$ 0.42$ 203 1 554,558 915 555,473 234,912$ 1,111,104 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.63$ 0.42$ 368 32 1,447,813 567,425 2,015,238 852,696$ 4,344,829 328,490 1,306,174$ 3.98$ 4,803,438
Kake PCE 0.63$ 0.42$ 235 16 893,785 238,531 1,132,316 479,138$ 2,609,982 216,348 862,275$ 3.99$ 2,886,541
Klukwan PCE 0.63$ 0.42$ 46 9 170,451 64,227 234,678 99,133$ 365,384 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,050 66 3,759,891 1,119,192 4,879,083 2,063,635$ 10,246,947 684,257 2,722,363$ 3.98$ 9,723,368
PCE DATA - Inside Passage Electric (IPEC) - 2010 THRU 2021
1
A B C D H I K L M N O P Q R T
Year Utility/Community
Last Reported
Residential
Rate (based on
500 kWh)
Last PCE
Rate
Applied
Residential
Customers
Community
Facilities
Eligible PCE
kWh -
Residential
Eligible PCE
kWh -
Community
Facilities
Total Eligible
PCE kWh
PCE Payments
Made Total kWh Sold
Total Fuel
Used
Diesel
(Gallons)
Total Fuel Used
Diesel (Cost)
Avg Price of
Fuel ($/gal)
Total kWh
Generated (Diesel)
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
2011 Angoon PCE 0.61$ 0.38$ 193 8 657,310 226,279 883,589 324,662$ 1,825,732 141,499 435,543$ 3.08$ 2,052,011
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.61$ 0.38$ 200 1 571,769 1,030 572,799 207,094$ 1,207,436 - -$ -$ -
Hoonah PCE 0.61$ 0.38$ 353 32 1,437,333 540,738 1,978,071 719,741$ 4,361,553 325,172 1,004,066$ 3.09$ 4,760,212
Kake PCE 0.61$ 0.38$ 226 13 835,925 172,646 1,008,571 377,050$ 2,285,784 186,054 574,210$ 3.09$ 2,581,902
Klukwan PCE 0.61$ 0.38$ 49 8 172,657 56,420 229,077 83,605$ 375,753 - -$ -$ -
Utility Company Total 1,021 62 3,674,994 997,113 4,672,107 1,712,151$ 10,056,258 652,725 2,013,819$ 3.09$ 9,394,125
2010 Angoon PCE 0.57$ 194 7 599,310 207,930 807,240 258,263$ 1,739,193 137,730 348,708$ 2.53$ 1,953,750
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.57$ 36.30$ 204 1 581,995 987 582,982 172,742$ 1,163,542 - -$ -$ -
Hoonah PCE 0.57$ 36.30$ 358 28 1,420,263 497,121 1,917,384 567,816$ 4,274,752 330,476 864,850$ 2.62$ 4,702,798
Kake PCE 0.57$ 36.30$ 221 12 831,966 82,500 914,466 295,143$ 2,197,459 189,678 495,702$ 2.61$ 2,501,933
Klukwan PCE 0.57$ 36.30$ 47 7 159,521 31,314 190,835 62,828$ 370,507 - -$ -$ -
Utility Company Total 1,024 55 3,593,055 819,852 4,412,907 1,356,792$ 9,745,453 657,884 1,709,260$ 2.60$ 9,158,481
ELECTRIC VEHICLE
INFRASTRUCTURE
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
House Energy Committee
March 29, 2022
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
AEA EV Mission
Statement
Lead the effort to
minimize barriers
that inhibit EV
adoption in Alaska.
Dimond Center EV Car Show and Ride & Drive, Anchorage, AK
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 02
Working Group
Technical Sessions
EV Car Show / Ride and Drive
School bus in Tok
Transit bus in Juneau
MOA box truck
Installation of L2 and DCFC
EV Program
Overview
Alaska’s First Electric School Bus, Tok, AK
Capital Transit Battery-Electric Bus, Juneau, AK
03
Lack of charging infrastructure
Range anxiety
High demand charges
Cold climate performance
Market availability of electric
AWD, SUVs, and trucks
Barriers to EV
Adoption in Alaska
Dimond Center EV Car Show and Ride & Drive, Anchorage, AK
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 04
Existing and Planned EV
Fast-Charging Locations
Glenn Highway
-Chugiak –94 miles from Trapper Creek
Parks Highway
-Trapper Creek –95 mi from Cantwell
-Cantwell –38 miles from Healy
-Healy –110 miles from Fairbanks
Seward Highway
Seward –46 miles from Cooper Landing
Sterling Highway
Homer –76 miles from Soldotna
Soldotna –46 miles from Cooper Landing
Cooper Landing –95 miles from Anchorage
Seward Highway
Anchorage –27 miles from Chugiak
(50-12 kW CSS and CHAdeMo)
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 05
Two sites completed in Anchorage 2021
Linny Pacillo Parking Garage
Snowden Administration Building
Two more sites planned for 2022-2023
AEA office parking lot
Ted Stevens Anchorage International
Airport
State and Federal SEP funds
Level 2 Chargers
At State Facilities
EV Level 2 Charger, Linny Pacillo Parking Garage, Anchorage, AKEV Level 2 Charger, Snowden Building, Anchorage, AK
EV Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Program -$2.5 Billion
State, local, tribal governments, port
authorities, metropolitan planning
organizations
Partnerships with private entities
Procurement, installation, 5 years O&M
80% federal share
20% match from applicant or
private entity
50% Alternative Fuel Corridors
Publicly accessible Priority for rural
areas, underserved communities, areas
with limited access to infrastructure
Procurement, installation, 5 years O&M
Also preconstruction, planning,
feasibility, public education
$15 million cap per project
80% federal share
20% match from private entity
50% Community Grant Program
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 07
>$50 Million for Alaska FY22-FY26
-$7.8 million in FY22
EV Fast-charging Installations
-4 Combined Charging System Connectors
->150 kW each
-< 50 miles apart
-Within 1 mile of highway
Designated Alternative Fuel Corridors
-Until fully built out
Interstate Highway System Priority
Implementation Plan due August 1, 2022
Federal Share –80%
Private entity or other –20%
NEVI Formula Program
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 08
National EV
Infrastructure
(NEVI) Formula
Program
Schedule
09
NEVI Formula Program Timeline
AFC
Nominations
Due
NEVI
Implementation
Plan Due
DOT/DOE
Joint Office
Approves Plan
MAY 13,
2022
AUG. 1,
2022
SEPT. 30,
2022
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 10
Submitted comments to the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) Request for
information (RFI)
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with
Departments of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for
data sharing
MOA with Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities (DOT&PF)
Stakeholder outreach (utilities, municipalities,
other interested parties)
Interagency coordination (DEC, DMV, DOA
DOT&PF, and DNR Parks)
Gather baseline data (registered EVs, existing
and planned Electric Vehicle Supply
Equipment)
Request For Proposal (RFP) for EV contractor
out to bid
Release RFI/RFP for interested site hosts
Nominate Alternative Fuel Corridors
Continue interagency coordination,
stakeholder outreach, data compilation
NEVI Implementation Plan due 8/1/2022
AEA EV Program Planning Activities
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 11
813 W Northern Lights Blvd.
Anchorage, AK 99503
Main: (907) 771-3000
Fax: (907) 771-3044
akenergyauthority.org
@alaskaenergyauthority
@alaskaenergyauthority
Alaska Energy Authority
12
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:Laib.Allensworth@akleg.gov; Tyler.Newcombe@akleg.gov; Emma Torkelson
Cc:Jennifer L. Bertolini; Curtis W. Thayer
Subject:Alaska Energy Authority--REF Projects by Energy Region + Rd14 Summary - REF Ext Bill - Senate Finance
Committee Request
Date:Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:15:56 PM
Attachments:REF_PROJECTS_BY_ENERGY_REGION_AND_RD14_SUMMARY.xlsx
image002.png
image003.png
Attached is a summary of all REF projects by Energy Region, along with a summary of those Rd14
applications under review, as requested by the Senate Finance Committee for the REF Extension bill.
Those REF projects under development are denoted by blue highlight.
Please let me know if you need anything else.
Thank you---Curtis
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
Energy RegionPJ CodeLocationCodeAEA Project Name Community NameHouseDistrictSenate District PopulationPopulationCount YR.Native Corporation Electric Utility Budget Spent Budget Spent403038 100Adak Diesel Hybrid - ClosedAdak Aleutians 37 S 298 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators76,369.00 76,369.00 5,756.00 5,756.00407106100Adak Hydro Power Generator R9-ClosedAdak Aleutians 37 S 298 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators----406010105Akutan Geothermal Development Prj - ClosedAkutan Aleutians 37 S 990 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators5,463,792.00 5,463,792.00 441,689.85 881,759.17407061 105Loud Creek Hydro-ClosedAkutan Aleutians 37 S 990 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators206,295.92 206,295.92 - -407062 105Town Crk Hydro-Design for Repairs/Upgrades -ClosedAkutan Aleutians 37 S 990 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators162,000.00 162,000.00 - -407072 105Akutan Hydroelectric System Repair/Upgrade-ClosedAkutan Aleutians 37 S 990 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators1,391,000.00 1,391,000.00 135,633.35 135,633.35403039 124Atka Hydro Dispatched Excess Elect. Power-CLOSEDAtka Aleutians 37 S 50 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators56,702.31 56,702.31 16,179.09 16,179.09407033 124Chuniisax Cr Hydroelectric Construction - ClosedAtka Aleutians 37 S 50 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators996,000.00 996,000.00 1,918,891.00 1,953,836.59403069 167Cold Bay Waste Heat Recovery Project - ClosedCold Bay Aleutians 37 S 60 2019 Aleut Corporation City of Seward17,524.50 17,524.50 1,188.75 1,188.75410061 167Cold Bay Electric Utility Wind Energy R4-ClosedCold Bay Aleutians 37 S 60 2019 Aleut Corporation City of Seward57,591.91 57,591.91 7,987.00 7,987.00410079 210False Pass Wind Energy Project R4-CLOSEDFalse Pass Aleutians 37 S 42 2019 Aleut Corporation City of Diomede68,653.75 68,653.75 5,000.00 5,000.00407090278Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project - ClosedKing Cove Aleutians 37 S 919 2019 Aleut Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated2,800,000.00 2,800,000.00 1,500,000.00 2,746,513.24410070341Nelson Lagoon Wind Energy Project R4-ClosedNelson Lagoon Aleutians 37 S 30 2019 Aleut Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated75,756.47 75,756.47 7,260.00 7,260.00410028 351Nikolski Wind Integration Construction - ClosedNikolski Aleutians 37 S 17 2019 Aleut Corporation North Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems409,430.00 409,430.00 41,500.00 69,082.24410029 408St. George Wind Farm Construction-ClosedSaint George Aleutians 37 S 59 2019 Aleut Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated1,485,167.34 1,485,167.34 - -403040411Saint Paul Fuel Economy Upgrade R3-CLOSEDSaint Paul Aleutians 37 S 385 2019 Aleut Corporation City and Borough of Wrangell98,149.00 98,149.00 19,238.52 19,238.52409023 411St. Paul Wind Diesel Project R3 - ClosedSaint Paul Aleutians 37 S 385 2019 Aleut Corporation City and Borough of Wrangell1,790,301.15 1,790,301.15 191,605.61 191,605.61407051 414Aleutians East Borough Feasibility Study - ClosedSand Point Aleutians 37 S 897 2019 Aleut Corporation City of Peterburg25,000.00 25,000.00 15,000.00 15,177.25410050414Sand Point Wind-ClosedSand Point Aleutians 37 S 897 2019 Aleut Corporation City of Peterburg639,494.85 639,494.85 437,900.00 437,900.00410100414Sand Point Excess Wind Utilization - ClosedSand Point Aleutians 37 S 897 2019 Aleut Corporation City of Peterburg307,120.00 307,120.00 79,550.51 79,550.51403032 471Unalaska Heat Recovery Construction-CLOSEDUnalaska Aleutians 37 S 4,592 2019 Aleut Corporation1,300,000.00 1,300,000.00 - -407116471Unalaska Wind - FeasibilityUnalaska Aleutians 37 S 4,592 2019 Aleut Corporation139,000.00 - - -17,565,348.20 17,426,348.20 4,824,379.68 6,573,667.32403070139Brevig Mission Water System Heat Recovery-ClosedBrevig Mission Bering Straits 39 T 451 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationPaxson Lodge113,076.49 113,076.49 20,574.69 20,574.69410077 202Elim Wind Feasibility R4-ClosedElim Bering Straits 39 T 351 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationCircle Electric , LLC73,234.00 73,234.00 3,854.00 3,854.00410080 224Gambell Wind Energy Recovery RD5-CLOSEDGambell Bering Straits 39 T 667 2019 Bering Straits Native Corporation Copper Valley Electric Association, Incorporated239,950.00 239,950.00 12,645.00 12,645.00407107 296Koyuk Water System Heat Recovery R9Koyuk Bering Straits 39 T 348 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative90,922.00 81,023.70 910.00 8,393.74410075 296Koyuk Wind Feasibility R4-ClosedKoyuk Bering Straits 39 T 348 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative16,142.00 16,142.00 850.00 850.00406013 354Pilgrim Hot Springs Geothermal Assess R3,R4-ClosedNome Bering Straits 39 T 3,6902019 Bering Straits Native CorporationKipnuk Light Plant1,943,410.72 1,943,410.72 2,313,093.00 2,313,093.00409017 354Nome Banner Peak Wind Farm Trans Const-ClosedNome Bering Straits 39 T 3,6902019 Bering Straits Native CorporationKipnuk Light Plant801,000.00 801,000.00 89,000.00 122,871.43410030354Nome/Newton Peak Wind Farm Construction-ClsdNome Bering Straits 39 T 3,6902019 Bering Straits Native CorporationKipnuk Light Plant8,069,000.00 8,069,000.00 1,159,641.56 1,159,641.56403062 415Savoonga Heat Recovery System R6 CLOSEDSavoonga Bering Straits 39 T 735 2019 Bering Straits Native Corporationn/a425,234.32 425,234.32 10,452.57 10,452.57410053 423Shaktoolik Wind-ClosedShaktoolik Bering Straits 39 T 272 2019 Bering Straits Native Corporation Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative Incorporated2,465,633.00 2,465,633.00 374,280.00 374,280.00410081 423Shaktoolik Surplus Wind Energy Recovery RD5-CLOSEDShaktoolik Bering Straits 39 T 272 2019 Bering Straits Native Corporation Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative Incorporated239,230.00 239,230.00 12,645.00 12,645.00403055 425Shishmaref Heat Recovery Project R5ShishmarefBering Straits 39 T 577 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationMatanuska Electric Association, Incorporated310,841.00 42,418.32 16,360.00 13,741.72407108 425Shishmaref Wind Feasibility&Conceptual Design R9ShishmarefBering Straits 39 T 577 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationMatanuska Electric Association, Incorporated152,000.00 625.00 8,000.00 251.00403065 436Stebbins Heat Recovery Project R6-ClosedStebbins Bering Straits 39 T 618 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationHomer Electric Association, Incorporated1,319,088.00 1,319,088.00 72,825.00 72,825.00410066436Stebbins/St Michael Wind Feas.FD&Permitting-CLOSEDStebbins Bering Straits 39 T 618 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationHomer Electric Association, Incorporated479,750.00 479,750.00 170,000.00 171,348.43410054451Teller Wind Analysis-ClosedTellerBering Straits 39 T 235 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationAnchorage Municipal Light and Power98,165.00 98,165.00 - -410031 470Unalakleet Wind Farm Construction - ClosedUnalakleet Bering Straits 39 T 721 2019 Bering Straits Native Corporation4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 619,807.00 619,807.00407105 477Wales Water System Heat Recovery R9-CLOSEDWales Bering Straits 39 T 150 2019 Bering Straits Native Corporation69,905.00 63,510.00 - -20,906,581.53 20,470,490.55 4,884,937.82 4,917,274.14407034153Indian Creek Hydro Feasibility StudyChignik Bristol Bay37 S 95 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationMatanuska Electric Association, Incorporated198,513.12 198,513.12 - -407036154Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Final Design - ClosedChignik Lagoon Bristol Bay37 S 81 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationIndividual Generators150,000.00 150,000.00 - -407091 154Packer's Creek Hydroelectric Project - ClosedChignik Lagoon Bristol Bay37 S 81 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationIndividual Generators4,346,196.00 4,346,196.00 1,046,938.04 1,046,938.04410033 155Chignik Lake Area Wind-Hydro Final Design-ClosedChignik Lake Bristol Bay37 S 57 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationAlaska Power Company74,850.60 74,850.60 9,854.30 9,854.30410088 196Egegik Wind Feasibility Study R6-ClosedEgegik Bristol Bay37 S 85 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationG & K, Incorporated60,000.00 60,000.00 16,377.52 16,377.52408002 256Kvichak River - Ocean & River Energy-ClosedIgiugig Bristol Bay37 S 56 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationIndividual Generators704,905.21 704,905.21 - -410098 256Igiugig Wind Resource Feasibility & CDR-CLOSEDIgiugig Bristol Bay37 S 56 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationIndividual Generators80,000.00 80,000.00 30,000.00 30,000.00410089 291Kokhanok - High-penetration Wind Energy R6Kokhanok Bristol Bay37 S 157 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationNorth Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems185,000.00 96,139.78 5,000.00 -407111 292Nuyakuk River Hydro - Conceptual DesignKoliganek Bristol Bay37 S 195 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationTDX Adak Generating, LLC1,000,000.00 - - -410072 292New Koliganek Wind & Heat Recovery Feasb-ClosedKoliganek Bristol Bay37 S 195 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationTDX Adak Generating, LLC77,853.48 77,853.48 2,575.00 2,575.00402026301Lake & Peninsula Borough Wood Boilers R1,R4-CLOSEDLake & Peninsula Borough Bristol Bay1,622 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationUngusrag Power Company280,421.41 280,421.41 18,386.64 18,386.64407035 301Nushagak Area Hydropower Project R3-ClosedLake & Peninsula Borough Bristol Bay1,622 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationUngusrag Power Company1,873,223.18 1,873,223.18 - -410032 301Lake Pen Borough Wind Feasibility Study-ClosedLake & Peninsula Borough Bristol Bay1,622 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationUngusrag Power Company184,000.00 184,000.00 40,000.00 60,562.47410087 307Levelock Wind Reconnaissance Study R6-ClosedLevelock Bristol Bay37 S 70 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative10,000.00 10,000.00 1,636.00 1,636.00403068 344New Stuyahok Heat Recovery R6 - ClosedNew Stuyahok Bristol Bay37 S 476 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative484,897.27 484,897.27 62,000.00 59,931.12409025 344New Stuyahok Wind-Feasibility Analysis R3-ClosedNew Stuyahok Bristol Bay37 S 476 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative142,500.00 142,500.00 8,885.00 8,885.00407103 375Pedro Bay/Knutson Creek Hydroelectric Project R6Pedro BayBristol Bay37 S 36 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationMatanuska Electric Association, Incorporated290,000.00 249,620.95 2,500.00 2,577.98409026 380Pilot Point Wind Power & Heat R3 - ClosedPilot Point Bristol Bay 37 S 81 2019 Bristol Bay Native Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated1,421,240.00 1,421,240.00 111,659.76 111,659.76407073 391Port Alsworth Hydroelectric Construction R3-ClosedPort Alsworth Bristol Bay37 S 226 2019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedAlaska Power Company----407098 391Tazimina Hydroelectric Project Capacity Inc-ClosedPort Alsworth Bristol Bay37 S 226 2019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedAlaska Power Company160,000.00 160,000.00 34,923.45 34,923.45403056456Togiak Waste Heat Recovery ProjectTogiak Bristol Bay37 S 873 2019 Bristol Bay Native Corporation443,030.00 146,158.60 15,000.00 15,000.00407114334Naknek Wind and Solar - FeasibilityNaknek Bristol Bay37 S 488 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative103,500.00 - - -410062 394Port Heiden Wind Turbine Project R4-ClosedPort Heiden Bristol Bay37 S 105 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationMetlakatla Power and Light----12,270,130.27 10,740,519.60 1,405,735.71 1,419,307.28407071 149Chenega Bay Hydro Design and Permitting - ClosedChenega Bay Copper River/Chugach 32 P 0 0 Chugach Alaska Corporation Individual Generators242,231.05 242,231.05 34,932.95 34,932.95410096157Chisana Mountain Wind Feasibility - ClosedChisana Copper River/Chugach 3 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Igiugig Electric Company67,364.12 67,364.12 29,795.47 29,795.47402028 158Chistochina Central Wood Heating Construction-ClsdChistochina Copper River/Chugach 6 C 83 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Copper Valley Electric Association, Incorporated500,000.00 500,000.00 12,000.00 61,107.97407058 159Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project R2,R4Chitina Copper River/Chugach 6 C 85 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Alaska Power Company4,095,660.72 538,319.22 3,000,000.00 347,870.70403028 173Cordova Heat Recovery Construction - CLOSEDCordova Copper River/Chugach 32 P 2,343 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Alaska Power Company1,780,000.00 1,780,000.00 1,990,000.00 2,017,652.00407037 173Humpback Creek Hydroelectric Construction-ClosedCordova Copper River/Chugach 32 P 2,343 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Alaska Power Company4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 3,400,238.00 3,402,483.00RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS BY ENERGY REGION (*Projects highlighted in blue denote those in-development)As of October 31, 2021Renewable Energy Fund Community ContributionsAleutiansAleutians TotalBering StraitsBering Straits TotalBristol BayBristol Bay TotalCopper River/Chugach
407066173Humpback Creek Hydro Rehabilitation R3 - ClosedCordova Copper River/Chugach 32 P 2,343 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Alaska Power Company4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 5,805,000.00 6,186,291.00407119 173Cordova Hydro Storage Assessment - FeasibilityCordova Copper River/Chugach 32 P 2,343 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Alaska Power Company294,642.00 - - -402027 207Cordova Wood Processing Plant Construction-ClosedEyak Copper River/Chugach 0 0 Chugach Alaska Corporation Middle Kuskokwim Electric Cooperative, Incorporated136,760.00 136,760.00 - -402115 207Eyak Biomass Feasibility Study R4-ClosedEyak Copper River/Chugach 0 0 Chugach Alaska Corporation Middle Kuskokwim Electric Cooperative, Incorporated63,998.83 63,998.83 3,000.00 9,235.50402030234Gulkana Central Wood Heating Construction ClosedGulkana Copper River/Chugach 6 C 111 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated City of Golovin500,000.00 500,000.00 - -402019 274KennyLakeSchool Wood Fired BoilerR0,R1,R4-CLOSEDKenny Lake Copper River/Chugach 6 C 305 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Matanuska Electric Association, Incorporated648,381.23 648,381.23 17,472.04 17,472.04402029 274Kenny Lake Wood-INACTIVE DONT USEKenny Lake Copper River/Chugach 6 C 305 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Matanuska Electric Association, Incorporated----402127 324Mentasta Comm. Fac Woody Biomass Space Heat-CLOSEDMentasta Lake Copper River/Chugach 6 C 122 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Copper Valley Electric Association, Incorporated460,000.00 460,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00403057 448Tatitlek Heat Recovery Project R5-CLOSEDTatitlek Copper River/Chugach 32 P 98 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation n/a263,444.55 263,444.55 5,273.05 5,273.05410052 448Tatitlek High Penetration Wind Diesel-ClosedTatitlek Copper River/Chugach 32 P 98 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation n/a51,974.47 51,974.47 48,187.67 56,435.47402138 449Wood Boiler for the Native Vllg of Tazlina-CLOSEDTazlina Copper River/Chugach 6 C 271 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated n/a270,807.00 270,807.00 5,167.00 5,167.00407038 474Allison Lake Hydro Prj Feas. & Construction-ClosedValdez Copper River/Chugach 9 E 3,876 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation10,288,009.00 10,288,009.00 8,309.09 8,309.0927,663,272.97 23,811,289.47 14,409,375.27 12,232,025.24407059 288Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project-ClosedKodiak Island Borough Kodiak 13,001 2019 Koniag, Incorporated Inside Passage Electric Cooperative3,976,258.68 3,976,258.68 7,815,346.50 7,815,346.50407068 288Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydro Project R3 - ClosedKodiak Island Borough Kodiak 13,001 2019 Koniag, Incorporated Inside Passage Electric Cooperative248,160.00 248,160.00 200,000.00 200,000.00410025 288Pillar Mtn. Wind PH III Kodiak - ClosedKodiak Island Borough Kodiak 13,001 2019 Koniag, Incorporated Inside Passage Electric Cooperative4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00410082 288Pillar Mountain High Penetration Wind RD5 - ClosedKodiak Island Borough Kodiak 13,001 2019 Koniag, Incorporated Inside Passage Electric Cooperative7,800,000.00 7,800,000.00 7,800,000.00 7,800,000.00407039 368Old Harbor Hydroelectric R1,R4-CLOSEDOld HarborKodiak 32 P 203 2019 Koniag, Incorporated Alaska Village Electric Cooperative462,500.00 462,500.00 37,500.00 50,954.0016,486,918.68 16,486,918.68 16,852,846.50 16,866,300.50410078 103Akiachak Wind Feasibility&Conceptual Design-ClosedAkiachak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 724 2019 Calista Corporation n/a110,000.00 110,000.00 18,373.44 18,373.44403063 125Atmautluak Washeteria Heat Recovery - ClosedAtmautluak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 338 2019 Calista Corporation Elfin Cove Utility Commission349,999.97 349,999.97 10,744.00 10,744.00410065 125Atmautluak Wind Renewable Energy R4-ClosedAtmautluak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 338 2019 Calista Corporation Elfin Cove Utility Commission100,000.00 100,000.00 - -402134133Bethel Heat Recovery Assess&Concept Design-CLOSEDBethel Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 6,259 2019 Calista Corporation n/a645,613.00 623,079.00 34,503.00 34,503.00410034133Bethel Renewable Energy Project R1-ClosedBethel Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 6,259 2019 Calista Corporation n/a2,598,320.00 2,598,320.00 199,889.00 223,299.00410086133Bethel Renewable Energy Project - ClosedBethel Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 6,259 2019 Calista Corporation n/a197,170.18 197,170.18 34,794.74 34,794.74410076148Chefornak Wind Feasibility R4-CLOSEDChefornak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 457 2019 Calista Corporation Pedro Bay Village130,522.02 130,522.02 8,205.00 8,205.00403071 150Chevak Water & Vacuum Plant Heat RecoveryChevak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 1,0142019 Calista Corporation Individual Generators558,800.00 549,987.34 16,765.00 10,991.97410084150Chevak Wind Energy Recovery RD5-CLOSEDChevak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 1,0142019 Calista Corporation Individual Generators240,260.00 240,260.00 12,641.00 12,641.00410067 195Eek Wind Feasibility R4-ClosedEek Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 349 2019 Calista Corporation BC Hydro114,718.00 114,718.00 6,225.00 6,225.00403072 203Emmonak Heat Recovery System-ClosedEmmonak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 836 2019 Calista Corporation City of Nikolai684,311.77 684,311.77 20,677.00 20,677.00410055 203Emmonak/Alakanuk Wind & Transmission - ClosedEmmonak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 836 2019 Calista Corporation City of Nikolai8,000,000.00 8,000,000.00 888,889.00 891,627.00410040 249Hooper Bay Wind Farm Construction - ClosedHooper Bay Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 1,239 2019 Calista Corporation Copper Valley Electric Association, Incorporated60,179.25 60,179.25 - -407120293Airfoil for Wind Turbines - ConstructionKongiganak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 544 2019 Calista Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative108,000.00 - - -410035 293Kongiganak Wind Farm Construction - ClosedKongiganak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 544 2019 Calista Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative1,699,791.57 1,699,791.57 1,475,169.97 1,475,169.97410099 293Kongiginak Wind Heat Elect. Thermal Storage-ClosedKongiganak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 544 2019 Calista Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative274,735.01 274,735.01 9,000.00 9,000.00410068 299Kwethluk Wind Feasibility R4-ClosedKwethluk Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 814 2019 Calista Corporation Napakiak Ircinraq Power Company44,098.22 44,098.22 5,747.65 5,747.65410036300Kwigillingok Wind Farm Construction-ClosedKwigillingokLower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 374 2019 Calista Corporation City of Akiak1,600,000.00 1,600,000.00 1,600,000.00 1,600,000.00403066315Marshall Heat Recovery-W ater Treatment Plant-ClsdMarshall Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 471 2019 Calista Corporation City of Buckland177,702.30 177,702.30 6,000.00 6,000.00410069 315Marshall Wind Feasibility-ClosedMarshall Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 471 2019 Calista Corporation City of Buckland111,150.00 111,150.00 6,985.00 6,985.00410038 322Mekoryuk Wind Farm Construction-ClosedMekoryuk Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 206 2019 Calista Corporation Inside Passage Electric Cooperative3,155,765.00 3,155,765.00 390,493.00 390,493.00410083 322Mekoryuk Surplus Wind Energy Recovery RD5-CLOSEDMekoryuk Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 206 2019 Calista Corporation Inside Passage Electric Cooperative264,459.00 264,459.00 13,919.00 13,919.00410097 332Mountain Village Wind Feasibility & CDR-ClosedMountain VillageLower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 808 2019 Calista Corporation Aniak Light and Power Company95,893.00 95,893.00 5,047.00 5,047.00410063 338Napaskiak Wind, Power and Heat Recovery R4-ClosedNapaskiak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 440 2019 Calista Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative61,224.39 61,224.39 3,688.00 3,688.00403074365Nunam Iqua Heat Recovery CLOSEDNunam Iqua Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 213 2019 Calista Corporation Kwethluk Incorporated450,000.00 450,000.00 - -403064401Kwinhagak Heat Recovery - Water Treatment - ClosedQuinhagak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 716 2019 Calista Corporation City of Seward668,350.00 668,350.00 21,435.39 21,435.39410037 401Quinhagak Wind Farm Construction-ClosedQuinhagak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 716 2019 Calista Corporation City of Seward3,437,322.00 3,437,322.00 381,924.00 381,924.00403059 407Russian Mission Heat Recovery System R5 - ClosedRussian Mission Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 350 2019 Calista Corporation Cordova Electric Cooperative, Incorporated552,157.06 552,157.06 32,000.10 32,000.10403073 409St. Mary's Heat Recovery System-ClosedSaint Mary's Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 555 2019 Calista Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated735,200.00 735,200.00 24,142.39 24,142.39407110 409Mountain Village-St. Mary's Wind IntertieR9-CLOSEDSaint Mary's Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 555 2019 Calista Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated2,042,431.00 2,042,431.00 3,117,266.00 3,117,266.00410064 409St. Mary's/ Pitka's Point Wind - ClosedSaint Mary's Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 555 2019 Calista Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated4,624,094.00 4,624,094.00 34,444.00 34,444.00402137 417Scammon Bay Community Facilities Heat Recovery-ClsScammon Bay Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 593 2019 Calista Corporation Matanuska Electric Association, Incorporated34,660.01 34,660.01 1,740.36 1,740.36407092 417Scammon Bay Hydro Design & Engineering R5-ClosedScammon Bay Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 593 2019 Calista Corporation Matanuska Electric Association, Incorporated79,636.86 79,636.86 2,792.63 2,792.63410071 417Scammon Bay Wind Feasibility R4-ClosedScammon Bay Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 593 2019 Calista Corporation Matanuska Electric Association, Incorporated142,500.00 142,500.00 16,441.00 16,441.00403058 432Sleetmute Heat Rec PowerPlant to WaterPlant CLOSEDSleetmute Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 37 S 95 2019 Calista Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated126,682.00 126,682.00 6,667.00 6,667.00410039 458Toksook Bay Wind Farm Expansion Construct.-ClosedToksook Bay Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 667 2019 Calista Corporation1,037,750.00 1,037,750.00 10,988.47 10,988.47403075 463Tuntutuliak Heat Recovery-ClosedTuntutuliakLower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 464 2019 Calista Corporation71,638.58 71,638.58 1,600,000.00 1,600,000.00410051 463Tuntutuliak High Penetration Wind Diesel-ClosedTuntutuliakLower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 464 2019 Calista Corporation1,760,000.00 1,760,000.00 164,340.00 201,492.00407112 232Goodnews Bay Wind - FeasiblityGoodnews Bay Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 284 2019 Calista Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated128,250.00 - - -411005 308Lime Village Photovoltaic Systm Retrofit R4-ClosedLime Village Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 37 S 15 2019 Calista Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative----37,273,384.19 37,005,787.53 10,181,937.14 10,239,464.11402025 1000Biomass-fired Organic Rankine Cycle System-ClosedStatewide Projects & Studies Non Specified 0 0 Non Specified1,895,725.00 1,895,725.00 3,195,277.82 3,195,277.824030541000Organic Rankine Cycle Field Testing R4Statewide Projects & Studies Non Specified 0 0 Non Specified472,787.00 472,787.00 - -407078 1001AVTEC Hydroelectric Training Facility R4-ClosedStatewide TrainingNon Specified 0 0 Non Specified----407075 1100Battle Creek Diversion R4 -Also SEE PJ 270011AEA Owned Projects Non Specified 0 0 Non Specified500,000.00 500,000.00 21,975.00 21,975.002,868,512.00 2,868,512.00 3,217,252.82 3,217,252.82410073 264Kaktovik Wind Diesel R4 - ClosedKaktovik North Slope 40 T 235 2019 Arctic Slope Regional CorporationChugach Electric Association, Incorporated131,859.00 131,859.00 13,041.00 13,041.00403029 357North Pole Heat Recovery Construction - ClosedNorth Pole North Slope 3 B 2,091 2019 Doyon, Limited Alaska Village Electric Cooperative817,291.63 817,291.63 204,322.90 204,322.90409027 386Point Hope Wind Turbine Design - ClosedPoint Hope North Slope 40 T 775 2019 Arctic Slope Regional CorporationHomer Electric Association, Incorporated124,048.42 124,048.42 13,783.16 13,783.16403036 387Point Lay Wind Generation Design R4-ClosedPoint Lay North Slope 40 T 299 2019 Arctic Slope Regional Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated390,546.90 390,546.90 39,591.00 39,591.00409029 387Point Lay Wind Diesel Generation Project R3-ClosedPoint Lay North Slope 40 T 299 2019 Arctic Slope Regional Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated114,845.38 114,845.38 12,760.60 12,760.60403037 476Wainwright Wind Turbine Design R4-ClosedWainwright North Slope 40 T 553 2019 Arctic Slope Regional Corporation- - 13,694.99 13,694.99409028 476Wainwright Wind Diesel Generation Prj. R3-ClosedWainwright North Slope 40 T 553 2019 Arctic Slope Regional Corporation123,255.02 123,255.02 6,447.70 6,447.70409021 128Atqasuk Transmission Line-CLOSEDUtqiagvik North Slope 40 T 5,4002019 Arctic Slope Regional CorporationU.S. Coast Guard Generator367,304.67 367,304.67 8,573,143.00 8,573,143.002,069,151.02 2,069,151.02 8,876,784.35 8,876,784.35Copper River/Chugach TotalKodiakKodiak TotalLower Yukon-KuskokwimLower Yukon‐Kuskokwim TotalNorthwest ArcticNon SpecifiedNon Specified TotalNorth SlopeNorth Slope Total
403033 114Ambler Heat Recovery Construction - CLOSEDAmblerNorthwest Arctic 40 T 263 2019 NANA Regional CorporationIndividual Generators434,928.09 434,928.09 66,659.53 66,659.53411002 114Ambler Solar PV Construction - ClosedAmblerNorthwest Arctic 40 T 263 2019 NANA Regional CorporationIndividual Generators20,122.00 20,122.00 2,012.00 2,012.00410058 141Buckland Wind Farm Construction - PJ 410042-ClosedBuckland Northwest Arctic 40 T 509 2019 NANA Regional CorporationAlaska Power Company----409024 282Kivalina Wind-Intertie Feas Analys&CDes R3-ClosedKivalina Northwest Arctic 40 T 427 2019 NANA Regional Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated177,005.00 177,005.00 9,317.00 9,317.00402117 295Kotzebue Paper & Wood Waste to Energy R4-CLOSEDKotzebue Northwest Arctic 40 T 3,112 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKWIG Power Company66,578.25 66,578.25 3,838.34 3,838.34403034295Kotzebue Electric Heat Recovery ConstructionKotzebue Northwest Arctic 40 T 3,112 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKWIG Power Company915,627.00 824,064.30 300,000.00 305,794.14407121 295Kotzebue Energy Storage - DesignKotzebue Northwest Arctic 40 T 3,112 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKWIG Power Company325,000.00 - - -409022 295High Penetration Wind-Battery-Diesel R3-ClosedKotzebue Northwest Arctic 40 T 3,112 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKWIG Power Company8,000,000.00 8,000,000.00 2,884,170.00 2,884,170.00410041 295Kotzebue Wind-Grant tranferred to PJ 409022Kotzebue Northwest Arctic 40 T 3,112 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKWIG Power Company----403067 356Noorvik Heat Recovery - Water Treatment Plant-ClsdNoorvikNorthwest Arctic 40 T 651 2019 NANA Regional CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative985,805.00 985,805.00 29,580.00 29,580.00410060356Noorvik Wind Farm Constructino - PJ 410042-ClosedNoorvikNorthwest Arctic 40 T 651 2019 NANA Regional CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative----402031 362Upper Kobuk River Biomass R4 - ClosedNorthwest Arctic Borough Northwest Arctic 7,715 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKodiak Electric Association, Incorporated771,666.95 771,666.95 312,915.00 312,915.00407040362Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Feasibility-ClosedNorthwest Arctic Borough Northwest Arctic 7,715 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKodiak Electric Association, Incorporated1,025,000.00 1,025,000.00 50,722.00 50,722.00410042 362Buckland/Deering/Noorvik Wind Farm Const-ClsdNorthwest Arctic Borough Northwest Arctic 7,715 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKodiak Electric Association, Incorporated10,738,438.91 10,738,438.91 154,777.12 154,777.12410074418Selawik Hybrid Wind Diesel Syst Turbine R4-ClsdSelawik Northwest Arctic 40 T 832 2019 NANA Regional CorporationMatanuska Electric Association, Incorporated75,420.00 75,420.00 7,540.00 7,540.00410059 180Deering Wind Farm Construction - PJ 410042-ClosedDeering Northwest Arctic 40 T 166 2019 NANA Regional CorporationLevelock Electric Coop----407118 426Shungnak Heat Recovery - Design/ConstructionShungnak Northwest Arctic 40 T 253 2019 NANA Regional CorporationHomer Electric Association, Incorporated1,303,607.00 - - -24,839,198.20 23,119,028.50 3,821,530.99 3,827,325.13402032 117Anch. Landfill Gas Elect Const.-Biofuels-CLOSEDAnchorage Railbelt 12;13;1 F;G;H;I;J;K;L;M;N 291,845 2019 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated Individual Generators2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,423,866.00 1,423,866.00407084144Jack River Hydro Project R4 - ClosedCantwell Railbelt 6 C 190 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Kodiak Electric Association, Incorporated30,000.00 30,000.00 1,500.00 1,500.00411003 183McKinley Village Solar Thermal Const - ClosedDenali ParkRailbelt 186 2019 Doyon, Limited Native Village of Chenega190,000.00 190,000.00 3,600.00 20,878.92402033 208Delta Junction Wood Chip Heating Feasibilit-ClosedFairbanks North Star BoroughRailbelt 95,8982019 Doyon, Limited Alaska Power Company2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 - -410022 208Delta Junction Wind Assessment& Avian Study-ClosedFairbanks North Star BoroughRailbelt 95,8982019 Doyon, Limited Alaska Power Company65,412.09 65,412.09 184,567.79 184,567.79410027 208Delta Area Wind Turbines - ClosedFairbanks North Star BoroughRailbelt 95,8982019 Doyon, Limited Alaska Power Company2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 801,500.00 954,534.37410045 208Coal Mine Road Wind Farm Final Design- see 410022Fairbanks North Star BoroughRailbelt 95,8982019 Doyon, Limited Alaska Power Company----407052 228California Creek Hydro Feasibility - ClosedGirdwood Railbelt 0 0 Not recognized under ANCSAAlaska Village Electric Cooperative27,300.00 27,300.00 2,700.00 2,700.00402021 317Susitna Valley HS Wood Heat - Biomass-ClosedMatanuska‐Susitna Borough Railbelt 106,4382019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedManokotak Power Company- - 7,045.74 7,045.74407030317Fishhook Hydro Hatcher PH 1 -Closed See PJ 407031Matanuska‐Susitna Borough Railbelt 106,4382019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedManokotak Power Company----407031 317Fishhook Hydro Hatcher Pass Construction-ClosedMatanuska‐Susitna Borough Railbelt 106,4382019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedManokotak Power Company----407080317Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project R4 - ClosedMatanuska‐Susitna Borough Railbelt 106,4382019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedManokotak Power Company84,000.00 84,000.00 16,000.00 16,000.00407082 317Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project R4 - ClosedMatanuska‐Susitna Borough Railbelt 106,4382019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedManokotak Power Company14,407.70 14,407.70 2,881.54 2,881.54407053 342Nenana Hydrokinetic Construction-CLOSEDNenana Railbelt 6 C 362 2019 Doyon, Limited Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated450,000.00 450,000.00 - -410046348Nikiski Wind Farm Construction - ClosedNikiski Railbelt 29 O 4,5102019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedMatanuska Electric Association, Incorporated2,102.87 2,102.87 18,925.88 18,925.88402116393Port Graham Biomass Waste Heat Demo PrjR4-CLOSEDPort Graham Railbelt 32 P 180 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated58,600.00 58,600.00 14,119.00 14,119.00406012 992Mount Spurr Geothermal Project R3, R4-ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated1,993,158.00 1,993,158.00 2,158,603.00 2,549,052.00407023 992Cresent Lk/Cr Low Impact Hydro Assess - ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated23,273.04 23,273.04 13,318.27 13,318.27407025 992Grant Lk/Cr Low Impact Hydro Assessment - ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated50,000.00 50,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00407026992Ptarmingan Lk/Ck Low Impact Hydro Assess - ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated4,684.35 4,684.35 13,671.08 13,671.08407041 992South Fork Hydroelectric Const - CancelledRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated----407042 992Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility-ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 500,000.00 500,000.00407043 992Whittier Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance-ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated39,471.00 39,471.00 34,285.00 34,285.00407077 992StetsonCrkDiversion/CooperLakeDamFacilities-ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated3,594,979.60 3,594,979.60 3,594,979.50 3,594,979.50408005 992Cook Inlet Tidal Generation Project R4-CLOSEDRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated----409031 992CEA Transmis Line to Renewable Energy Res. -ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated----410043 992Nikolaevsk Wind Farm Final Design - CancelledRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated----410044992EVA Creek Wind Turbine Purchase-CLOSEDRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated3,463,200.00 3,463,200.00 24,031,049.51 24,031,049.51406023 420Seldovia Ground Source Heat Pump-CLOSEDSeldovia Railbelt 32 P 226 2019 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated Copper Valley Electric Association, Incorporated311,753.20 311,753.20 48,964.43 48,964.43406011 421AK SeaLifeCenter PH II Seawater Heat PumpR3-ClosedSeward Railbelt 29 O 2,545 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated286,580.00 286,580.00 - 426,720.00407044421Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric-ClosedSeward Railbelt 29 O 2,545 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated20,000.00 20,000.00 20,000.00 20,016.92407109 421Heat Pump System for City of Seward R9Seward Railbelt 29 O 2,545 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated725,000.00 88,000.00 157,497.00 81,284.31407060997Carlson Creek Hydro-ClosedSouthcentral Alaska Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated8,811.26 8,811.26 2,202.82 2,202.82407087 171CVEA Allison Crk Hydroelectric-DoNotUse-See 407038Copper CenterRailbelt 6 C 323 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated n/a----19,442,733.11 18,805,733.11 33,076,276.56 33,987,563.08402131 120Angoon Low-Income Housing Pellet Heat - ClosedAngoon Southeast 35 R 404 2019 Sealaska Corporation Individual Generators240,592.00 240,592.00 51,592.00 60,013.31403035 120Angoon Heat Recovery-Not Active/ClosedAngoon Southeast 35 R 404 2019 Sealaska Corporation Individual Generators----407074120Thayer lake Hydroelectric Project R4Angoon Southeast 35 R 404 2019 Sealaska Corporation Individual Generators8,055,716.90 1,736,323.20 1,577,593.31 1,327,593.31406015 428Japonski Island Boathouse Heat Pump R4-ClosedCity and Borough of Sitka Southeast 35 R 8,532 2019 Sealaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated----406016428Sitka Centennial Hall&Library Feas/HeatPump-ClosedCity and Borough of Sitka Southeast 35 R 8,532 2019 Sealaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated262,600.00 262,600.00 4,626.81 4,626.81406017 428Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant Feas R4 ClosedCity and Borough of Sitka Southeast 35 R 8,532 2019 Sealaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated16,699.14 16,699.14 2,376.48 2,376.48407049 428Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility-ClosedCity and Borough of Sitka Southeast 35 R 8,532 2019 Sealaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated1,919,069.04 1,919,069.04 231,768.00 231,768.00407088 428Sitka Blue Lake Hydroelectric Project-ClosedCity and Borough of Sitka Southeast 35 R 8,532 2019 Sealaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 89,355,487.00 90,312,930.71407055 488Wrangell Hydro Based Electric Boiler Const.-ClosedCity and Borough of WrangellSoutheast 36 R 2,4002019 Sealaska Corporation1,862,387.13 1,862,387.13 76,357.87 76,357.87407086488Wrangell Electric Vehicle Feasibility Study-ClosedCity and Borough of WrangellSoutheast 36 R 2,4002019 Sealaska Corporation25,000.00 25,000.00 428.48 428.48402035 489Yakutat Biomass Feas. & District HeatingLoop-ClsdCity and Borough of YakutatSoutheast 32 P 540 2019 Sealaska Corporation249,600.00 249,600.00 6,621.76 6,621.76402114176Craig Biomass Fuel Dryer Project R4 - CLOSEDCraig Southeast 35 R 1,0742019 Sealaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated350,000.00 350,000.00 250,000.00 262,989.06407015 201Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project-ClosedElfin Cove Southeast 35 R 16 2019 Sealaska Corporation Inside Passage Electric Cooperative346,639.61 346,639.61 80,093.90 99,093.90407024235Falls Cr Low Impact Hydro Assessment - ClosedGustavus Southeast 33Q537 2019 Sealaska Corporation City of Ruby50,000.00 50,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00407045 235Falls Creek Hydroelectric Construction-ClosedGustavus Southeast 33Q537 2019 Sealaska Corporation City of Ruby750,000.00 750,000.00 - -402034236Haines Ctrl Wood Heating Sys Constr(LIHP)-ClosedHaines Borough Southeast 2,516 2019 Sealaska Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative188,620.00 188,620.00 36,500.00 36,500.00402036236Haines Borough Municipal Buildings Biomass CLOSEDHaines Borough Southeast 2,516 2019 Sealaska Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative409,331.18 409,331.18 122,139.21 122,139.21407079 236Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project R4-ClosedHaines Borough Southeast 2,516 2019 Sealaska Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative468,000.00 468,000.00 118,844.37 118,844.37407081 236Schubee Lake Hydroelectric Project R4 - ClosedHaines Borough Southeast 2,516 2019 Sealaska Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative74,191.47 74,191.47 18,935.06 18,935.06407083 236Haines Excursion Inlet Hydro Project R4 - ClosedHaines Borough Southeast 2,516 2019 Sealaska Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative78,384.40 78,384.40 8,418.43 8,418.43402133 248Hoonah Biomass District Heating Loop-ClosedHoonah Southeast 35 R 782 2019 Sealaska Corporation North Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems40,000.00 40,000.00 10,000.00 10,365.00403053 248Hoonah Heat Recovery Project R4-ClosedHoonah Southeast 35 R 782 2019 Sealaska Corporation North Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems472,963.89 472,963.89 - -407070248Hoonah - IPEC Hydro Project R3-ClosedHoonah Southeast 35 R 782 2019 Sealaska Corporation North Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems850,000.00 850,000.00 450,000.00 450,000.00407100248Gartina Falls Hydroelectric Project - ClosedHoonah Southeast 35 R 782 2019 Sealaska Corporation North Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems6,694,000.00 6,694,000.00 - -407117 248Water Supply Creek Hydro - Final DesignHoonah Southeast 35 R 782 2019 Sealaska Corporation North Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems461,474.00 - - -402135 254Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler-CLOSEDHydaburg Southeast 36 R 397 2019 Sealaska Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative620,977.00 620,977.00 56,573.95 56,573.95406008 260Juneau Airport Ground Source Heat Pump - ClosedJuneau Southeast 33;34Q0 0 Sealaska Corporation Chugach Electric Association, Incorporated513,000.00 513,000.00 513,000.00 513,000.00406009 260Juneau Ground Source Heat Pump Constr(Aq Ctr)-ClsdJuneau Southeast 33;34Q0 0 Sealaska Corporation Chugach Electric Association, Incorporated1,450,000.00 1,450,000.00 500,000.00 500,000.00409030260Snettisham Trans Ln Avalanche Mitigation R4-ClosedJuneau Southeast 33;34Q0 0 Sealaska Corporation Chugach Electric Association, Incorporated2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 500,000.00 500,000.00SoutheastNorthwest Arctic TotalRailbeltRailbelt Total
App
Number Applicant Name Project Title Project Phase(s)Energy Region Senate
District
House
District
Election
District
Grant Funds
Requested Technology Community (Nearest)Status
14001
Nushagak Electric & Telephone
Cooperative Nuyakuk River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Bristol Bay S 37 37-S 2,000,000$ Hydro Dillingham Economic & Technical Review
14002 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Holy Cross Solar Energy & Battery Storage
Feasibility Study Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana S 37 37-S 135,000$ Solar Holy Cross Economic & Technical Review
14003 Point MacKenzie Solar Point MacKenzie Solar
Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual
Design; Final Design and Permitting;
Construction Railbelt D 8 8-D 1,000,000$ Solar Point Mackenzie Economic & Technical Review
14004 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Pilot Station Wind Energy Feasibility Study &
Conceptual Design Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim T 39 39-T 229,500$ Wind Pilot Station Economic & Technical Review
14005 City of Ouzinkie
Ouzinkie Wind Energy Feasibility and
Conceptual Design Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Kodiak P 32 32-P 172,600$ Wind Ouzinkie Economic & Technical Review
14006
City of Homer, Department of Public
Works Homer Energy Recovery Project Final Design and Permitting; Construction Railbelt P 31 31-P 492,500$ Hydro Homer Economic & Technical Review
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 T 40 40-T 590,000$ Solar
Ambler /
Kiana /
Noorvik /
Selawik Economic & Technical Review
14008 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC Ninilchik Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt P 31 31-P 192,000$ Wind Ninilchik Economic & Technical Review
14009 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC Summit Lake Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt O 29 29-O 232,000$ Wind Moose Pass Economic & Technical Review
14010 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC East Foreland/Nikiski Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt O 29 29-O 200,000$ Wind Nikiski Economic & Technical Review
14011 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC Caribou Hills Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt P 31 31-P 209,600$ Wind Ninilchik/Fox River Economic & Technical Review
14012 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC/KPB CPL Landfill Gas CHP Project Final Design and Permitting Railbelt P 31 31-P 884,986$ Biomass Soldotna Economic & Technical Review
14015 City of Kotzebue Kotzebue Wind to Heat System
Feasibility and Conceptual Design; Final Design
and Permitting; Construction Northwest Arctic T 40 40-T 702,435$ Wind (to heat)Kotzebue Economic & Technical Review
14016 Kwig Power Company Kwigillingok Wind Turbine Upgrade Construction Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim S 38 38-S 278,176$ Wind Kwigillingok Economic & Technical Review
14017 Native Village of Kwinhagak Kwinhagak Reconnaissance Study Reconnaissance Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim S 38 38-S 81,000$ Solar Quinhagak Economic & Technical Review
14018 Kotzebue Electric Association, Inc.
Kotzebue Wind to PV Transition Utilizing
Existing Wind Infrastructure Construction Northwest Arctic T 40 40-T 1,900,000$ Solar Kotzebue Economic & Technical Review
14019 Native Village of Eklutna
Eklutna Village Solar Energy Project -
Feasibility Study Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt F 12 12-F 22,500$ Solar Native Village of Eklutna Economic & Technical Review
14020 Puvurnaq Power Company
Kongiganak Wind Upgrade with Airfoil Blades
for Turbines Construction Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim S 38 38-S 328,716$ Wind Kongiganak Economic & Technical Review
14021 Akiachak Native Community Akiachak Wind Feasibility
Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual
Design Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim S 38 38-S 371,000$ Wind Akiachak Economic & Technical Review
14022
Chugach Electric Association, Inc. On
behalf of the Bradley Lake Management
Committee (BPMC)Dixon Diversion Feasibility Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt P 32 32-P 1,000,000$ Hydro Fritz Creek/ Fox River Economic & Technical Review
14024 Naterkaq Light Plant
Naterkaq Light Plant Battery Installation and
Integration Construction Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim S 38 38-S 325,000$ Storage Chefornak Economic & Technical Review
14025 City of Pilot Point
Pilot Point Comprehensive Community
Wind/Solar/Storage & Heat Project Construction Bristol Bay S 37 37-S 495,500$ Storage Pilot Point Economic & Technical Review
14026 Nome Joint Utility System Nome Battery Energy Storage System Construction Bering Straits T 39 39-T 2,000,000$ Storage Nome Economic & Technical Review
14027 Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Jenny Creek Hydro Reconnaissance - Kake
IPEC Reconnaissance Southeast R 35 35-R 62,368$ Hydro Kake Economic & Technical Review
14028 City of Nenana Nenana Biomass District Heat System Construction Railbelt C 6 6-C 676,121$ Biomass Nenana Economic & Technical Review
14029 Golden Valley Electric Association
Interior Alaska Wind Energy Resource
Assessment
Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual
Design Railbelt E 9 9-E 1,425,000$ Wind
Murphy Dome (Fairbanks)
Deltana Area (Delta Junction)
Donnelly Dome (Fort Greely)
Pedro Dome (Fox)
Wickersham Dome (Fox)Economic & Technical Review
14031 Atmautluak Tribal Utilities
Atmautluak Light Plant Battery, Thermal
Stove, and Metering Installation Construction Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim S 38 38-S 375,000$ Storage Atmautluak Economic & Technical Review
REF Round 14 Application Summary
1 of 2 4/4/2022 1:56 PM
App
Number Applicant Name Project Title Project Phase(s)Energy Region Senate
District
House
District
Election
District
Grant Funds
Requested Technology Community (Nearest)Status
14034 City of Galena
Galena Community Scale Solar PV and
Battery Project Final Design and Permitting; Construction Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana T 39 39-T 2,000,000$ Solar Galena Economic & Technical Review
14035 City of False Pass UNGA Man Creek Hydroelectric Project Final Design and Permitting Aleutians S 37 37-S 321,000$ Hydro False Pass Economic & Technical Review
TOTAL 18,702,002$
2 of 2 4/4/2022 1:56 PM
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:Rep. Calvin Schrage; Rep. Zack Fields; Representative Tiffany Zulkosky; Rep. Chris Tuck; Rep. George Rauscher;
Rep. James Kaufman; Rep. Matt Claman
Cc:akis.gialopsos@alaska.gov; Jennifer L. Bertolini; Kookesh, Melissa M (CED); TW Patch; Curtis W. Thayer
Subject:AEA Responses to 3-8-22 House Energy Committee - HB301
Date:Wednesday, March 23, 2022 11:05:48 AM
Attachments:2022.03.22 AEA Response on HB 301 RPS to House Energy Committee (Final).pdf
State Renewable Portfolio Standards and Goals.pdf
Working Paper No 2019-62-Energy Policy Institute.pdf
image001.png
image002.png
Rep Schrage,
Attached is the Alaska Energy Authority’s response to the several questions that were
posed at the March 8 committee hearing regarding HB 301. Please let me know if you need any
additional information.
Curtis
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 1 of 8
March 22, 2022
The Honorable Calvin Schrage
Chairman, House Energy Committee
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol Room 104
Juneau, AK 99801
Re: House Bill 301, AEA Responses to Committee Member Questions
Dear Representative Schrage,
The propose of this letter is to provide you with responses to the questions asked of the Alaska Energy
Authority (AEA) during our presentation to the House Energy Committee on March 8, 2022 regarding
House Bill 301 – Utilities: Renewable Portfolio Standard. Please see the request in bold and our response
immediately below the request.
1. What is the funding mechanism for the Dixon Diversion project?
The Dixon Diversion Project study is in the very early stages of consideration and studies of project
feasibility as regards cost to develop, license, and construct are ongoing. If the project is determined
technically feasible and economically meritorious through licensing, construction, and operation.
The estimated cost projection for licensing and study of the Dixon Diversion Project is $12 million.
The Railbelt utilities and AEA are continuing to engineer the project and are examining how best to
finance project costs. It is anticipated that costs will be borne by the State and the utilities.
Currently, the total cost of studies, licensing, feasibility analysis, engineering, and subsequent
construction is estimated between $400 and $600 million.
Once constructed the diversion will provide the power equivalent to as many as 25,000 homes.
Bradley Lake currently provides the power equivalent to more than 54,000 homes.
2. What are the fuel cost savings associated with Slides 12 and 13?
Slides 12 and 13 show theoretical dispatch charts for how an 80% RPS would function under peak
load in a high-hydro scenario and in a high-wind and solar scenario. These scenarios were produced
by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and published in the Alaska Railbelt RPS
feasibility study in February. NREL would need to perform an economic analysis to determine the
fuel cost savings for this theoretical 24-hour period.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 8
While not specific to slides 12 and 13, the
average fuel cost savings for a 24-hour period
can be calculated fairly easily based on NREL’s
annual fuel cost savings figures. Using AEA’s
estimates of $16.60/MMBTU blended fuel
prices, NREL predicts an annual fuel cost savings
of $426 million to $506 million in 2040. Dividing
this range by 365 days results in an estimated
daily fuel savings of $1.17 million to $1.39
million in an 80% RPS scenario. In the theoretical
peak demand scenarios shown in the slides, this
range would be higher than the average day, but
the exact amount is a question that should be
directed to the report authors.
3. Please provide a breakdown of other states’ RPS Programs and what their benchmarks are as they
compare to those in HB 301.
More than half of RPS
states have set long-term
targets (2030 or beyond).
The proposed 2030 and
2035 targets in SB 179 are
on the low end of these
targets. For example, for
the 2030 timeframe, Maine
has set a target of 80%,1
Nevada has set a target of
50%,2 and Hawaii has a
target of 40%.3
Of states and territories
with 2040 targets or
beyond, the proposed 2040
target is slightly below
average. For example, the
2040 target of 80% is above
Oregon (50% by 2040)4 and slightly above Massachusetts (80% by 2050),5 but below New Mexico
1 https://www.maine.gov/energy/initiatives/renewable-energy/renewable-portfolio-standards
2 https://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program/detail/373/energy-portfolio-standard
3 https://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program/detail/606
4 https://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program/detail/2594
5 https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=MA
Proposed benchmarks compared to select final targets across the country.
NREL fuel cost savings chart from pg. 30 of their report.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 3 of 8
(100% by 2045),6 below Virginia (100% by 2045 or 2050),7 and below fellow islanded locales like
Hawaii (100% by 2045),8 Guam (100% by 2045),9 and Puerto Rico (100% by 2050).10
Note that the Oregon RPS is an outlier in that it contains a long-term target, but was passed 15 years
ago, thus it is significantly lower than other long-term targets.
The chart on the right is provided by Berkeley Labs. This data is approximately one year old and does
not reflect recent updates, but it helps to visualize the proposed targets.
Please also see attachment 1.
4.In reference to slide six, is data available from other states on the economic impacts, specifically
impacts on ratepayers?
Data on economic impacts can be grouped into three categories:
1.The incremental cost to implement the RPS is generally understood as the difference in rates (up
or down) as the RPS ramps up compared to the base case.
2.The temporary economic impacts of significant infrastructure projects throughout the lifetime
of the RPS.
3.The lasting economic impact of the completed RPS in terms of fuel cost savings, economic
growth, and ancillary impacts on society.
In addition to the answers below, additional information on the economic case for the RPS can be
found in the Governor’s February 15, 2022 letter to the Regulatory Commission of Alaska.11
Category #1: Incremental costs during RPS ramp-up
In 2019, RPS compliance costs averaged 2.6% across the country.12 However, states with the most
significant increases, including New Jersey and Massachusetts, have solar carve-outs built into their
RPS – a primary driver of higher incremental costs not found in HB 301. Many also exclude
conventional hydro, which is currently the cheapest form of power in the Railbelt by a significant
margin. This is not the case with the proposed Alaska RPS.
This is also average and does not reflect the entire nation. In Maine, modeling sponsored by the
state energy office shows negligible consumer rate impacts despite their very high target of 100%
renewable energy by 2050.13
6 https://www.utilitydive.com/news/threes-company-new-mexico-joins-california-hawaii-in-approving-100-
clea/550390/
7 https://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program/detail/22133/renewable -portfolio-standard
8 https://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program/detail/606
9 https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=GQ
10 https://www.energy.gov/oe/puerto-rico-grid-resilience-and-transitions-100-renewable-energy-study-pr100
11 http://rca.alaska.gov/RCAWeb/ViewFile.aspx?id=377B67BC-2A41-429F-B208-28DD6EC952DC
12 https://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/rps_status_update-2021_early_release.pdf
13 https://www.maine.gov/energy/sites/maine.gov.energy/files/inline-
files/GEO_State%20of%20Maine%20Renewable%20Energy%20Goals%20Market%20Assessment_Final_March%20
2021_1.pdf (pg. 62)
Alaska Energy Authority Page 4 of 8
In Colorado, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, which supplies 17 Colorado
cooperatives, announced they would achieve 50% renewable power by 2024 while cutting
wholesale rates by 8%.14
In the similarly fuel-dependent state of Hawaii,15 a 100% RPS has existed since 2015. Despite major
efforts to meet renewable targets in a state with similar infrastructure issues, Hawaii’s rate
increases since 2015 are almost identical to those in Alaska at 29.8% and 28.5% respectively.
While there is a wide range of opinions on whether rates will slightly decrease or slightly increase
during the RPS as we develop much-needed infrastructure.
Category #2: Temporary economic impacts
The impact of new infrastructure projects, while not the aim of RPS policy, should also be
considered. In the mid-2000’s, Montana passed a small, 15% RPS. Despite its very small goal and
“negligible” impact on rates, it resulted in $423 million in investment, 482 temporary construction
jobs, and 26.5 full-time jobs.16 In Colorado, 6,000 renewable energy jobs were created in the four
years that followed the passage of their RPS ballot initiative.17
A 2016 NREL study found that RPS’s supported about 200,000 jobs and $20 billion in GDP output at
the time.18 They also determined that 4.7 million to 11.5 million renewable energy jobs will be
needed to meet RPS demands across the country (partially offset by contractions in other areas).19
Category #3: Lasting economic impacts after RPS completion
One of the primary drivers of this RPS is the cost savings that will be achieved by diversifying from a
fuel source that has increased by 270% since 1991. Obtaining data from other states on this
category is not possible because none have completed a high-percentage RPS nor do they share our
challenges in terms of fuel prices and isolation.
Instead, we rely on modeling such as the data provided by NREL which indicates an annual fuel cost
savings of $426 million to $506 million by 2040 in perpetuity. Further modeling suggests that the
capital costs of the proposed RPS will equate to less than half of the potential fuel savings. Less
expensive electricity also has the potential to drive industry investment in the Railbelt, creating jobs
as well as population and GDP growth.
Other ancillary economic benefits have also been posited in other states. For example, a 2019 study
of RPS policy in the Rust Belt estimated health benefits of 8 to 14 cents/kWh.20 A 2016 NREL study
estimated 2.4 to 5.0 cents/kWh in air quality impacts.21
14 https://www.denverpost.com/2020/10/07/tri-state-rates-renewable-energy/
15 https://www.eia.gov/state/data.php?sid=HI#Prices
16 https://leg.mt.gov/content/Committees/Interim/2013-2014/Energy-and-
Telecommunications/Legislation/RPSFinal.pdf
17 https://cnee.colostate.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Blue-Print-for-the-New-Energy-Economy-Colorado.pdf
(pg. 29)
18 https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy16osti/65005.pdf
19 https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1344104
20 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab31d9/pdf
21 https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1344104
Alaska Energy Authority Page 5 of 8
Please also see attachment 2.
5. Is there is information about Pumped Storage capacity in Alaska?
In addition to building pumped storage capacity, battery energy storage systems (BESS), located
strategically in each of the three Railbelt regions, are fully capable of loading variable renewables,
especially when backed up by thermal generation which will continue to exist even after 2040.
NREL’s Railbelt feasibility study determined that a 46 MW, 8-hour battery will be required in
Fairbanks (a significant upgrade over GVEA’s existing BESS22), a 46.5 MW 4-hour battery will be
required in Homer (already in place23), and a 70 MW 4-hour battery will be required in Anchorage.24
Regardless of what mix of pumped storage or BESS systems are utilized, NREL found that resource
adequacy and operational reliability are fully achievable under an 80% renewable scenario.25
“All modeled scenarios can achieve 80% renewable energy while maintaining a balance of supply
and demand with no unserved energy or reserve shortages during normal operations. The system
can also serve load under severe outage conditions in all cases, although the 80% RPS may not be
achieved if very long outages were to occur on some parts of the grid. This finding depends on the
continued use of best practices and the engineering approaches historically deployed by Alaska’s
Railbelt utilities, particularly about the use of state-of-the-art (but proven) technologies.”
6. Have there been any studies on what Alaska’s Energy Composition should be and whether there
was a study that might have established a prior baseline.
AEA has participated in several studies to varying degrees that address Alaska’s Energy Composition.
Those studies include:
1. Alaska Railbelt Electrical Grid Authority Study (September 12, 2008)
2. Alaska Energy: A First Step Toward Energy Independence (January 2009)
3. Alaska Railbelt Integrated Resource Plan (RIRP) Study (February 2010)
4. Alaska Energy Pathway: Toward Energy Independence (July 2010)
5. The Alaska Affordable Energy Strategy (2017)
6. Renewable Energy Atlas of Alaska (2019)
22 https://gvea.com/battery-system/
23 https://www.homerelectric.com/my -cooperative/power-generation/battery-energy-storage-system-has-
arrived/
24 https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/81698.pdf (pg. 16)
25 Ibid. (pg. 20)
Alaska Energy Authority Page 6 of 8
7.Is there funding requests on this year’s (infrastructure) projects and whether the effects on
ratepayers was quantified?
The Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project Power Sales Agreement (PSA) provides for payment to be
made by the purchasing utilities after the bonded debt for construction of the project is retired. The
purpose of excess payments is to provide a means whereby the necessary costs for modernization
or repairs on the existing project can be funded jointly by those purchasing power from the project
so that continuing necessary maintenance and upgrades can be readily funded by the purchasers.
These excess payments are estimated to fund project improvements totaling $225 million, which is
close to the $261 million as shown on page 15 of the AEA presentation made to the committee on
March 8, 2022. Required Project Work is defined in the PSA to mean “…repairs, maintenance,
renewals, replacements, improvements or betterments required by federal or state law … to keep
the project in good and efficient operating condition, consistent with sound economics for the
project and the purchasers and national standards for the industry.” Upgraded transmission lines, a
battery for grid stabilization, and the study of benefits and costs for an alternative pathway to move
power north by means of an alternative pathway off the Kenai Peninsula are not expected to have a
significant cost to ratepayers over time and should provide both stability and reliability benefits. This
Required Project Work is necessary for greater penetration of renewable energy resources in
Alaska’s Railbelt energy portfolio.
This Required Project Work will result in one of the most significant improvements to the electrical
transmission system in Alaska’s history. This work will eliminate the constraints on exiting
transmission systems and stabilize rates for consumers throughout the Railbelt by increasing the
deliverability of energy from the Project while providing jobs and other economic development
opportunities from the Kenai to Fairbanks without any burden on the State’s budget. A “win-win”
for all Alaskans.
8.How would the entire state see a benefit since the bill is by its text impacts only Railbelt electric
utilities?
The Administration has introduced several energy bills and funding proposals targeted at different
areas of Alaska. For example, the Governor’s budget included a significant $15 million
recapitalization of the Renewable Energy Fund. The Governor has also made significant efforts to
protect Power Cost Equalization and enshrine it in the Constitution.
This year, the Governor introduced HB 299, An Act relating to microreactors, to develop a path
forward for microreactors with the stated goal of reducing power costs and providing cleaner power
in rural Alaska. While the currently proposed projects are urban or semi-urban (Eielson and Valdez),
the Administration believes the primary use case for microreactors will ultimately be rural Alaska.
There has been some understandable confusion over the rural impacts of HB 299. AEA agrees that a
microreactor being built in a truly rural location is not feasible because on-site teams will likely
always be a requirement no matter how safe the technology may be. However, a microreactor could
be built in proximity to a rural hub city that desires to pursue such a project. That microreactor
could supply power to more remote villages via high-voltage DC transmission lines or be used to
convert hydrogen into ammonia fuel. Providing rural communities with options should be one of the
primary goals of this HB 299.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 7 of 8
9.What would the potential carbon reductions would look like over time given the percentage of
renewable energy to be achieved by stated times set out in HB 301 to be achieved by certain
dates.
The NREL feasibility study did not analyze carbon reductions as the Governor did not introduce the
RPS for this purpose. While most Alaskans, including the Governor, support cleaner air, the primary
goals of HB 301 are energy independence and long-term cost reductions by reducing our reliance on
an expensive and unpredictable energy source and by utilizing a larger fraction of the abundant
renewable energy sources available in the Railbelt region.
It should be noted that NREL’s research did include estimates for the reduction of fuel that would be
achieved by 2040.26 If desired, these numbers could be compared to U.S. Energy Information
Administration data on emissions27 and used to estimate carbon reductions, however, AEA would
respectfully recommend reaching out to the report authors to make these scientific calculations.
10.Please provide a breakdown of electricity generation within the Railbelt by fuel type and utility
service area.
I hope you will find this information to be useful. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have
further questions.
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
Attachments:
1.National Conference of State Legislature, State Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards and Goals
(August 13, 2021)
26 https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/81698.pdf (pg. 30)
27 https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/co2_vol_mass.php
Railbelt Energy Generation
By Fuel Source, By Utility / Service Area
Fuel Source Type CEA (MWh)% of Total Energy GVEA (MWh)% of Total Energy HEA (MWh)*% of Total Energy MEA (MWh)% of Total Energy Railbelt (MWh)% of Total Energy
Non-Renewable 1,039,087 75%1,153,284 90%444,331 91%739,461 88%3,376,164 85%
Coal - 0%544,222 43%- 0%183 0%544,405 14%
Diesel - 0%173,832 14%122 0%- 0%173,954 4%
Naptha - 0%385,999 30%- 0%- 0%385,999 10%
Natural Gas 1,039,087 75%49,231 4%444,209 91%739,278 88%2,271,805 57%
Renewable 337,317 25%123,408 10%42,182 9%98,103 12%601,010 15%
Hydro 291,355 21%73,531 6%41,953 9%96,795 12%503,634 13%
Solar - 0%656 0%229 0%1,308 0%2,193 0%
Wind 45,962 3%49,220 4%- 0%- 0%95,182 2%
Total 1,376,405 100%1,276,692 100%486,513 100%837,564 100%3,977,174 100%
Notes:
*Solar figure for HEA is applying an assumption that 100% of the "consumer generation", as listed under purchased power for its submitted RCA annual report, is solar power
Source:
2020 Railbelt Utility Annual Reports to the RCA
Alaska Energy Authority Page 8 of 8
2.Working Paper, No. 2019-62, Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago, Do Renewable
Portfolio Standards Deliver? (April 2019)
Cc: House Energy Committee
Vasilios Gialopos, Legislative Director
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:Rep. Zack Fields; TW Patch
Cc:Rep. Calvin Schrage; Kookesh, Melissa M (CED); Jennifer L. Bertolini; Curtis W. Thayer
Subject:RE: energy generation by source for railbelt
Date:Tuesday, March 22, 2022 2:59:41 PM
Attachments:image003.png
image004.png
image002.png
We had included your response in overall document responded to the other questions from the committee. However, I believe this
what you are looking for:
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
From: Rep. Zack Fields <Rep.Zack.Fields@akleg.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 2:40 PM
To: Curtis W. Thayer <cthayer@akenergyauthority.org>; TW Patch <TPatch@akenergyauthority.org>
Cc: Rep. Calvin Schrage <Rep.Calvin.Schrage@akleg.gov>; Kookesh, Melissa M (CED) <melissa.kookesh@alaska.gov>
Subject: RE: energy generation by source for railbelt
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Hi Curtis & TW,
I’m following up on this request for data on railbelt electricity generation. Do you have that data available to share with me?
Zack
From: Rep. Zack Fields
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2022 2:52 PM
To: Curtis W. Thayer <cthayer@akenergyauthority.org>
Cc: Rep. Calvin Schrage <Rep.Calvin.Schrage@akleg.gov>
Subject: energy generation by source for railbelt
Hi Curtis,
In the context of the RPS bill, I was hoping to understand the breakdown of electricity generation within the railbelt, broken down by
type (gas, coal, wind, solar, hydro, ….). Does AEA have that?
If AEA also this generation % breakdown by utility service area, that would be useful too. Thank you,
Zack
Representative Zack Fields
House District 20
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:Senator Natasha Vonlmhof
Cc:Curtis W. Thayer; Jennifer L. Bertolini
Subject:AEA & IIJA
Date:Monday, March 21, 2022 2:02:38 PM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act - H.R. 3684 - AEA Summary - Feb 2 2022_.xlsx
Per our conversation, the list is ever evolving as we receive additional information from the Feds.
Curtis
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act - H.R. 3684 - AEA Summary
Updated: 02/02/2022 Page 1 of 4 4/4/2022
Section
(IIJA)
Program Title Technology
Program
Description/Notes Aggregate Federal Funding
Appropriation
Estimated Funding for AK State of AK Match Requirement Notes on AK Funding Estimate
11109 Surface
Transportation Block
Grant
Electric Vehicles -
Betsy
In addition to standard eligible infrastructure projects, this section adds the installation of electric vehicle charging
infrastructure and vehicle-to-grid infrastructure as eligible projects.
Total Federal Appropriation
=$273,150,000,000
28.74% of base appropriation for Surface
Transportation Block Program
Total appropriation by FY:
FY22: $52,488,065,375
FY23: $53,537,826,683
FY24: $54,608,583,217
FY25: $55,700,754,881
FY26: $56,814,769,844
$990,000,000 DOTPF DOTPF may have higher priority eligible infrastructure projects than
EVSE. The State is required to allocate a proportion of funds on
certain types of projects as well as by population and to prioritize
some geographic locations. Projects also need to be included in the
STIP.
Amount AK will receive was based on 2% more than AK's FY21
apportionment with penalties, and 1% more than previous FY. 28.74%
of base appropriation allocated for Surface Transportation Block
Program.
11401 Grants for Charging
and Fueling
Infrastructure
Electric Vehicles -
Betsy
Alternative Fuel Corridor Redesignation
Within 180 days of enactment, the Transportation Secretary is required to consult with federal agencies, state and local
officials, as well as other entities to redisgnate highway corridors as Alternative Fuel Corridor Ready (corridor with EV DC fast
chargers or alternative fueling stations located no more than 50 miles apart) or Corridor Pending (corridor that is targeted
to achieve Corridor Ready status, but does not yet meet the criteria).
Alternate Fuel Corridor Grants
Within a year of enactment, a grant program will be established for state, local, and tribal governments, port authorities or
metropolitan planning organizations to work with private entities to acquire, install, and operate and maintain alternative
fuel infrastructure along FHWA-designated Alternative Fuel Corridors for 5 years.
Community Grants
50% of program funds will be set-aside annually for competitive grants to expand publically-accessible alternative fuel
infrastructure with priority to rural, underserved communities, and multi-unit dwellings. Community grants can also be used
for preconstruction work, such as, planning, feasibility analysis, environmental review, revenue forecasting, preliminary
design and engineering; and up to 5% can be used for public education and outreach. Community grants are capped at
$15M per project.
Total: $2,500,000,000
FY22: $300,000,000
FY23: $400,000,000
FY24: $500,000,000
FY25: $600,000,000
FY26: $700,000,000
Competitive application
process
Administration's goal is to
have 500,000 EV charging
stations to meet projected
2030 EV market. Based on
population, AK would need
1,097 charging stations to
meet that goal.
Federal share not to exceed 80%
total project costs; Private Entities
(subgrantees) required to provide
20% match.
No State match requirement.
However, AEA estimates a need for
$200,000 annually for staff time for
planning and preparation of grant
applications; procurements;
distributing the funds; and
managing subgrants/projects.
About half of these funds can only be used for purposes of EV
charging infrastructure development along designated alternative
fuel corridors (AFCs). It is important for the State to get clarification
on flexibility of AFC criteria and then decide to nominate the National
Highway System highways and ferry/port terminals, and other roads
if allowed, as Corridor Pending to make full use of these funds.
Alaska currently has one Corridor Pending highway route from
Anchorage to Fairbanks and no Corridor Ready routes.
11507 Denali Commission Rural - Tim For an additional amount for "Denali Commission", $75,000,000 to remain available until expended: Provided further, that
such amount is designated by the Congress as being for an emergency requirement pursuant to section 4112(a) of H. Con.
Res. 71 (115th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018 and to section 251(b) of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Control Act of 1985.
$75,000,000 $75,000,000 $15,000,000
40101 Grid Resilience and
Reliability
Transmission -
Kirk
$5B to be allocated FY2022 to FY2026, with $2.5B as competitive Federal Grant Program and $2.5B for formula-based
State/Tribal Grant Program, for grid resiliency and reliability initiatives. activities, technologies, equipment, and hardening
measures to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events, including: weatherization technologies and
equipment; fire-resistant technologies and fire prevention systems; monitoring and control technologies; the
undergrounding of electrical equipment; utility pole management; the relocation of power lines or the reconductoring of
power lines with low-sag, advanced conductors; vegetation and fuel-load management; the use or construction of
distributed energy resources for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events (including microgrids and
battery-storage subcomponents); adaptive protection technologies; advanced modeling technologies; hardening of power
lines, facilities, substations, of other systems; and the replacement of old overhead conductors and underground cables.
Federal Grant Program - Competitive Program
Grant program set aside for activities that are supplemental to existing hardening efforts planned for any given year; and
reduce the risk of any power lines owned or operated by the eligible entity causing a wildfire; or increase the ability of the
eligible entity to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events. Eligible entities include: electric grid operator;
electricity storage operator; electricity generator; transmission owner or operator; distribution provider; fuel supplier; and
any other relevant entity. Must submit a report detailing past, current, and future efforts by the eligible entity to reduce the
likelihood and consequences of disruptive events. Grant amounts cannot exceed total amount the eligible entity has spent
in the previous 3 years on efforts to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events.
Priority will be given to projects that generate the greatest community benefit (whether rural or urban) in reducing the
likelihood and consequences of disruptive events. Small utility (<4M MWh annually) set aside of a minimum of 30% of
program funds. Small utility (<4M MWh annually) required to match 1⁄3 of the amount of the grant.
$2,500,000,000
30% minimum set-aside for small utilities
(<4M MWh annually)
Competitive application
process
Small utility match = 1/3 Small utility match = 1/3
Eligible entities include: electric grid operator; electricity storage
operator; electricity generator; transmission owner or operator;
distribution provider; fuel supplier. AEA would be eligible as owner of
Bradley Lake Hydro Project and transmission lines.
At least 30% of program funds will be set aside for small utilities.
Grant amounts cannot exceed total amount the eligible entity has
spent in the previous 3 years on efforts to reduce the likelihood and
consequences of disruptive events.
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act - H.R. 3684 - AEA Summary
Updated: 02/02/2022 Page 2 of 4 4/4/2022
Section
(IIJA)
Program Title Technology
Program
Description/Notes Aggregate Federal Funding
Appropriation
Estimated Funding for AK State of AK Match Requirement Notes on AK Funding Estimate
40101 Grid Resilience and
Reliability
Transmission -
Kirk
$5B to be allocated, with $2.5B eligible for use by States for FY2022 to FY2026, for grid resiliency and reliability initiatives.
activities, technologies, equipment, and hardening measures to reduce the likelihood
and consequences of disruptive events, including: weatherization technologies and equipment; fire-resistant technologies
and fire prevention systems; monitoring and control technologies; the undergrounding of electrical equipment; utility pole
management; the relocation of power lines or the reconductoring of power lines with low-sag, advanced conductors;
vegetation and fuel-load management; the use or construction of distributed energy resources for enhancing system
adaptive capacity during disruptive events (including microgrids and battery-storage subcomponents); adaptive protection
technologies; advanced modeling technologies; hardening of power lines, facilities, substations, of other systems; and the
replacement of old overhead conductors and underground cables.
State/Tribal Grant Program - Formula Based
50% formula-based set aside for states and tribes to issue grants to eligible entities. Grant funding allocations are based on
total population; total area; areas with low ratio of electricity customers to power lines; probability of disruptive events
during previous 10 years based on federally declared disasters or emergencies; number and severity of events; amount of
funds expended over past 10 years on percapita basis to mitigate or reduce severity or consequences over previous 10
years; among other factors.
State/Tribe must submit a plan each FY for disbursing the funds. Small utilitiy set aside (<4M MWh annually) cannot be less
than the percentage of all customers in the State/Tribe that are served by those eligible entities. 15% match requirement for
State or Tribe. Small utility (<4M MWh annually) required to match 1⁄3 of the amount of the grant.
$2,500,000,000 Not estimated 15% state match requirement
and
Small utility match = 1/3
State Cost Share = 15%
Formula-based grant requiring 15% state match and 1/3 match from
small utilities. The State/Tribe must submit a plan with the application.
The State/Tribe may use up to 5% for providing technical assistance
and administration expenses. Utility contributions to Bradley Lake
transmission projects should count as State match funds.
40103 Energy Infrastructure
Federal Financial
Assistance Program -
Program Upgrading
Our Electric Grid and
Ensuring Reliability
and Resiliency
Transmission $5B for FY2022 to FY2026 to create the "Program Upgrading Our Electric Grid and Ensuring Reliability and Resiliency". The
purpose of the program being to "to demonstrate innovative approaches to transmission, storage, and distribution
infrastructure to harden and enhance resilience and reliability; and to demonstrate new approaches to enhance regional
grid resilience, implemented through States by public and rural electric cooperative entities on a cost-shared basis."
Competitive application program for Federal Assistance.
Eligible entities include: State; combination of 2 or more States; Indian Tribe; unit of local government; and public utility
commission.
$5,000,000,000 Competitive application
process
20% match requirement as per 42
U.S. Code § 16352
State Cost Share: 20%
40103 Energy Improvement
in Rural or Remote
Areas, and Energy
Infrastructure
Resilience
Framework
Rural $1B for FY2022 to FY2026 to supplement the "Program Upgrading Our Electric Grid and Ensuring Reliability and Resiliency"
with specific guidance relating to Federal financial assistance for rural and remote areas (city, town, or unincorporated area
with less than <10K inhabitants). Such eligible projects include but are not limited to: "overall cost-effectiveness of energy
generation, transmission, or distribution systems; siting or upgrading transmission and distribution lines; and reducing
greenhouse gas emissions from energy generation by rural or remote areas."
$1,000,000,000 Competitive application
process
20% match requirement as per 42
U.S. Code § 16352
State Cost Share = 20%
40106 Transmission
Facilitation Program
Transmission -
Kirk
$50M for FY2022 to FY2026 for the establishment of a "Transmission Facilitation Fund" by which the DOE shall facilitate the
construction of electric power transmission lines and related facilities. In addition to the 5 year $10M appropriation, the
program will also establish a $2.5B revolving loan fund that allows DOE to serve as an “anchor tenant” for a new
transmission line or an upgrade of an existing line. DL: eligible transmission lines required to have capacity of 1GW if new.
Upgrades to existing lines or new lines in existing corridors must have 500MW capacity. These minimums are much greater
than currently contemplated transmission line upgrades in Alaska. The only exceptions are an HVDC line from the North
Slope to the Railbelt or a connection to Canada. This should be confirmed with the Railbelt utilities.
$50,000,000 Competitive application
process
100% match Loan program (100% match) - subject to some potential loan
forgiveness clauses.
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act - H.R. 3684 - AEA Summary
Updated: 02/02/2022 Page 3 of 4 4/4/2022
Section
(IIJA)
Program Title Technology
Program
Description/Notes Aggregate Federal Funding
Appropriation
Estimated Funding for AK State of AK Match Requirement Notes on AK Funding Estimate
40109 State Energy
Program
AEEE - Taylor Allocates $500M, distributed in accordance with the applicable distribution formula in effect for 01/01/2021. Funds are to
be made available for, but not limited to, "[...] the electrification of, State government vehicles, fleet vehicles, taxis and
ridesharing services, mass transit, school buses, ferries, and privately owned passenger and medium- and heavy-duty-
vehicles." SEP funding for AK for FY2021 was $445,730 of a total $56M, or 0.79%. At $100M per annum, it is estimated AK
will receive $795,946/yr ($3.98M total).
$500,000,000 $3,979,732 None required Changes some of the regulation of the SEP for this bill and going
forward: ‘‘(7) the mandatory conduct of activities to support
transmission
and distribution planning, including—
‘‘(A) support for local governments and Indian Tribes;
‘‘(B) feasibility studies for transmission line routes and
alternatives;
‘‘(C) preparation of necessary project design and permits;
and
‘‘(D) outreach to affected stakeholders.’’
40331 Hydroelectric
Production
incentives
Hydro - Bryan $125M for FY2022 to remain available until expended for DOE to make incentive payments for electric energy generated
and sold by a qualified hydroelectric facility during the incentive period. "Payments made by the Secretary under this
section to the owner or operator of a qualified hydroelectric facility shall be based on the number of kilowatt hours of
hydroelectric energy generated by the facility during the incentive period. For any such facility, the amount of such payment
shall be 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour (adjusted as provided in paragraph (2) [for inflation]), subject to the availability of
appropriations under subsection (g), except that no facility may receive more than $1,000,000 in 1 calendar year."
$125,000,000 Competitive application
process
Incentive payments capped at $1M
per year for 10 years, or $10M total
for a single qualifying facility.
Incentive program based on energy generation; cost share is 100%
with incentive acting only as a discount towards hydro facility O&M
costs.
40332 Hydroelectric
Efficiency
improvement
incentives
Hydro - Bryan $75M for FY2022 to remain available until expended for DOE to make incentive payments to the owners or operators of
hydroelectric facilities at existing dams to be used to make capital improvements in the facilities that are directly related to
improving the efficiency of such facilities by at least 3 percent. Incentive payments under this section shall not exceed 30
percent of the costs of the capital improvement concerned and not more than 1 payment may be made with respect to
improvements at a single facility. No payment in excess of $5,000,000 may be made with respect to improvements at a
single facility.
$75,000,000 Competitive application
process
Incentive payment capped at 30%
of capital cost of improvement(s),
not to exceed $5M. As pursuant to
42 U.S. Code § 15882
State Cost Share is total capital cost of improvement(s). Incentive
payment can be construed as a percentage discount to overall project
cost. Incentive payment increases with capital cost, capped at 30%,
not to exceed $5M. Utility contributions to Bradley should count as
state match funds.
40333 Maintaining and
Enhancing
Hydroelectricity
Incentives
Hydro - Bryan $553.6M for FY2022 to remain available until expended for DOE to make payments to the owners or operators of qualified
hydroelectric facilities at existing dams to be used to make improvements related to dam safety, grid resiliency, and
environmental improvements. Incentive payments under this section shall not exceed 30 percent of the costs of the capital
improvement concerned and not more than 1 payment may be made with respect to improvements at a single facility. No
payment in excess of $5,000,000 may be made with respect to improvements at a single facility.
$553,600,000 Competitive application
process
Incentive payment capped at 30%
of capital cost of improvement(s),
not to exceed $5M.
Incentive payment increases with capital cost, capped at 30%, not to
exceed $5M. Utility contributions to Bradley should count as state
match funds.
40334 Pumped Storage
Hydropower Wind
and Solar
Integration and
System Reliability
Initiative
AEEE - Audrey $10M for FY2022 to FY2026 for purposes of no later than 09/30/2023 the DOE "enter[ing] into an agreement with an eligible
to provide financial assistance to the eligible entity to carry out project design, transmission studies, power market
assessments, and permitting for a pumped storage hydropower project to facilitate the long duration storage of intermittent
renewable electricity." Eligibility for assistance is subject to a potential project being "(i) designed to provide not less than
1,000MW of storage capacity; (ii) be able to provide energy and capacity of use in more than 1 organized electricity market;
(iii) be able to store electricity generated by intermittent renewable electricity projects located on Tribal land; and (iv) have
received a preliminary permit from FERC."
$10,000,000 Competitive application
process
100% match State Cost Share = 100%
40502 Energy Efficiency
Revolving Loan Fund
Grant Program
Energy Efficiency
- Taylor
$250M to be allocated for FY2022, available until expended. Maximum of $15M in grant funds to be allocated to each State
to establish OR utilize an existing revolving loan fund for purposes of conducting commercial and residential energy audits
and commercial and residential energy upgrades and retrofits. Additional funding may be available for those priority states
which "are among the 15 States with the highest annual per-capita combined residential and commercial sector energy
consumption, per the EIA; or the 15 States with the highest annual per-capita energy-related carbon dioxide emissions by
State, per the EIA". While State matching funds are not required, the leveraging of private capital via the grant funds is
highly encouraged.
$250,000,000 $795,946 None required This program flows through SEP and will be subject to the same
reporting requirements/platform. AHFC may be interested, still
awaiting answer as of 01/28/2022. AEA/AIDEA would need to
administer a Commercial Loan/Grant program.
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act - H.R. 3684 - AEA Summary
Updated: 02/02/2022 Page 4 of 4 4/4/2022
Section
(IIJA)
Program Title Technology
Program
Description/Notes Aggregate Federal Funding
Appropriation
Estimated Funding for AK State of AK Match Requirement Notes on AK Funding Estimate
40503 Energy Auditor
Training Grant
Program
Energy Efficiency
- Taylor
$40M to be allocated for FY2022 to FY 2026. Grant allocation to States is subject to formula calculation based on
population and shall not exceed $2M. Grants to be made available to States to "train individuals to conduct energy audits
or surveys of commercial and residential buildings."
$40,000,000 $2,000,000 None required $2M is maximum amount per State.
This program flows through SEP and will be subject to the same
reporting requirements/platform. AHFC may be interested, answer
expected week of 11/22
40552 Energy Efficiency
and Conservation
Block Grant Program
Energy Efficiency
- Taylor
$550M to be allocated for FY2022, until expended. Funding amount calculated per formula. Adding "programs for
financing energy efficiency, renewable energy, and zero-emission transportation (and associated infrastructure), capital
investments, projects, and programs, which may include loan programs and performance contracting programs, for
leveraging of additional public and private sector funds, and programs that allow rebates, grants, or other incentives for the
purchase and installation of energy efficiency, renewable energy, and zero-emission transportation (and associated
infrastructure) measures" to EECBG program.
$550,000,000 $1,925,000 None required NASEO reports 68% going to the 10 largest city or boroughs in the
state direct from DOE. 28% to smaller cities, to be run through AEA.
2% to tribes (last time that was direct from DOE, and 2% for
competitive projects.
41007 Renewable Energy
Projects
AEEE - Audrey This section plans to administer funding for RE projects through DOE, EERE and other federal agencies. Similar to other DOE
RE programs, the match requirement and state applicant eligibility is defined on a case by case basis, depending on the
agency that the funds are administered through. More information should become available on these programs as the
adminstration plan is revealed by DOE. The Funding Opportunity Working Group will continue to monitor the relevant
offices for funding announcements. Funding appears to be focused heavily on Research and Development type projects.
Geothermal:
$84,000,000 for FY 2022 - 2025
Wind Energy:
$100,000,000 for FY 2022 - 2025
Solar Energy:
$80,000,000 for FY 2022 - 2025
Competitive application
process
Varies depending on program
Section J
Title VIII
National Electric
Vehicle Formula
Program
Electric Vehicles -
Betsy
Formula based funds under Section 104(c) of title 23 USC for the development of publically available networked EV charging
infrastructure along deisgnated alternative fuel corridors. Must develop a plan for disbursing the funds and developing the
charging network and submit to Department of Transportation for approval. If the plan is not submitted or approved, the
funds for that FY will be provided to localities within the state or disbursed to other states if they cannot be used by the
localities.
$5,000,000,000 total
$300,000,000 for Federal Joint Office
10% set aside for assistance grants for
States and localities
Remaining funds follow base
apportionment under Section 104(c) of
title 23 USC.
$51,000,000 $1,500,000
Federal share not to exceed 80%
total project costs; State or Private
Entities (subgrantees) can provide
20% match. State will need to fund
planning, interagency coordination,
stakeholder outreach, GIS support,
and reporting prior to federal
funding being available. If 10% set
aside for assistance is apportioned
to AK and state required to provide
20% match, then state would need
$1,500,000.
These funds can only be used for purposes of EV charging
infrastructure development. Amount AK will receive was estimated
from AK's FY21 apportionment after penalties applied to 90% of the
funds. The AK funding estimate does not include the 10% set aside
for assistance grants to states and localities because it is not clear if
that will be competitive or apportioned.
These funds can only be used for purposes of EV charging
infrastructure development along designated alternative fuel
corridors (AFCs) until they are fully built out. It is important for the
State to get clarification on flexibility of AFC criteria and then decide
to nominate the National Highway System highways and ferry/port
terminals and other roads if allowed as Corridor Pending to make full
use of these funds.
Alaska currently has one Corridor Pending highway route from
Anchorage to Fairbanks and no Corridor Ready routes.
HB 301 OVERVIEW
T.W. Patch, JD
Director of Planning
House Energy Committee
March 8, 2022
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
Railbelt Energy –AEA owns the Bradley
Lake Hydroelectric Project, the Alaska
Intertie, and the Sterling to Quartz Creek
Transmission Line —all of which benefit
Railbelt consumers by reducing the cost
of power.
Power Cost Equalization (PCE) –PCE
reduces the cost of electricity in rural
Alaska for residential customers and
community facilities, which helps ensure
the sustainability of centralized power.
Rural Energy –AEA constructs bulk fuel
tank farms, diesel powerhouses, and
electrical distribution grids in rural
villages. AEA supports the operation of
these facilities through circuit rider and
emergency response programs.
Alternative Energy and Energy Efficiency
–AEA provides funding, technical
assistance, and analysis on alternative
energy technologies to benefit Alaskans.
These include biomass, hydro, solar,
wind, and others.
Grants and Loans –AEA provides loans
to local utilities, local governments, and
independent power producers for the
construction or upgrade of power
generation and other energy facilities.
Energy Planning –In collaboration with
local and regional partners, AEA
provides economic and engineering
analysis to plan the development of
cost-effective energy infrastructure.
AEA Programs and Services
AEA works to diversify
Alaska’s energy
portfolio, engages on
energy planning and
policy, invests in
Alaska’s energy
infrastructure, and
provides rural Alaska
with technical and
community
assistance.
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 02
What is a Renewable Portfolio Standard?
Renewable
Portfolio
Standard
(RPS)
A requirement on retail electric suppliers…
To supply a minimum percentage or amount of their retail load…
With eligible sources of renewable energy
Typically Backed with incentives of some form (financial or other)
Often Accompanied by a tradable renewable energy certificate (REC)
program to facilitate compliance
Never Designed the same in any two states
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 03
House Bill 301
House Bill (HB) 301 promotes energy independence, long-term
cost reductions, and competitive markets in Alaska’s Railbelt.
HB 301 aligns Alaska with 30 states and two territories in creating
a renewable portfolio standard on the Railbelt.
A key element of the Governor’s RPS is a firm commitment to
transition to 30% renewable power by 2030 and 80% by 2040.
Expanding our renewable energy portfolio is the best way to
diversify our supply thus increasing Alaska’s energy security.
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 04
Prior Legislative Action
AN ACT DECLARING A STATE ENERGY POLICY.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Alaska
*Section 1. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is amended by adding a new section to read:
LEGISLATIVE INTENT. It is the intent of the legislature that
(1) the state achieve a 15 percent increase in energy efficiency on a per capita basis between 2010 and 2020;
(2) the state receive 50 percent of its electric generation from renewable and alternative energy sources by 2025;
(3) the state work to ensure a reliable in-state gas supply for residents of the state;
(4) the power project fund (AS 42.45.010) serve as the main source of state assistance for energy projects;
(5) the state remain a leader in petroleum and natural gas production and become a leader in renewable and
alternative energy development.
Section 2. Permanent law. See Table of Disposition of Acts.
Approved: June 16, 2010
2010 Temporary Special Acts and Resolves, An Act Declaring a State Energy Policy, Chapter 82 Effective: September 14, 2010
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 05
Recent Evolution RPS Standards and Goals
RPS policies exist in 30 States and DC; apply to 58% of total U.S. retail electricity sales
JANUARY 2012
Source: N.C. Solar Center at N.C. State University, Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency (accessed
July 2012). (Correction: Amended source corrects the source listed in original publication of February 3, 2012.)
Note: The map includes West Virginia as a State with a Renewable Portfolio Standard, although the Interstate
Renewable Energy Council categorizes it as a goal State rather than an RPS State.
Source: Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy & Efficiency® September 2020
SEPTEMBER 2020
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 06
HOW DO WE GET THERE
U.S.AK
34%
58%
6%2%
AK*
Energy Production Profile by Source (%)
Oil and Gas Coal Renewable Energy
(Biomass, Solar, Wind)
Hydroelectric
(*With Susitna-Watana)
Nuclear Power
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 08
Soldotna
Homer
Seward
Location –The Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project is located
27‐air miles northeast of Homer on the Kenai Peninsula
Benefits –Provide low cost energy to 550,000+ members of
Chugach Electric Association, City of Seward, Golden Valley
Electric Association, Homer Electric Association, and Matanuska
Electric Association
Annual Energy Production –~10% of Railbelt electricity at 4.5
cents/kWh (or ~54,400 homes/year) and over $20 million in
savings per year to Railbelt utilities from Bradley Lake versus
natural gas
Status –Energized in 1991
Dam Height –125 feet
Dam Elevation –1,190 Feet
Reservoir Length –4 miles
Reservoir Width –1.3 miles
Installed Capacity –120 MW
Annual Energy –400,000 MWh
Cost –~$400 Million
Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project
Hydroelectric power is Alaska’s largest source of renewable
energy —and Bradley Lake is Alaska’s largest hydro facility.
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 09
Installed Capacity –≤ 180 MW
Annual Energy –100,000-
500,000 MWh
Cost –~$160-500 Million
Location –The Dixon Diversion Project is located five
miles southwest of Bradley Lake
Studying Two Options –
-Alternative 1 –Tunnel to Bradley Lake
-Alternative 2 –Run-of-River Powerhouse on Martin
River
Benefits –Could provide annual electric energy for
17,000-40,000 homes on the Railbelt. (Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project: 54,000 homes)
Status –Alternative analysis underway
Dixon Diversion Project
The proposed Dixon Diversion Project would expand the
size of the largest hydro project in Alaska —the Bradley
Lake Hydroelectric Project.
Soldotna
Homer
Seward
10
$345,000 $1.5 Million $2.5 Million
Feasibility Design and
Hydrology
Environmental Studies
Draft License Amendment
Detailed Geotechnical
Investigations
Operations/Power
Modeling
Environmental Assessment
Fiscal Year 2024
Detailed
mapping/topography
License Amendment
Consultations
Environmental Studies
Hydrology Studies
Initial Geotechnical
Investigations
Preliminary Design
Fiscal Year 2023
Establish river gauge
Initiate Bradley Lake FERC
License Amendment
Alternatives Analysis
Report (Conceptual
Design
Fiscal Year 2022
Dixon Diversion: Next Steps
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 11
Peak Demand Scenario on Coldest Day of Year —Hydro
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 12
Peak Demand Scenario on Coldest Day of Year —Wind & Solar
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 13
Railbelt
Infrastructure
Upgrades
The Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project is managed by the Bradley Lake Project
Management Committee (BPMC), which is comprised of a member from each of
the five participating Railbelt utilities —Chugach Electric Association, Golden
Valley Electric Association, Homer Electric Association, Matanuska Electric
Association, Seward Electric Association —and AEA.
AEA and the BPMC have identified several opportunities to optimize the value
provided by the project to more than 550,000 Alaskans along the Railbelt.
These projects will remove transmission constraints, improve grid resiliency, and
allow for better use of the Bradley Project’s potential by increasing its ability to
deliver more low-cost, renewable energy throughout the Railbelt grid and
enhance our ability to utilize that power most flexibly and cost-effectively.
The Railbelt region of the State has seen significant changes
to its energy infrastructure in the last 10 years. As a result of
these changes transmission enhancements are necessary.
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 14
Project Name Scope Schedule Budget
Upgrade Transmission Line from
Bradley Junction to Soldotna
Construction of a second 115 kV transmission line
from Bradley Junction to the Soldotna Substation 2022-2029 $66 Million
Upgrade Transmission Line from
Soldotna to Sterling
Upgrade of the transmission line from 115 kV to
230 kV from the Soldotna Substation to the
Sterling Substation in accordance with the results
of engineering studies
2022-2029 $17 Million
Upgrade Transmission Line from
Sterling to Quartz Creek
Upgrade of the transmission line between the
Sterling Substation and Quartz Creek Substation
(SSQ Line) from 115 kV to 230 kV
2022-2029 $53 Million
Battery Energy Storage Systems
for Grid Stabilization
Upgrade to existing BESS system in Fairbanks, and
also new BESS systems in the Kenai, and Central
regions of the grid
2019-2025 $115 Million
Study of Alternative Path to Export
Energy Off Kenai Peninsula
Study the feasibility of the best alternative
transmission line path to deliver Bradley Project
energy off the Kenai Peninsula
2022-2024 $10 Million
Required Project Work Summary
Total $261 MillionAEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 15
Constructed in the mid-1980s, the Alaska
Intertie is a 170 mile-long, 345 kilovolt (kV)
transmission line from Willow to Healy
Operated by AEA and Railbelt utilities, the
transmission line improves reliability within
Railbelt system
Allows Golden Valley Electric Association
(GVEA) to connect to and benefit from
lower cost power
Between 2008 and 2018, the
Intertie provided an average
annual cost savings of
$30 million to GVEA
customers
Alaska Intertie
16
Maximizing Clean
Energy for the Railbelt
Bradley Lake Expansion (Spillway Raise) –$4 million
Bradley-Soldotna 115kV Line –$66 million
Soldotna-Quartz Creek (and Substation) –$70 million
Bernice Lake-Beluga HVDC –$185 million
Dave’s Creek-University 230kV Line –$58 million
Grid Stabilization –$115 million
17
2019
Abeyance Rescinded
2017
Licensing Abeyance
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project History
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 18
Cook Inlet Natural Gas Value into the Future
Opportunities:
Home heating on the Railbelt (including potential future expansion)
Power generation fuel on an as-needed basis and gas storage
(CINGSA)
Industrial customers in the Cook Inlet
-Combined heat and power applications stand alone
customers
-Possibility for green hydrogen production
-In-state industrial use
-Potential pipeline transport for minerals extraction
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 19
813 W Northern Lights Blvd.
Anchorage, AK 99503
Main: (907) 771-3000
Fax: (907) 771-3044
akenergyauthority.org
@alaskaenergyauthority
@alaskaenergyauthority
Alaska Energy Authority
AEA provides
energy solutions
to meet the
unique needs of
Alaska’s rural
and urban
communities.
20
APPENDIX
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Timeline
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 22
CAPITAL BUDGET
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
Senate and House Finance Committee
March 7, 2022
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
AEA Active Projects
and Services
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 02
Program Funding Sources FY2023 Proposed
Electrical Emergencies State General Fund $ 200.0
Strategic Plan for Railbelt Assets Fiscal Year 2022 Supplemental General Fund 2,500.0
Bulk Fuel Tank Farm Upgrades State Match 5,500.0
Bulk Fuel Tank Farm Upgrades Federal Receipt Authority 7,500.0
Renewable Energy Fund (REF)PCE Excess Earnings via REF Capitalization 15,000.0
Rural Power System Upgrades PCE Excess Earnings 10,000.0
Rural Power System Upgrades Federal Receipt Authority 10,000.0
Volkswagen Settlement Interest Earnings Receipt Authority (Statutory Designated)400.0
Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Fiscal Year 2022 Supplemental General Fund 1,500.0
Total $ 52,600.0
FY2023 Capital Budget Overview (Thousands)
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 03
AEA provides support when an electric
utility has lost, or will lose ability to
generate or transmit power
In the Fiscal Year 2022, $200,000 was
appropriated.
During the last five years there have
been four electrical emergencies on
average
The average cost of an electrical
emergency assistance is approximately
$45,000 eachState General Fund: $200,000CAPITAL
REQUEST:
Electrical Emergency
Response
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 04
Develop an updated Railbelt
Integrated Resource Plan
Focus on un-constraining
transmission congestion on the
bulk power system
Utilize the least cost power
opportunities on the
interconnected transmission
system FY22 Supplemental General Fund:
$2.5 Million
CAPITAL
REQUEST:
Strategic Plan For
Railbelt Assets
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 05
~400 rural bulk fuel facilities
Goal —code compliant fuel storage
facilities and prevention of spills and
contamination
Aging infrastructure, erosion, and
catastrophic failure
Active projects —8 full and 18
Maintenance and Improvement
Deferred maintenance unmet
$800 million
State Match: $5.5 MillionFederal Receipt Authority:$7.5 Million
CAPITAL
REQUEST:
Bulk Fuel Tank Farm
Upgrades
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 06
REF incentivizes the development of qualifying and
competitively selected renewable energy projects
Since inception, the program to date has awarded 244
grants totaling $275 million; 99 projects are in operation,
27 are in development
Legislature approved all 11 AEA-recommended
projects as submitted for Round 13, for a total of $4.75
million in available grant funds
Solicited for Round 14; application deadline was
January 18, 2022; 39 applicants —$15 million in
Governor’s Fiscal Year 2023 proposed budget
Alaska Statute 42.45.085(B)(PCE Excess Earnings)
REF program sunsets on June 30, 2023
PCE Excess Earnings:
$15 Million
CAPITAL
REQUEST:
Renewable Energy
Fund (REF)
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 07
~197 eligible communities
Goal —improve power system
efficiency, safety, and reliability
Aging infrastructure and Operation and
Maintenance
Active projects —11 full and 40
Maintenance and Improvement / Diesel
Emissions Reduction Act
Deferred maintenance unmet is over
$300 million
Alaska Statute 42.45.085(B) (PCE Excess
Earnings)
PCE Excess Earnings: $10 Million
Federal Receipt Authority:
$10 Million
CAPITALREQUEST:
Rural Power
System Upgrades
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 08
VW Trust Agreement requires
consistency with the terms of the
agreement approved by the Trustee
Allocation of VW Trust Interest Earnings
is estimated at $400,000:
-School Bus Replacement –65%
-DERA Diesel Genset Replacement –15%
-Electric Vehicle Infrastructure –15%
-Public Transit Bus Replacement –5%Receipt Authority (Statutory
Designated): $400,000
CAPITAL
REQUEST:
Volkswagen (VW) Settlement
Interest Earnings
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 09
Build out of Phase 2 and 3 of
an EV fast-charging network on
Alaska’s highway system and
community-based Level 2 EV
chargers to resolve range
anxiety
Capital request would be used
to leverage federal match
FY22 Supplemental General
Fund: $1.5 Million
CAPITAL
REQUEST:
Electric Vehicle
Infrastructure
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 10
813 W Northern Lights Blvd.
Anchorage, AK 99503
Main: (907) 771-3000
Fax: (907) 771-3044
akenergyauthority.org
@alaskaenergyauthority
@alaskaenergyauthority
Alaska Energy Authority
AEA provides
energy solutions
to meet the
unique needs of
Alaska’s rural
and urban
communities.
11
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:Rep. Calvin Schrage
Cc:"Rep. Bryce Edgmon"; Rep. Chris Tuck; Representative Tiffany Zulkosky; Rep. Matt Claman; Rep. George
Rauscher; Rep. Zack Fields; Rep. James Kaufman; Curtis W. Thayer; Jennifer L. Bertolini; TW Patch
Subject:AEA 2022.03.01 HB 358 Energy Committee Response.docx
Date:Wednesday, March 2, 2022 12:51:27 PM
Attachments:2022.03.01 HB 358 Energy Committee Response.pdf
image001.png
image002.png
Mr., Chairman,
Attached is the Energy Committee’s request for a “look back” regarding the cost of
administering the Renewable Energy Grant Fund program. Please let me know if you need any
additional information. Appreciate your efforts in advancing this legislation.
Curtis
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
From: Jennifer L. Bertolini <JBertolini@akenergyauthority.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 12:43 PM
To: Curtis W. Thayer <cthayer@akenergyauthority.org>
Subject: 2022.03.01 HB 358 Energy Committee Response.docx
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
RGYAUTHORITY.ORG
Renewable Energy Grant Fund
3 YR Look Back
Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) program administration includes:
Program Management and oversight
Grant Management
Project Management
Technical Support
Accounting Support
The costs of administrering the program are dependent on:
Program funding levels
Volume of active projects in a given year
Technical oversight required for new and existing
Out year costs are dependent on those factors and therefore not known at this
time.
Alaska Energy Authority
Renewable Energy Grant (38 Active Grants)
Administrative Expenses YOY 2019-2021
No.Name FY19 FY20 FY21
72000 Travel 6,610.02$ 1,500.65$ 164.00$
73000 Contractual 1,042,410.56$ 887,931.88$ 1,030,923.82$
74000 Supplies 7,441.95$ 4,517.66$ 14,413.59$
75000 Equipment & Other 1,759.67$ 2,311.09$ 1,728.89$
TOTAL 1,058,222.20$ 896,261.28$ 1,047,230.30$
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2
Renewable Energy Grant Fund
FY 2021 Detail
No.Name Net Change Balance
70000 State AR Expense
71002 Personal Services
72000 Travel
72508 Field Per Diem-In State 164.00 164.00
73000 Contractual
73115 Other Professional Services 104,282.28 104,282.28
73116 Other Professional Servc.-SOA 101,035.86 101,035.86
73141 Legal Services-SOA 1,232.79 1,232.79
73150 AIDEA Staff-Prof Services 786,335.38 786,335.38
73301 Telephone, Internet, and Cable 17,162.76 17,162.76
73302 Postage 1,997.90 1,997.90
73460 Freight & Express Charges 19.52 19.52
73502 Advertising/Printing/Binding 4,157.03 4,157.03
73503 Subscriptions & Info Services 6,731.24 6,731.24
73600 Building Utilities 6,520.38 6,520.38
73710 Other R&M 665.42 665.42
73900 Building Other 256.10 256.10
73903 Employee Tuition & Fees 264.66 264.66
73905 Recording Fees 262.50 262.50
74000 Supplies
74220 Stationery & Office Supplies 8,019.78 8,019.78
74221 Food Supplies 240.79 240.79
74560 Computer Commodities 3,031.42 3,031.42
74760 Vehicle R&M and Gas 779.74 779.74
74800 Materials & Supplies-Warehouse 1,726.69 1,726.69
74910 Other Supplies 615.17 615.17
75000 Equipment & Other
75050 Office Equipment & Furniture 1,728.89 1,728.89
79999 General & Admin Exp, Total 1,047,230.30 1,047,230.30
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:David Scott; melissa.kookesh@alaska.gov
Cc:Jennifer L. Bertolini; Curtis W. Thayer
Subject:RE: Stedman request
Date:Thursday, March 31, 2022 1:46:29 PM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
Stedman Request PCE Data IPEC 2010-2021.xlsx
David,
This is likely more information then you needed---but let me know if you have any
questions.
Curtis
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
From: David Scott <David.Scott@akleg.gov>
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 4:15 PM
To: melissa.kookesh@alaska.gov
Cc: Curtis W. Thayer <cthayer@akenergyauthority.org>
Subject: Stedman request
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi Melissa & Curtis:
Senator Stedman is requesting to receive the data (in excel if possible) for IPEC that is in the
attached report.
Can we please get the data from 2010 up to the most recent available?
Thanks,
Dave
David Scott
Office of Senator Stedman
465-3712
PCE DATA - Inside Passage Electric (IPEC) - 2010 THRU 2021
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
A B C D H I K L M N O P Q R T
Year Utility/Community
Last Reported
Residential
Rate (based on
500 kWh)
Last PCE
Rate
Applied
Residential
Customers
Community
Facilities
Eligible PCE
kWh -
Residential
Eligible PCE
kWh -
Community
Facilities
Total Eligible
PCE kWh
PCE Payments
Made Total kWh Sold
Total Fuel
Used
Diesel
(Gallons)
Total Fuel Used
Diesel (Cost)
Avg Price of
Fuel ($/gal)
Total kWh
Generated (Diesel)
2021 Angoon PCE 0.61$ 0.32$ 200 8 613,324 169,634 782,958 209,942$ 1,598,471 125,526 249,274$ 1.99$ 1,804,812
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.61$ 0.32$ 218 1 592,612 22,474 615,086 165,859$ 1,170,440 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.61$ 0.32$ 410 27 1,438,885 589,378 2,028,263 545,184$ 4,338,853 220,011 431,834$ 1.96$ 3,202,358
Kake PCE 0.61$ 0.32$ 237 14 809,657 188,752 998,409 267,452$ 1,992,988 115,213 229,518$ 1.99$ 1,735,436
Klukwan PCE 0.61$ 0.32$ 50 9 176,215 79,800 256,015 68,649$ 430,716 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,115 59 3,630,693 1,050,038 4,680,731 1,257,086$ 9,531,468 460,750 910,626$ 1.98$ 6,742,606
2020 Angoon PCE 0.60$ 0.33$ 195 8 583,441 186,588 770,029 268,609$ 1,518,280 119,701 324,598$ 2.71$ 1,717,656
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.60$ 0.33$ 211 1 569,144 1,495 570,639 204,882$ 1,099,212 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.60$ 0.33$ 392 27 1,439,416 615,497 2,054,913 717,931$ 4,283,328 234,537 637,745$ 2.72$ 3,436,087
Kake PCE 0.60$ 0.33$ 237 15 766,406 180,127 946,533 330,644$ 1,967,777 148,456 402,756$ 2.71$ 2,276,881
Klukwan PCE 0.60$ 0.33$ 48 7 174,349 78,960 253,309 88,371$ 439,728 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,083 58 3,532,756 1,062,667 4,595,423 1,610,437$ 9,308,325 502,694 1,365,098$ 2.72$ 7,430,624
2020 Angoon PCE 0.60$ 0.34$ 196 8 596,805 227,406 824,211 285,268$ 1,525,400 124,458 351,176$ 2.82$ 1,717,656
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.60$ 0.34$ 214 1 543,983 1,372 545,355 189,202$ 1,102,959 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.60$ 0.34$ 382 27 1,359,108 608,052 1,967,160 681,485$ 4,026,944 263,981 740,627$ 2.81$ 3,436,087
Kake PCE 0.60$ 0.34$ 247 15 758,073 185,962 944,035 327,248$ 1,891,144 153,514 432,531$ 2.82$ 2,276,881
Klukwan PCE 0.60$ 0.34$ 47 9 178,361 78,120 256,481 88,731$ 436,887 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 60 3,436,330 1,100,912 4,537,242 1,571,934$ 8,983,334 541,953 1,524,334$ 2.81$ 7,430,624
2018 Angoon PCE 0.56$ 0.31$ 193 8 616,778 221,842 838,620 255,108$ 1,581,236 120,226 294,298$ 2.45$ 1,792,705
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.56$ 0.31$ 210 1 564,530 1,436 565,966 172,074$ 1,070,801 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.56$ 0.31$ 377 28 1,384,370 630,574 2,014,944 613,082$ 4,198,932 246,002 603,533$ 2.45$ 3,486,555
Kake PCE 0.56$ 0.31$ 238 15 787,631 192,659 980,290 298,322$ 1,968,818 152,721 372,245$ 2.44$ 2,242,369
Klukwan PCE 0.56$ 0.31$ 48 9 179,428 79,660 259,088 78,784$ 460,990 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,066 61 3,532,737 1,126,171 4,658,908 1,417,370$ 9,280,777 518,949 1,270,077$ 7.34$ 7,521,629
2017 Angoon PCE 0.53$ 0.29$ 199 8 637,647 201,605 839,252 237,010$ 1,598,233 126,487 271,940$ 2.15$ 1,832,776
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.53$ 0.29$ 214 1 561,013 1,399 562,412 159,481$ 1,108,722 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.53$ 0.29$ 387 28 1,401,108 618,634 2,019,742 573,051$ 4,228,766 233,786 496,226$ 2.12$ 3,546,296
Kake PCE 0.53$ 0.29$ 245 14 832,783 202,815 1,035,598 293,382$ 1,991,469 169,760 365,590$ 2.15$ 2,229,319
Klukwan PCE 0.53$ 0.29$ 49 9 179,816 78,120 257,936 73,012$ 438,378 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,094 60 3,612,367 1,102,573 4,714,940 1,335,936$ 9,365,568 530,033 1,133,756$ 2.14$ 7,608,391
PCE DATA - Inside Passage Electric (IPEC) - 2010 THRU 2021
1
A B C D H I K L M N O P Q R T
Year Utility/Community
Last Reported
Residential
Rate (based on
500 kWh)
Last PCE
Rate
Applied
Residential
Customers
Community
Facilities
Eligible PCE
kWh -
Residential
Eligible PCE
kWh -
Community
Facilities
Total Eligible
PCE kWh
PCE Payments
Made Total kWh Sold
Total Fuel
Used
Diesel
(Gallons)
Total Fuel Used
Diesel (Cost)
Avg Price of
Fuel ($/gal)
Total kWh
Generated (Diesel)
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
2016 Angoon PCE 0.47$ 0.24$ 196 8 646,158 230,281 876,439 237,341$ 1,587,342 126,011 322,921$ 2.56$ 1,826,961
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.47$ 0.24$ 216 1 536,941 1,198 538,139 145,774$ 1,129,877 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.47$ 0.24$ 391 28 1,431,233 556,575 1,987,808 538,322$ 4,197,469 223,262 579,792$ 2.60$ 3,307,649
Kake PCE 0.47$ 0.24$ 247 14 862,343 223,058 1,085,401 294,458$ 2,002,393 170,593 436,930$ 2.56$ 2,294,968
Klukwan PCE 0.47$ 0.24$ 48 9 168,423 66,998 235,421 63,712$ 382,281 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,098 60 3,645,098 1,078,110 4,723,208 1,279,606$ 9,299,362 519,866 1,339,643$ 2.58$ 7,429,578
2015 Angoon PCE 0.59$ 0.37$ 200 8 640,012 238,475 878,487 339,194$ 1,613,326 130,963 477,228$ 3.64$ 1,842,917
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.59$ 0.37$ 204 1 522,260 1,082 523,342 201,778$ 1,082,198 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.59$ 0.37$ 391 28 1,433,055 570,293 2,003,348 772,418$ 4,323,699 314,793 1,146,242$ 3.64$ 4,734,244
Kake PCE 0.59$ 0.37$ 229 16 854,510 212,208 1,066,718 412,721$ 2,379,443 201,609 736,280$ 3.65$ 2,739,418
Klukwan PCE 0.59$ 0.37$ 48 9 163,515 65,905 229,420 88,374$ 345,076 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,072 62 3,613,352 1,087,963 4,701,315 1,814,485$ 9,743,742 647,365 2,359,749$ 3.65$ 9,316,579
2014 Angoon PCE 0.62$ 0.40$ 196 8 645,313 207,929 853,242 343,660$ 1,571,232 130,625 507,538$ 3.89$ 1,797,775
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.62$ 0.40$ 207 1 517,848 949 518,797 208,570$ 1,065,433 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.62$ 0.40$ 372 28 1,419,497 584,832 2,004,329 805,765$ 4,265,453 314,168 1,224,178$ 3.90$ 4,654,869
Kake PCE 0.62$ 0.40$ 230 15 847,737 226,350 1,074,087 437,736$ 2,758,557 220,851 863,502$ 3.91$ 3,078,307
Klukwan PCE 0.62$ 0.40$ 49 9 157,706 64,362 222,068 89,235$ 352,516 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,054 61 3,588,101 1,084,422 4,672,523 1,884,966$ 10,013,191 665,644 2,595,218$ 3.90$ 9,530,951
2013 Angoon PCE 199 8 675,988 214,574 890,562 380,598$ 1,600,238 133,093 557,471$ 4.19$ 1,823,517
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.68$ 0.46$ 206 1 544,126 789 544,915 233,374$ 1,100,020 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.68$ 0.46$ 371 28 1,449,839 557,663 2,007,502 858,064$ 4,274,532 315,632 1,322,017$ 4.19$ 4,659,732
Kake PCE 0.68$ 0.46$ 236 15 905,211 230,706 1,135,917 485,361$ 2,672,032 205,961 862,556$ 4.19$ 2,952,396
Klukwan PCE 0.68$ 0.46$ 49 9 165,142 65,911 231,053 98,677$ 334,431 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,061 61 3,740,306 1,069,643 4,809,949 2,056,074$ 9,981,253 654,686 2,742,045$ 4.19$ 9,435,645
2012 Angoon PCE 198 8 693,284 248,094 941,378 397,755$ 1,815,648 139,419 553,914$ 3.97$ 2,033,389
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.63$ 0.42$ 203 1 554,558 915 555,473 234,912$ 1,111,104 - $ -$ --
Hoonah PCE 0.63$ 0.42$ 368 32 1,447,813 567,425 2,015,238 852,696$ 4,344,829 328,490 1,306,174$ 3.98$ 4,803,438
Kake PCE 0.63$ 0.42$ 235 16 893,785 238,531 1,132,316 479,138$ 2,609,982 216,348 862,275$ 3.99$ 2,886,541
Klukwan PCE 0.63$ 0.42$ 46 9 170,451 64,227 234,678 99,133$ 365,384 - $ -$ --
Utility Company Total 1,050 66 3,759,891 1,119,192 4,879,083 2,063,635$ 10,246,947 684,257 2,722,363$ 3.98$ 9,723,368
PCE DATA - Inside Passage Electric (IPEC) - 2010 THRU 2021
1
A B C D H I K L M N O P Q R T
Year Utility/Community
Last Reported
Residential
Rate (based on
500 kWh)
Last PCE
Rate
Applied
Residential
Customers
Community
Facilities
Eligible PCE
kWh -
Residential
Eligible PCE
kWh -
Community
Facilities
Total Eligible
PCE kWh
PCE Payments
Made Total kWh Sold
Total Fuel
Used
Diesel
(Gallons)
Total Fuel Used
Diesel (Cost)
Avg Price of
Fuel ($/gal)
Total kWh
Generated (Diesel)
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
2011 Angoon PCE 0.61$ 0.38$ 193 8 657,310 226,279 883,589 324,662$ 1,825,732 141,499 435,543$ 3.08$ 2,052,011
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.61$ 0.38$ 200 1 571,769 1,030 572,799 207,094$ 1,207,436 - -$ -$ -
Hoonah PCE 0.61$ 0.38$ 353 32 1,437,333 540,738 1,978,071 719,741$ 4,361,553 325,172 1,004,066$ 3.09$ 4,760,212
Kake PCE 0.61$ 0.38$ 226 13 835,925 172,646 1,008,571 377,050$ 2,285,784 186,054 574,210$ 3.09$ 2,581,902
Klukwan PCE 0.61$ 0.38$ 49 8 172,657 56,420 229,077 83,605$ 375,753 - -$ -$ -
Utility Company Total 1,021 62 3,674,994 997,113 4,672,107 1,712,151$ 10,056,258 652,725 2,013,819$ 3.09$ 9,394,125
2010 Angoon PCE 0.57$ 194 7 599,310 207,930 807,240 258,263$ 1,739,193 137,730 348,708$ 2.53$ 1,953,750
Chilkat Valley PCE 0.57$ 36.30$ 204 1 581,995 987 582,982 172,742$ 1,163,542 - -$ -$ -
Hoonah PCE 0.57$ 36.30$ 358 28 1,420,263 497,121 1,917,384 567,816$ 4,274,752 330,476 864,850$ 2.62$ 4,702,798
Kake PCE 0.57$ 36.30$ 221 12 831,966 82,500 914,466 295,143$ 2,197,459 189,678 495,702$ 2.61$ 2,501,933
Klukwan PCE 0.57$ 36.30$ 47 7 159,521 31,314 190,835 62,828$ 370,507 - -$ -$ -
Utility Company Total 1,024 55 3,593,055 819,852 4,412,907 1,356,792$ 9,745,453 657,884 1,709,260$ 2.60$ 9,158,481
ELECTRIC VEHICLE
INFRASTRUCTURE
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
House Energy Committee
March 29, 2022
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
AEA EV Mission
Statement
Lead the effort to
minimize barriers
that inhibit EV
adoption in Alaska.
Dimond Center EV Car Show and Ride & Drive, Anchorage, AK
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 02
Working Group
Technical Sessions
EV Car Show / Ride and Drive
School bus in Tok
Transit bus in Juneau
MOA box truck
Installation of L2 and DCFC
EV Program
Overview
Alaska’s First Electric School Bus, Tok, AK
Capital Transit Battery-Electric Bus, Juneau, AK
03
Lack of charging infrastructure
Range anxiety
High demand charges
Cold climate performance
Market availability of electric
AWD, SUVs, and trucks
Barriers to EV
Adoption in Alaska
Dimond Center EV Car Show and Ride & Drive, Anchorage, AK
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 04
Existing and Planned EV
Fast-Charging Locations
Glenn Highway
-Chugiak –94 miles from Trapper Creek
Parks Highway
-Trapper Creek –95 mi from Cantwell
-Cantwell –38 miles from Healy
-Healy –110 miles from Fairbanks
Seward Highway
Seward –46 miles from Cooper Landing
Sterling Highway
Homer –76 miles from Soldotna
Soldotna –46 miles from Cooper Landing
Cooper Landing –95 miles from Anchorage
Seward Highway
Anchorage –27 miles from Chugiak
(50-12 kW CSS and CHAdeMo)
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 05
Two sites completed in Anchorage 2021
Linny Pacillo Parking Garage
Snowden Administration Building
Two more sites planned for 2022-2023
AEA office parking lot
Ted Stevens Anchorage International
Airport
State and Federal SEP funds
Level 2 Chargers
At State Facilities
EV Level 2 Charger, Linny Pacillo Parking Garage, Anchorage, AKEV Level 2 Charger, Snowden Building, Anchorage, AK
EV Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Program -$2.5 Billion
State, local, tribal governments, port
authorities, metropolitan planning
organizations
Partnerships with private entities
Procurement, installation, 5 years O&M
80% federal share
20% match from applicant or
private entity
50% Alternative Fuel Corridors
Publicly accessible Priority for rural
areas, underserved communities, areas
with limited access to infrastructure
Procurement, installation, 5 years O&M
Also preconstruction, planning,
feasibility, public education
$15 million cap per project
80% federal share
20% match from private entity
50% Community Grant Program
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 07
>$50 Million for Alaska FY22-FY26
-$7.8 million in FY22
EV Fast-charging Installations
-4 Combined Charging System Connectors
->150 kW each
-< 50 miles apart
-Within 1 mile of highway
Designated Alternative Fuel Corridors
-Until fully built out
Interstate Highway System Priority
Implementation Plan due August 1, 2022
Federal Share –80%
Private entity or other –20%
NEVI Formula Program
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 08
National EV
Infrastructure
(NEVI) Formula
Program
Schedule
09
NEVI Formula Program Timeline
AFC
Nominations
Due
NEVI
Implementation
Plan Due
DOT/DOE
Joint Office
Approves Plan
MAY 13,
2022
AUG. 1,
2022
SEPT. 30,
2022
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 10
Submitted comments to the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) Request for
information (RFI)
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with
Departments of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for
data sharing
MOA with Department of Transportation &
Public Facilities (DOT&PF)
Stakeholder outreach (utilities, municipalities,
other interested parties)
Interagency coordination (DEC, DMV, DOA
DOT&PF, and DNR Parks)
Gather baseline data (registered EVs, existing
and planned Electric Vehicle Supply
Equipment)
Request For Proposal (RFP) for EV contractor
out to bid
Release RFI/RFP for interested site hosts
Nominate Alternative Fuel Corridors
Continue interagency coordination,
stakeholder outreach, data compilation
NEVI Implementation Plan due 8/1/2022
AEA EV Program Planning Activities
AEA EV Infrastructure | House Energy Committee| March 22, 2022 11
813 W Northern Lights Blvd.
Anchorage, AK 99503
Main: (907) 771-3000
Fax: (907) 771-3044
akenergyauthority.org
@alaskaenergyauthority
@alaskaenergyauthority
Alaska Energy Authority
12
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:Laib.Allensworth@akleg.gov; Tyler.Newcombe@akleg.gov; Emma Torkelson
Cc:Jennifer L. Bertolini; Curtis W. Thayer
Subject:Alaska Energy Authority--REF Projects by Energy Region + Rd14 Summary - REF Ext Bill - Senate Finance
Committee Request
Date:Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:15:56 PM
Attachments:REF_PROJECTS_BY_ENERGY_REGION_AND_RD14_SUMMARY.xlsx
image002.png
image003.png
Attached is a summary of all REF projects by Energy Region, along with a summary of those Rd14
applications under review, as requested by the Senate Finance Committee for the REF Extension bill.
Those REF projects under development are denoted by blue highlight.
Please let me know if you need anything else.
Thank you---Curtis
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
Energy RegionPJ CodeLocationCodeAEA Project Name Community NameHouseDistrictSenate District PopulationPopulationCount YR.Native Corporation Electric Utility Budget Spent Budget Spent403038 100Adak Diesel Hybrid - ClosedAdak Aleutians 37 S 298 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators76,369.00 76,369.00 5,756.00 5,756.00407106100Adak Hydro Power Generator R9-ClosedAdak Aleutians 37 S 298 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators----406010105Akutan Geothermal Development Prj - ClosedAkutan Aleutians 37 S 990 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators5,463,792.00 5,463,792.00 441,689.85 881,759.17407061 105Loud Creek Hydro-ClosedAkutan Aleutians 37 S 990 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators206,295.92 206,295.92 - -407062 105Town Crk Hydro-Design for Repairs/Upgrades -ClosedAkutan Aleutians 37 S 990 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators162,000.00 162,000.00 - -407072 105Akutan Hydroelectric System Repair/Upgrade-ClosedAkutan Aleutians 37 S 990 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators1,391,000.00 1,391,000.00 135,633.35 135,633.35403039 124Atka Hydro Dispatched Excess Elect. Power-CLOSEDAtka Aleutians 37 S 50 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators56,702.31 56,702.31 16,179.09 16,179.09407033 124Chuniisax Cr Hydroelectric Construction - ClosedAtka Aleutians 37 S 50 2019 Aleut Corporation Individual Generators996,000.00 996,000.00 1,918,891.00 1,953,836.59403069 167Cold Bay Waste Heat Recovery Project - ClosedCold Bay Aleutians 37 S 60 2019 Aleut Corporation City of Seward17,524.50 17,524.50 1,188.75 1,188.75410061 167Cold Bay Electric Utility Wind Energy R4-ClosedCold Bay Aleutians 37 S 60 2019 Aleut Corporation City of Seward57,591.91 57,591.91 7,987.00 7,987.00410079 210False Pass Wind Energy Project R4-CLOSEDFalse Pass Aleutians 37 S 42 2019 Aleut Corporation City of Diomede68,653.75 68,653.75 5,000.00 5,000.00407090278Waterfall Creek Hydroelectric Project - ClosedKing Cove Aleutians 37 S 919 2019 Aleut Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated2,800,000.00 2,800,000.00 1,500,000.00 2,746,513.24410070341Nelson Lagoon Wind Energy Project R4-ClosedNelson Lagoon Aleutians 37 S 30 2019 Aleut Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated75,756.47 75,756.47 7,260.00 7,260.00410028 351Nikolski Wind Integration Construction - ClosedNikolski Aleutians 37 S 17 2019 Aleut Corporation North Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems409,430.00 409,430.00 41,500.00 69,082.24410029 408St. George Wind Farm Construction-ClosedSaint George Aleutians 37 S 59 2019 Aleut Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated1,485,167.34 1,485,167.34 - -403040411Saint Paul Fuel Economy Upgrade R3-CLOSEDSaint Paul Aleutians 37 S 385 2019 Aleut Corporation City and Borough of Wrangell98,149.00 98,149.00 19,238.52 19,238.52409023 411St. Paul Wind Diesel Project R3 - ClosedSaint Paul Aleutians 37 S 385 2019 Aleut Corporation City and Borough of Wrangell1,790,301.15 1,790,301.15 191,605.61 191,605.61407051 414Aleutians East Borough Feasibility Study - ClosedSand Point Aleutians 37 S 897 2019 Aleut Corporation City of Peterburg25,000.00 25,000.00 15,000.00 15,177.25410050414Sand Point Wind-ClosedSand Point Aleutians 37 S 897 2019 Aleut Corporation City of Peterburg639,494.85 639,494.85 437,900.00 437,900.00410100414Sand Point Excess Wind Utilization - ClosedSand Point Aleutians 37 S 897 2019 Aleut Corporation City of Peterburg307,120.00 307,120.00 79,550.51 79,550.51403032 471Unalaska Heat Recovery Construction-CLOSEDUnalaska Aleutians 37 S 4,592 2019 Aleut Corporation1,300,000.00 1,300,000.00 - -407116471Unalaska Wind - FeasibilityUnalaska Aleutians 37 S 4,592 2019 Aleut Corporation139,000.00 - - -17,565,348.20 17,426,348.20 4,824,379.68 6,573,667.32403070139Brevig Mission Water System Heat Recovery-ClosedBrevig Mission Bering Straits 39 T 451 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationPaxson Lodge113,076.49 113,076.49 20,574.69 20,574.69410077 202Elim Wind Feasibility R4-ClosedElim Bering Straits 39 T 351 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationCircle Electric , LLC73,234.00 73,234.00 3,854.00 3,854.00410080 224Gambell Wind Energy Recovery RD5-CLOSEDGambell Bering Straits 39 T 667 2019 Bering Straits Native Corporation Copper Valley Electric Association, Incorporated239,950.00 239,950.00 12,645.00 12,645.00407107 296Koyuk Water System Heat Recovery R9Koyuk Bering Straits 39 T 348 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative90,922.00 81,023.70 910.00 8,393.74410075 296Koyuk Wind Feasibility R4-ClosedKoyuk Bering Straits 39 T 348 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative16,142.00 16,142.00 850.00 850.00406013 354Pilgrim Hot Springs Geothermal Assess R3,R4-ClosedNome Bering Straits 39 T 3,6902019 Bering Straits Native CorporationKipnuk Light Plant1,943,410.72 1,943,410.72 2,313,093.00 2,313,093.00409017 354Nome Banner Peak Wind Farm Trans Const-ClosedNome Bering Straits 39 T 3,6902019 Bering Straits Native CorporationKipnuk Light Plant801,000.00 801,000.00 89,000.00 122,871.43410030354Nome/Newton Peak Wind Farm Construction-ClsdNome Bering Straits 39 T 3,6902019 Bering Straits Native CorporationKipnuk Light Plant8,069,000.00 8,069,000.00 1,159,641.56 1,159,641.56403062 415Savoonga Heat Recovery System R6 CLOSEDSavoonga Bering Straits 39 T 735 2019 Bering Straits Native Corporationn/a425,234.32 425,234.32 10,452.57 10,452.57410053 423Shaktoolik Wind-ClosedShaktoolik Bering Straits 39 T 272 2019 Bering Straits Native Corporation Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative Incorporated2,465,633.00 2,465,633.00 374,280.00 374,280.00410081 423Shaktoolik Surplus Wind Energy Recovery RD5-CLOSEDShaktoolik Bering Straits 39 T 272 2019 Bering Straits Native Corporation Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative Incorporated239,230.00 239,230.00 12,645.00 12,645.00403055 425Shishmaref Heat Recovery Project R5ShishmarefBering Straits 39 T 577 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationMatanuska Electric Association, Incorporated310,841.00 42,418.32 16,360.00 13,741.72407108 425Shishmaref Wind Feasibility&Conceptual Design R9ShishmarefBering Straits 39 T 577 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationMatanuska Electric Association, Incorporated152,000.00 625.00 8,000.00 251.00403065 436Stebbins Heat Recovery Project R6-ClosedStebbins Bering Straits 39 T 618 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationHomer Electric Association, Incorporated1,319,088.00 1,319,088.00 72,825.00 72,825.00410066436Stebbins/St Michael Wind Feas.FD&Permitting-CLOSEDStebbins Bering Straits 39 T 618 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationHomer Electric Association, Incorporated479,750.00 479,750.00 170,000.00 171,348.43410054451Teller Wind Analysis-ClosedTellerBering Straits 39 T 235 2019 Bering Straits Native CorporationAnchorage Municipal Light and Power98,165.00 98,165.00 - -410031 470Unalakleet Wind Farm Construction - ClosedUnalakleet Bering Straits 39 T 721 2019 Bering Straits Native Corporation4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 619,807.00 619,807.00407105 477Wales Water System Heat Recovery R9-CLOSEDWales Bering Straits 39 T 150 2019 Bering Straits Native Corporation69,905.00 63,510.00 - -20,906,581.53 20,470,490.55 4,884,937.82 4,917,274.14407034153Indian Creek Hydro Feasibility StudyChignik Bristol Bay37 S 95 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationMatanuska Electric Association, Incorporated198,513.12 198,513.12 - -407036154Chignik Lagoon Hydroelectric Final Design - ClosedChignik Lagoon Bristol Bay37 S 81 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationIndividual Generators150,000.00 150,000.00 - -407091 154Packer's Creek Hydroelectric Project - ClosedChignik Lagoon Bristol Bay37 S 81 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationIndividual Generators4,346,196.00 4,346,196.00 1,046,938.04 1,046,938.04410033 155Chignik Lake Area Wind-Hydro Final Design-ClosedChignik Lake Bristol Bay37 S 57 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationAlaska Power Company74,850.60 74,850.60 9,854.30 9,854.30410088 196Egegik Wind Feasibility Study R6-ClosedEgegik Bristol Bay37 S 85 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationG & K, Incorporated60,000.00 60,000.00 16,377.52 16,377.52408002 256Kvichak River - Ocean & River Energy-ClosedIgiugig Bristol Bay37 S 56 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationIndividual Generators704,905.21 704,905.21 - -410098 256Igiugig Wind Resource Feasibility & CDR-CLOSEDIgiugig Bristol Bay37 S 56 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationIndividual Generators80,000.00 80,000.00 30,000.00 30,000.00410089 291Kokhanok - High-penetration Wind Energy R6Kokhanok Bristol Bay37 S 157 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationNorth Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems185,000.00 96,139.78 5,000.00 -407111 292Nuyakuk River Hydro - Conceptual DesignKoliganek Bristol Bay37 S 195 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationTDX Adak Generating, LLC1,000,000.00 - - -410072 292New Koliganek Wind & Heat Recovery Feasb-ClosedKoliganek Bristol Bay37 S 195 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationTDX Adak Generating, LLC77,853.48 77,853.48 2,575.00 2,575.00402026301Lake & Peninsula Borough Wood Boilers R1,R4-CLOSEDLake & Peninsula Borough Bristol Bay1,622 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationUngusrag Power Company280,421.41 280,421.41 18,386.64 18,386.64407035 301Nushagak Area Hydropower Project R3-ClosedLake & Peninsula Borough Bristol Bay1,622 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationUngusrag Power Company1,873,223.18 1,873,223.18 - -410032 301Lake Pen Borough Wind Feasibility Study-ClosedLake & Peninsula Borough Bristol Bay1,622 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationUngusrag Power Company184,000.00 184,000.00 40,000.00 60,562.47410087 307Levelock Wind Reconnaissance Study R6-ClosedLevelock Bristol Bay37 S 70 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative10,000.00 10,000.00 1,636.00 1,636.00403068 344New Stuyahok Heat Recovery R6 - ClosedNew Stuyahok Bristol Bay37 S 476 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative484,897.27 484,897.27 62,000.00 59,931.12409025 344New Stuyahok Wind-Feasibility Analysis R3-ClosedNew Stuyahok Bristol Bay37 S 476 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative142,500.00 142,500.00 8,885.00 8,885.00407103 375Pedro Bay/Knutson Creek Hydroelectric Project R6Pedro BayBristol Bay37 S 36 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationMatanuska Electric Association, Incorporated290,000.00 249,620.95 2,500.00 2,577.98409026 380Pilot Point Wind Power & Heat R3 - ClosedPilot Point Bristol Bay 37 S 81 2019 Bristol Bay Native Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated1,421,240.00 1,421,240.00 111,659.76 111,659.76407073 391Port Alsworth Hydroelectric Construction R3-ClosedPort Alsworth Bristol Bay37 S 226 2019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedAlaska Power Company----407098 391Tazimina Hydroelectric Project Capacity Inc-ClosedPort Alsworth Bristol Bay37 S 226 2019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedAlaska Power Company160,000.00 160,000.00 34,923.45 34,923.45403056456Togiak Waste Heat Recovery ProjectTogiak Bristol Bay37 S 873 2019 Bristol Bay Native Corporation443,030.00 146,158.60 15,000.00 15,000.00407114334Naknek Wind and Solar - FeasibilityNaknek Bristol Bay37 S 488 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative103,500.00 - - -410062 394Port Heiden Wind Turbine Project R4-ClosedPort Heiden Bristol Bay37 S 105 2019 Bristol Bay Native CorporationMetlakatla Power and Light----12,270,130.27 10,740,519.60 1,405,735.71 1,419,307.28407071 149Chenega Bay Hydro Design and Permitting - ClosedChenega Bay Copper River/Chugach 32 P 0 0 Chugach Alaska Corporation Individual Generators242,231.05 242,231.05 34,932.95 34,932.95410096157Chisana Mountain Wind Feasibility - ClosedChisana Copper River/Chugach 3 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Igiugig Electric Company67,364.12 67,364.12 29,795.47 29,795.47402028 158Chistochina Central Wood Heating Construction-ClsdChistochina Copper River/Chugach 6 C 83 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Copper Valley Electric Association, Incorporated500,000.00 500,000.00 12,000.00 61,107.97407058 159Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project R2,R4Chitina Copper River/Chugach 6 C 85 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Alaska Power Company4,095,660.72 538,319.22 3,000,000.00 347,870.70403028 173Cordova Heat Recovery Construction - CLOSEDCordova Copper River/Chugach 32 P 2,343 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Alaska Power Company1,780,000.00 1,780,000.00 1,990,000.00 2,017,652.00407037 173Humpback Creek Hydroelectric Construction-ClosedCordova Copper River/Chugach 32 P 2,343 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Alaska Power Company4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 3,400,238.00 3,402,483.00RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS BY ENERGY REGION (*Projects highlighted in blue denote those in-development)As of October 31, 2021Renewable Energy Fund Community ContributionsAleutiansAleutians TotalBering StraitsBering Straits TotalBristol BayBristol Bay TotalCopper River/Chugach
407066173Humpback Creek Hydro Rehabilitation R3 - ClosedCordova Copper River/Chugach 32 P 2,343 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Alaska Power Company4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 5,805,000.00 6,186,291.00407119 173Cordova Hydro Storage Assessment - FeasibilityCordova Copper River/Chugach 32 P 2,343 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Alaska Power Company294,642.00 - - -402027 207Cordova Wood Processing Plant Construction-ClosedEyak Copper River/Chugach 0 0 Chugach Alaska Corporation Middle Kuskokwim Electric Cooperative, Incorporated136,760.00 136,760.00 - -402115 207Eyak Biomass Feasibility Study R4-ClosedEyak Copper River/Chugach 0 0 Chugach Alaska Corporation Middle Kuskokwim Electric Cooperative, Incorporated63,998.83 63,998.83 3,000.00 9,235.50402030234Gulkana Central Wood Heating Construction ClosedGulkana Copper River/Chugach 6 C 111 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated City of Golovin500,000.00 500,000.00 - -402019 274KennyLakeSchool Wood Fired BoilerR0,R1,R4-CLOSEDKenny Lake Copper River/Chugach 6 C 305 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Matanuska Electric Association, Incorporated648,381.23 648,381.23 17,472.04 17,472.04402029 274Kenny Lake Wood-INACTIVE DONT USEKenny Lake Copper River/Chugach 6 C 305 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Matanuska Electric Association, Incorporated----402127 324Mentasta Comm. Fac Woody Biomass Space Heat-CLOSEDMentasta Lake Copper River/Chugach 6 C 122 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Copper Valley Electric Association, Incorporated460,000.00 460,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00403057 448Tatitlek Heat Recovery Project R5-CLOSEDTatitlek Copper River/Chugach 32 P 98 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation n/a263,444.55 263,444.55 5,273.05 5,273.05410052 448Tatitlek High Penetration Wind Diesel-ClosedTatitlek Copper River/Chugach 32 P 98 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation n/a51,974.47 51,974.47 48,187.67 56,435.47402138 449Wood Boiler for the Native Vllg of Tazlina-CLOSEDTazlina Copper River/Chugach 6 C 271 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated n/a270,807.00 270,807.00 5,167.00 5,167.00407038 474Allison Lake Hydro Prj Feas. & Construction-ClosedValdez Copper River/Chugach 9 E 3,876 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation10,288,009.00 10,288,009.00 8,309.09 8,309.0927,663,272.97 23,811,289.47 14,409,375.27 12,232,025.24407059 288Terror Lake Hydroelectric Project-ClosedKodiak Island Borough Kodiak 13,001 2019 Koniag, Incorporated Inside Passage Electric Cooperative3,976,258.68 3,976,258.68 7,815,346.50 7,815,346.50407068 288Terror Lake Unit 3 Hydro Project R3 - ClosedKodiak Island Borough Kodiak 13,001 2019 Koniag, Incorporated Inside Passage Electric Cooperative248,160.00 248,160.00 200,000.00 200,000.00410025 288Pillar Mtn. Wind PH III Kodiak - ClosedKodiak Island Borough Kodiak 13,001 2019 Koniag, Incorporated Inside Passage Electric Cooperative4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00410082 288Pillar Mountain High Penetration Wind RD5 - ClosedKodiak Island Borough Kodiak 13,001 2019 Koniag, Incorporated Inside Passage Electric Cooperative7,800,000.00 7,800,000.00 7,800,000.00 7,800,000.00407039 368Old Harbor Hydroelectric R1,R4-CLOSEDOld HarborKodiak 32 P 203 2019 Koniag, Incorporated Alaska Village Electric Cooperative462,500.00 462,500.00 37,500.00 50,954.0016,486,918.68 16,486,918.68 16,852,846.50 16,866,300.50410078 103Akiachak Wind Feasibility&Conceptual Design-ClosedAkiachak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 724 2019 Calista Corporation n/a110,000.00 110,000.00 18,373.44 18,373.44403063 125Atmautluak Washeteria Heat Recovery - ClosedAtmautluak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 338 2019 Calista Corporation Elfin Cove Utility Commission349,999.97 349,999.97 10,744.00 10,744.00410065 125Atmautluak Wind Renewable Energy R4-ClosedAtmautluak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 338 2019 Calista Corporation Elfin Cove Utility Commission100,000.00 100,000.00 - -402134133Bethel Heat Recovery Assess&Concept Design-CLOSEDBethel Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 6,259 2019 Calista Corporation n/a645,613.00 623,079.00 34,503.00 34,503.00410034133Bethel Renewable Energy Project R1-ClosedBethel Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 6,259 2019 Calista Corporation n/a2,598,320.00 2,598,320.00 199,889.00 223,299.00410086133Bethel Renewable Energy Project - ClosedBethel Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 6,259 2019 Calista Corporation n/a197,170.18 197,170.18 34,794.74 34,794.74410076148Chefornak Wind Feasibility R4-CLOSEDChefornak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 457 2019 Calista Corporation Pedro Bay Village130,522.02 130,522.02 8,205.00 8,205.00403071 150Chevak Water & Vacuum Plant Heat RecoveryChevak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 1,0142019 Calista Corporation Individual Generators558,800.00 549,987.34 16,765.00 10,991.97410084150Chevak Wind Energy Recovery RD5-CLOSEDChevak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 1,0142019 Calista Corporation Individual Generators240,260.00 240,260.00 12,641.00 12,641.00410067 195Eek Wind Feasibility R4-ClosedEek Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 349 2019 Calista Corporation BC Hydro114,718.00 114,718.00 6,225.00 6,225.00403072 203Emmonak Heat Recovery System-ClosedEmmonak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 836 2019 Calista Corporation City of Nikolai684,311.77 684,311.77 20,677.00 20,677.00410055 203Emmonak/Alakanuk Wind & Transmission - ClosedEmmonak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 836 2019 Calista Corporation City of Nikolai8,000,000.00 8,000,000.00 888,889.00 891,627.00410040 249Hooper Bay Wind Farm Construction - ClosedHooper Bay Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 1,239 2019 Calista Corporation Copper Valley Electric Association, Incorporated60,179.25 60,179.25 - -407120293Airfoil for Wind Turbines - ConstructionKongiganak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 544 2019 Calista Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative108,000.00 - - -410035 293Kongiganak Wind Farm Construction - ClosedKongiganak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 544 2019 Calista Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative1,699,791.57 1,699,791.57 1,475,169.97 1,475,169.97410099 293Kongiginak Wind Heat Elect. Thermal Storage-ClosedKongiganak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 544 2019 Calista Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative274,735.01 274,735.01 9,000.00 9,000.00410068 299Kwethluk Wind Feasibility R4-ClosedKwethluk Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 814 2019 Calista Corporation Napakiak Ircinraq Power Company44,098.22 44,098.22 5,747.65 5,747.65410036300Kwigillingok Wind Farm Construction-ClosedKwigillingokLower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 374 2019 Calista Corporation City of Akiak1,600,000.00 1,600,000.00 1,600,000.00 1,600,000.00403066315Marshall Heat Recovery-W ater Treatment Plant-ClsdMarshall Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 471 2019 Calista Corporation City of Buckland177,702.30 177,702.30 6,000.00 6,000.00410069 315Marshall Wind Feasibility-ClosedMarshall Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 471 2019 Calista Corporation City of Buckland111,150.00 111,150.00 6,985.00 6,985.00410038 322Mekoryuk Wind Farm Construction-ClosedMekoryuk Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 206 2019 Calista Corporation Inside Passage Electric Cooperative3,155,765.00 3,155,765.00 390,493.00 390,493.00410083 322Mekoryuk Surplus Wind Energy Recovery RD5-CLOSEDMekoryuk Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 206 2019 Calista Corporation Inside Passage Electric Cooperative264,459.00 264,459.00 13,919.00 13,919.00410097 332Mountain Village Wind Feasibility & CDR-ClosedMountain VillageLower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 808 2019 Calista Corporation Aniak Light and Power Company95,893.00 95,893.00 5,047.00 5,047.00410063 338Napaskiak Wind, Power and Heat Recovery R4-ClosedNapaskiak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 440 2019 Calista Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative61,224.39 61,224.39 3,688.00 3,688.00403074365Nunam Iqua Heat Recovery CLOSEDNunam Iqua Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 213 2019 Calista Corporation Kwethluk Incorporated450,000.00 450,000.00 - -403064401Kwinhagak Heat Recovery - Water Treatment - ClosedQuinhagak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 716 2019 Calista Corporation City of Seward668,350.00 668,350.00 21,435.39 21,435.39410037 401Quinhagak Wind Farm Construction-ClosedQuinhagak Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 716 2019 Calista Corporation City of Seward3,437,322.00 3,437,322.00 381,924.00 381,924.00403059 407Russian Mission Heat Recovery System R5 - ClosedRussian Mission Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 350 2019 Calista Corporation Cordova Electric Cooperative, Incorporated552,157.06 552,157.06 32,000.10 32,000.10403073 409St. Mary's Heat Recovery System-ClosedSaint Mary's Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 555 2019 Calista Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated735,200.00 735,200.00 24,142.39 24,142.39407110 409Mountain Village-St. Mary's Wind IntertieR9-CLOSEDSaint Mary's Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 555 2019 Calista Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated2,042,431.00 2,042,431.00 3,117,266.00 3,117,266.00410064 409St. Mary's/ Pitka's Point Wind - ClosedSaint Mary's Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 555 2019 Calista Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated4,624,094.00 4,624,094.00 34,444.00 34,444.00402137 417Scammon Bay Community Facilities Heat Recovery-ClsScammon Bay Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 593 2019 Calista Corporation Matanuska Electric Association, Incorporated34,660.01 34,660.01 1,740.36 1,740.36407092 417Scammon Bay Hydro Design & Engineering R5-ClosedScammon Bay Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 593 2019 Calista Corporation Matanuska Electric Association, Incorporated79,636.86 79,636.86 2,792.63 2,792.63410071 417Scammon Bay Wind Feasibility R4-ClosedScammon Bay Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 39 T 593 2019 Calista Corporation Matanuska Electric Association, Incorporated142,500.00 142,500.00 16,441.00 16,441.00403058 432Sleetmute Heat Rec PowerPlant to WaterPlant CLOSEDSleetmute Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 37 S 95 2019 Calista Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated126,682.00 126,682.00 6,667.00 6,667.00410039 458Toksook Bay Wind Farm Expansion Construct.-ClosedToksook Bay Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 667 2019 Calista Corporation1,037,750.00 1,037,750.00 10,988.47 10,988.47403075 463Tuntutuliak Heat Recovery-ClosedTuntutuliakLower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 464 2019 Calista Corporation71,638.58 71,638.58 1,600,000.00 1,600,000.00410051 463Tuntutuliak High Penetration Wind Diesel-ClosedTuntutuliakLower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 464 2019 Calista Corporation1,760,000.00 1,760,000.00 164,340.00 201,492.00407112 232Goodnews Bay Wind - FeasiblityGoodnews Bay Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 38 S 284 2019 Calista Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated128,250.00 - - -411005 308Lime Village Photovoltaic Systm Retrofit R4-ClosedLime Village Lower Yukon‐Kuskokwim 37 S 15 2019 Calista Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative----37,273,384.19 37,005,787.53 10,181,937.14 10,239,464.11402025 1000Biomass-fired Organic Rankine Cycle System-ClosedStatewide Projects & Studies Non Specified 0 0 Non Specified1,895,725.00 1,895,725.00 3,195,277.82 3,195,277.824030541000Organic Rankine Cycle Field Testing R4Statewide Projects & Studies Non Specified 0 0 Non Specified472,787.00 472,787.00 - -407078 1001AVTEC Hydroelectric Training Facility R4-ClosedStatewide TrainingNon Specified 0 0 Non Specified----407075 1100Battle Creek Diversion R4 -Also SEE PJ 270011AEA Owned Projects Non Specified 0 0 Non Specified500,000.00 500,000.00 21,975.00 21,975.002,868,512.00 2,868,512.00 3,217,252.82 3,217,252.82410073 264Kaktovik Wind Diesel R4 - ClosedKaktovik North Slope 40 T 235 2019 Arctic Slope Regional CorporationChugach Electric Association, Incorporated131,859.00 131,859.00 13,041.00 13,041.00403029 357North Pole Heat Recovery Construction - ClosedNorth Pole North Slope 3 B 2,091 2019 Doyon, Limited Alaska Village Electric Cooperative817,291.63 817,291.63 204,322.90 204,322.90409027 386Point Hope Wind Turbine Design - ClosedPoint Hope North Slope 40 T 775 2019 Arctic Slope Regional CorporationHomer Electric Association, Incorporated124,048.42 124,048.42 13,783.16 13,783.16403036 387Point Lay Wind Generation Design R4-ClosedPoint Lay North Slope 40 T 299 2019 Arctic Slope Regional Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated390,546.90 390,546.90 39,591.00 39,591.00409029 387Point Lay Wind Diesel Generation Project R3-ClosedPoint Lay North Slope 40 T 299 2019 Arctic Slope Regional Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated114,845.38 114,845.38 12,760.60 12,760.60403037 476Wainwright Wind Turbine Design R4-ClosedWainwright North Slope 40 T 553 2019 Arctic Slope Regional Corporation- - 13,694.99 13,694.99409028 476Wainwright Wind Diesel Generation Prj. R3-ClosedWainwright North Slope 40 T 553 2019 Arctic Slope Regional Corporation123,255.02 123,255.02 6,447.70 6,447.70409021 128Atqasuk Transmission Line-CLOSEDUtqiagvik North Slope 40 T 5,4002019 Arctic Slope Regional CorporationU.S. Coast Guard Generator367,304.67 367,304.67 8,573,143.00 8,573,143.002,069,151.02 2,069,151.02 8,876,784.35 8,876,784.35Copper River/Chugach TotalKodiakKodiak TotalLower Yukon-KuskokwimLower Yukon‐Kuskokwim TotalNorthwest ArcticNon SpecifiedNon Specified TotalNorth SlopeNorth Slope Total
403033 114Ambler Heat Recovery Construction - CLOSEDAmblerNorthwest Arctic 40 T 263 2019 NANA Regional CorporationIndividual Generators434,928.09 434,928.09 66,659.53 66,659.53411002 114Ambler Solar PV Construction - ClosedAmblerNorthwest Arctic 40 T 263 2019 NANA Regional CorporationIndividual Generators20,122.00 20,122.00 2,012.00 2,012.00410058 141Buckland Wind Farm Construction - PJ 410042-ClosedBuckland Northwest Arctic 40 T 509 2019 NANA Regional CorporationAlaska Power Company----409024 282Kivalina Wind-Intertie Feas Analys&CDes R3-ClosedKivalina Northwest Arctic 40 T 427 2019 NANA Regional Corporation Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated177,005.00 177,005.00 9,317.00 9,317.00402117 295Kotzebue Paper & Wood Waste to Energy R4-CLOSEDKotzebue Northwest Arctic 40 T 3,112 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKWIG Power Company66,578.25 66,578.25 3,838.34 3,838.34403034295Kotzebue Electric Heat Recovery ConstructionKotzebue Northwest Arctic 40 T 3,112 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKWIG Power Company915,627.00 824,064.30 300,000.00 305,794.14407121 295Kotzebue Energy Storage - DesignKotzebue Northwest Arctic 40 T 3,112 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKWIG Power Company325,000.00 - - -409022 295High Penetration Wind-Battery-Diesel R3-ClosedKotzebue Northwest Arctic 40 T 3,112 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKWIG Power Company8,000,000.00 8,000,000.00 2,884,170.00 2,884,170.00410041 295Kotzebue Wind-Grant tranferred to PJ 409022Kotzebue Northwest Arctic 40 T 3,112 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKWIG Power Company----403067 356Noorvik Heat Recovery - Water Treatment Plant-ClsdNoorvikNorthwest Arctic 40 T 651 2019 NANA Regional CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative985,805.00 985,805.00 29,580.00 29,580.00410060356Noorvik Wind Farm Constructino - PJ 410042-ClosedNoorvikNorthwest Arctic 40 T 651 2019 NANA Regional CorporationAlaska Village Electric Cooperative----402031 362Upper Kobuk River Biomass R4 - ClosedNorthwest Arctic Borough Northwest Arctic 7,715 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKodiak Electric Association, Incorporated771,666.95 771,666.95 312,915.00 312,915.00407040362Cosmos Hills Hydroelectric Feasibility-ClosedNorthwest Arctic Borough Northwest Arctic 7,715 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKodiak Electric Association, Incorporated1,025,000.00 1,025,000.00 50,722.00 50,722.00410042 362Buckland/Deering/Noorvik Wind Farm Const-ClsdNorthwest Arctic Borough Northwest Arctic 7,715 2019 NANA Regional CorporationKodiak Electric Association, Incorporated10,738,438.91 10,738,438.91 154,777.12 154,777.12410074418Selawik Hybrid Wind Diesel Syst Turbine R4-ClsdSelawik Northwest Arctic 40 T 832 2019 NANA Regional CorporationMatanuska Electric Association, Incorporated75,420.00 75,420.00 7,540.00 7,540.00410059 180Deering Wind Farm Construction - PJ 410042-ClosedDeering Northwest Arctic 40 T 166 2019 NANA Regional CorporationLevelock Electric Coop----407118 426Shungnak Heat Recovery - Design/ConstructionShungnak Northwest Arctic 40 T 253 2019 NANA Regional CorporationHomer Electric Association, Incorporated1,303,607.00 - - -24,839,198.20 23,119,028.50 3,821,530.99 3,827,325.13402032 117Anch. Landfill Gas Elect Const.-Biofuels-CLOSEDAnchorage Railbelt 12;13;1 F;G;H;I;J;K;L;M;N 291,845 2019 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated Individual Generators2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,423,866.00 1,423,866.00407084144Jack River Hydro Project R4 - ClosedCantwell Railbelt 6 C 190 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated Kodiak Electric Association, Incorporated30,000.00 30,000.00 1,500.00 1,500.00411003 183McKinley Village Solar Thermal Const - ClosedDenali ParkRailbelt 186 2019 Doyon, Limited Native Village of Chenega190,000.00 190,000.00 3,600.00 20,878.92402033 208Delta Junction Wood Chip Heating Feasibilit-ClosedFairbanks North Star BoroughRailbelt 95,8982019 Doyon, Limited Alaska Power Company2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 - -410022 208Delta Junction Wind Assessment& Avian Study-ClosedFairbanks North Star BoroughRailbelt 95,8982019 Doyon, Limited Alaska Power Company65,412.09 65,412.09 184,567.79 184,567.79410027 208Delta Area Wind Turbines - ClosedFairbanks North Star BoroughRailbelt 95,8982019 Doyon, Limited Alaska Power Company2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 801,500.00 954,534.37410045 208Coal Mine Road Wind Farm Final Design- see 410022Fairbanks North Star BoroughRailbelt 95,8982019 Doyon, Limited Alaska Power Company----407052 228California Creek Hydro Feasibility - ClosedGirdwood Railbelt 0 0 Not recognized under ANCSAAlaska Village Electric Cooperative27,300.00 27,300.00 2,700.00 2,700.00402021 317Susitna Valley HS Wood Heat - Biomass-ClosedMatanuska‐Susitna Borough Railbelt 106,4382019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedManokotak Power Company- - 7,045.74 7,045.74407030317Fishhook Hydro Hatcher PH 1 -Closed See PJ 407031Matanuska‐Susitna Borough Railbelt 106,4382019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedManokotak Power Company----407031 317Fishhook Hydro Hatcher Pass Construction-ClosedMatanuska‐Susitna Borough Railbelt 106,4382019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedManokotak Power Company----407080317Hunter Creek Hydroelectric Project R4 - ClosedMatanuska‐Susitna Borough Railbelt 106,4382019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedManokotak Power Company84,000.00 84,000.00 16,000.00 16,000.00407082 317Eska Creek Hydroelectric Project R4 - ClosedMatanuska‐Susitna Borough Railbelt 106,4382019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedManokotak Power Company14,407.70 14,407.70 2,881.54 2,881.54407053 342Nenana Hydrokinetic Construction-CLOSEDNenana Railbelt 6 C 362 2019 Doyon, Limited Golden Valley Electric Association, Incorporated450,000.00 450,000.00 - -410046348Nikiski Wind Farm Construction - ClosedNikiski Railbelt 29 O 4,5102019 Cook Inlet Region, IncorporatedMatanuska Electric Association, Incorporated2,102.87 2,102.87 18,925.88 18,925.88402116393Port Graham Biomass Waste Heat Demo PrjR4-CLOSEDPort Graham Railbelt 32 P 180 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated58,600.00 58,600.00 14,119.00 14,119.00406012 992Mount Spurr Geothermal Project R3, R4-ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated1,993,158.00 1,993,158.00 2,158,603.00 2,549,052.00407023 992Cresent Lk/Cr Low Impact Hydro Assess - ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated23,273.04 23,273.04 13,318.27 13,318.27407025 992Grant Lk/Cr Low Impact Hydro Assessment - ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated50,000.00 50,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00407026992Ptarmingan Lk/Ck Low Impact Hydro Assess - ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated4,684.35 4,684.35 13,671.08 13,671.08407041 992South Fork Hydroelectric Const - CancelledRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated----407042 992Grant Lake Hydroelectric Facility-ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 500,000.00 500,000.00407043 992Whittier Creek Hydroelectric Reconnaissance-ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated39,471.00 39,471.00 34,285.00 34,285.00407077 992StetsonCrkDiversion/CooperLakeDamFacilities-ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated3,594,979.60 3,594,979.60 3,594,979.50 3,594,979.50408005 992Cook Inlet Tidal Generation Project R4-CLOSEDRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated----409031 992CEA Transmis Line to Renewable Energy Res. -ClosedRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated----410043 992Nikolaevsk Wind Farm Final Design - CancelledRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated----410044992EVA Creek Wind Turbine Purchase-CLOSEDRailbelt Region Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated3,463,200.00 3,463,200.00 24,031,049.51 24,031,049.51406023 420Seldovia Ground Source Heat Pump-CLOSEDSeldovia Railbelt 32 P 226 2019 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated Copper Valley Electric Association, Incorporated311,753.20 311,753.20 48,964.43 48,964.43406011 421AK SeaLifeCenter PH II Seawater Heat PumpR3-ClosedSeward Railbelt 29 O 2,545 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated286,580.00 286,580.00 - 426,720.00407044421Fourth of July Creek Hydroelectric-ClosedSeward Railbelt 29 O 2,545 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated20,000.00 20,000.00 20,000.00 20,016.92407109 421Heat Pump System for City of Seward R9Seward Railbelt 29 O 2,545 2019 Chugach Alaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated725,000.00 88,000.00 157,497.00 81,284.31407060997Carlson Creek Hydro-ClosedSouthcentral Alaska Railbelt 0 0 Cook Inlet Region, Incorporated8,811.26 8,811.26 2,202.82 2,202.82407087 171CVEA Allison Crk Hydroelectric-DoNotUse-See 407038Copper CenterRailbelt 6 C 323 2019 Ahtna, Incorporated n/a----19,442,733.11 18,805,733.11 33,076,276.56 33,987,563.08402131 120Angoon Low-Income Housing Pellet Heat - ClosedAngoon Southeast 35 R 404 2019 Sealaska Corporation Individual Generators240,592.00 240,592.00 51,592.00 60,013.31403035 120Angoon Heat Recovery-Not Active/ClosedAngoon Southeast 35 R 404 2019 Sealaska Corporation Individual Generators----407074120Thayer lake Hydroelectric Project R4Angoon Southeast 35 R 404 2019 Sealaska Corporation Individual Generators8,055,716.90 1,736,323.20 1,577,593.31 1,327,593.31406015 428Japonski Island Boathouse Heat Pump R4-ClosedCity and Borough of Sitka Southeast 35 R 8,532 2019 Sealaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated----406016428Sitka Centennial Hall&Library Feas/HeatPump-ClosedCity and Borough of Sitka Southeast 35 R 8,532 2019 Sealaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated262,600.00 262,600.00 4,626.81 4,626.81406017 428Sitka Wastewater Treatment Plant Feas R4 ClosedCity and Borough of Sitka Southeast 35 R 8,532 2019 Sealaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated16,699.14 16,699.14 2,376.48 2,376.48407049 428Takatz Lake Hydroelectric Feasibility-ClosedCity and Borough of Sitka Southeast 35 R 8,532 2019 Sealaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated1,919,069.04 1,919,069.04 231,768.00 231,768.00407088 428Sitka Blue Lake Hydroelectric Project-ClosedCity and Borough of Sitka Southeast 35 R 8,532 2019 Sealaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 89,355,487.00 90,312,930.71407055 488Wrangell Hydro Based Electric Boiler Const.-ClosedCity and Borough of WrangellSoutheast 36 R 2,4002019 Sealaska Corporation1,862,387.13 1,862,387.13 76,357.87 76,357.87407086488Wrangell Electric Vehicle Feasibility Study-ClosedCity and Borough of WrangellSoutheast 36 R 2,4002019 Sealaska Corporation25,000.00 25,000.00 428.48 428.48402035 489Yakutat Biomass Feas. & District HeatingLoop-ClsdCity and Borough of YakutatSoutheast 32 P 540 2019 Sealaska Corporation249,600.00 249,600.00 6,621.76 6,621.76402114176Craig Biomass Fuel Dryer Project R4 - CLOSEDCraig Southeast 35 R 1,0742019 Sealaska Corporation Homer Electric Association, Incorporated350,000.00 350,000.00 250,000.00 262,989.06407015 201Elfin Cove Hydroelectric Project-ClosedElfin Cove Southeast 35 R 16 2019 Sealaska Corporation Inside Passage Electric Cooperative346,639.61 346,639.61 80,093.90 99,093.90407024235Falls Cr Low Impact Hydro Assessment - ClosedGustavus Southeast 33Q537 2019 Sealaska Corporation City of Ruby50,000.00 50,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00407045 235Falls Creek Hydroelectric Construction-ClosedGustavus Southeast 33Q537 2019 Sealaska Corporation City of Ruby750,000.00 750,000.00 - -402034236Haines Ctrl Wood Heating Sys Constr(LIHP)-ClosedHaines Borough Southeast 2,516 2019 Sealaska Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative188,620.00 188,620.00 36,500.00 36,500.00402036236Haines Borough Municipal Buildings Biomass CLOSEDHaines Borough Southeast 2,516 2019 Sealaska Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative409,331.18 409,331.18 122,139.21 122,139.21407079 236Connelly Lake Hydroelectric Project R4-ClosedHaines Borough Southeast 2,516 2019 Sealaska Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative468,000.00 468,000.00 118,844.37 118,844.37407081 236Schubee Lake Hydroelectric Project R4 - ClosedHaines Borough Southeast 2,516 2019 Sealaska Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative74,191.47 74,191.47 18,935.06 18,935.06407083 236Haines Excursion Inlet Hydro Project R4 - ClosedHaines Borough Southeast 2,516 2019 Sealaska Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative78,384.40 78,384.40 8,418.43 8,418.43402133 248Hoonah Biomass District Heating Loop-ClosedHoonah Southeast 35 R 782 2019 Sealaska Corporation North Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems40,000.00 40,000.00 10,000.00 10,365.00403053 248Hoonah Heat Recovery Project R4-ClosedHoonah Southeast 35 R 782 2019 Sealaska Corporation North Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems472,963.89 472,963.89 - -407070248Hoonah - IPEC Hydro Project R3-ClosedHoonah Southeast 35 R 782 2019 Sealaska Corporation North Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems850,000.00 850,000.00 450,000.00 450,000.00407100248Gartina Falls Hydroelectric Project - ClosedHoonah Southeast 35 R 782 2019 Sealaska Corporation North Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems6,694,000.00 6,694,000.00 - -407117 248Water Supply Creek Hydro - Final DesignHoonah Southeast 35 R 782 2019 Sealaska Corporation North Slope Borough Power and Lights Systems461,474.00 - - -402135 254Hydaburg Schools Wood Fired Boiler-CLOSEDHydaburg Southeast 36 R 397 2019 Sealaska Corporation Alaska Village Electric Cooperative620,977.00 620,977.00 56,573.95 56,573.95406008 260Juneau Airport Ground Source Heat Pump - ClosedJuneau Southeast 33;34Q0 0 Sealaska Corporation Chugach Electric Association, Incorporated513,000.00 513,000.00 513,000.00 513,000.00406009 260Juneau Ground Source Heat Pump Constr(Aq Ctr)-ClsdJuneau Southeast 33;34Q0 0 Sealaska Corporation Chugach Electric Association, Incorporated1,450,000.00 1,450,000.00 500,000.00 500,000.00409030260Snettisham Trans Ln Avalanche Mitigation R4-ClosedJuneau Southeast 33;34Q0 0 Sealaska Corporation Chugach Electric Association, Incorporated2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 500,000.00 500,000.00SoutheastNorthwest Arctic TotalRailbeltRailbelt Total
App
Number Applicant Name Project Title Project Phase(s)Energy Region Senate
District
House
District
Election
District
Grant Funds
Requested Technology Community (Nearest)Status
14001
Nushagak Electric & Telephone
Cooperative Nuyakuk River Hydroelectric Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Bristol Bay S 37 37-S 2,000,000$ Hydro Dillingham Economic & Technical Review
14002 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Holy Cross Solar Energy & Battery Storage
Feasibility Study Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana S 37 37-S 135,000$ Solar Holy Cross Economic & Technical Review
14003 Point MacKenzie Solar Point MacKenzie Solar
Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual
Design; Final Design and Permitting;
Construction Railbelt D 8 8-D 1,000,000$ Solar Point Mackenzie Economic & Technical Review
14004 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative
Pilot Station Wind Energy Feasibility Study &
Conceptual Design Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim T 39 39-T 229,500$ Wind Pilot Station Economic & Technical Review
14005 City of Ouzinkie
Ouzinkie Wind Energy Feasibility and
Conceptual Design Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Kodiak P 32 32-P 172,600$ Wind Ouzinkie Economic & Technical Review
14006
City of Homer, Department of Public
Works Homer Energy Recovery Project Final Design and Permitting; Construction Railbelt P 31 31-P 492,500$ Hydro Homer Economic & Technical Review
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 T 40 40-T 590,000$ Solar
Ambler /
Kiana /
Noorvik /
Selawik Economic & Technical Review
14008 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC Ninilchik Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt P 31 31-P 192,000$ Wind Ninilchik Economic & Technical Review
14009 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC Summit Lake Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt O 29 29-O 232,000$ Wind Moose Pass Economic & Technical Review
14010 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC East Foreland/Nikiski Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt O 29 29-O 200,000$ Wind Nikiski Economic & Technical Review
14011 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC Caribou Hills Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt P 31 31-P 209,600$ Wind Ninilchik/Fox River Economic & Technical Review
14012 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc.AEEC/KPB CPL Landfill Gas CHP Project Final Design and Permitting Railbelt P 31 31-P 884,986$ Biomass Soldotna Economic & Technical Review
14015 City of Kotzebue Kotzebue Wind to Heat System
Feasibility and Conceptual Design; Final Design
and Permitting; Construction Northwest Arctic T 40 40-T 702,435$ Wind (to heat)Kotzebue Economic & Technical Review
14016 Kwig Power Company Kwigillingok Wind Turbine Upgrade Construction Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim S 38 38-S 278,176$ Wind Kwigillingok Economic & Technical Review
14017 Native Village of Kwinhagak Kwinhagak Reconnaissance Study Reconnaissance Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim S 38 38-S 81,000$ Solar Quinhagak Economic & Technical Review
14018 Kotzebue Electric Association, Inc.
Kotzebue Wind to PV Transition Utilizing
Existing Wind Infrastructure Construction Northwest Arctic T 40 40-T 1,900,000$ Solar Kotzebue Economic & Technical Review
14019 Native Village of Eklutna
Eklutna Village Solar Energy Project -
Feasibility Study Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt F 12 12-F 22,500$ Solar Native Village of Eklutna Economic & Technical Review
14020 Puvurnaq Power Company
Kongiganak Wind Upgrade with Airfoil Blades
for Turbines Construction Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim S 38 38-S 328,716$ Wind Kongiganak Economic & Technical Review
14021 Akiachak Native Community Akiachak Wind Feasibility
Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual
Design Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim S 38 38-S 371,000$ Wind Akiachak Economic & Technical Review
14022
Chugach Electric Association, Inc. On
behalf of the Bradley Lake Management
Committee (BPMC)Dixon Diversion Feasibility Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt P 32 32-P 1,000,000$ Hydro Fritz Creek/ Fox River Economic & Technical Review
14024 Naterkaq Light Plant
Naterkaq Light Plant Battery Installation and
Integration Construction Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim S 38 38-S 325,000$ Storage Chefornak Economic & Technical Review
14025 City of Pilot Point
Pilot Point Comprehensive Community
Wind/Solar/Storage & Heat Project Construction Bristol Bay S 37 37-S 495,500$ Storage Pilot Point Economic & Technical Review
14026 Nome Joint Utility System Nome Battery Energy Storage System Construction Bering Straits T 39 39-T 2,000,000$ Storage Nome Economic & Technical Review
14027 Inside Passage Electric Cooperative
Jenny Creek Hydro Reconnaissance - Kake
IPEC Reconnaissance Southeast R 35 35-R 62,368$ Hydro Kake Economic & Technical Review
14028 City of Nenana Nenana Biomass District Heat System Construction Railbelt C 6 6-C 676,121$ Biomass Nenana Economic & Technical Review
14029 Golden Valley Electric Association
Interior Alaska Wind Energy Resource
Assessment
Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual
Design Railbelt E 9 9-E 1,425,000$ Wind
Murphy Dome (Fairbanks)
Deltana Area (Delta Junction)
Donnelly Dome (Fort Greely)
Pedro Dome (Fox)
Wickersham Dome (Fox)Economic & Technical Review
14031 Atmautluak Tribal Utilities
Atmautluak Light Plant Battery, Thermal
Stove, and Metering Installation Construction Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim S 38 38-S 375,000$ Storage Atmautluak Economic & Technical Review
REF Round 14 Application Summary
1 of 2 4/4/2022 1:56 PM
App
Number Applicant Name Project Title Project Phase(s)Energy Region Senate
District
House
District
Election
District
Grant Funds
Requested Technology Community (Nearest)Status
14034 City of Galena
Galena Community Scale Solar PV and
Battery Project Final Design and Permitting; Construction Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana T 39 39-T 2,000,000$ Solar Galena Economic & Technical Review
14035 City of False Pass UNGA Man Creek Hydroelectric Project Final Design and Permitting Aleutians S 37 37-S 321,000$ Hydro False Pass Economic & Technical Review
TOTAL 18,702,002$
2 of 2 4/4/2022 1:56 PM
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:Rep. Calvin Schrage; Rep. Zack Fields; Representative Tiffany Zulkosky; Rep. Chris Tuck; Rep. George Rauscher;
Rep. James Kaufman; Rep. Matt Claman
Cc:akis.gialopsos@alaska.gov; Jennifer L. Bertolini; Kookesh, Melissa M (CED); TW Patch; Curtis W. Thayer
Subject:AEA Responses to 3-8-22 House Energy Committee - HB301
Date:Wednesday, March 23, 2022 11:05:48 AM
Attachments:2022.03.22 AEA Response on HB 301 RPS to House Energy Committee (Final).pdf
State Renewable Portfolio Standards and Goals.pdf
Working Paper No 2019-62-Energy Policy Institute.pdf
image001.png
image002.png
Rep Schrage,
Attached is the Alaska Energy Authority’s response to the several questions that were
posed at the March 8 committee hearing regarding HB 301. Please let me know if you need any
additional information.
Curtis
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 1 of 8
March 22, 2022
The Honorable Calvin Schrage
Chairman, House Energy Committee
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol Room 104
Juneau, AK 99801
Re: House Bill 301, AEA Responses to Committee Member Questions
Dear Representative Schrage,
The propose of this letter is to provide you with responses to the questions asked of the Alaska Energy
Authority (AEA) during our presentation to the House Energy Committee on March 8, 2022 regarding
House Bill 301 – Utilities: Renewable Portfolio Standard. Please see the request in bold and our response
immediately below the request.
1. What is the funding mechanism for the Dixon Diversion project?
The Dixon Diversion Project study is in the very early stages of consideration and studies of project
feasibility as regards cost to develop, license, and construct are ongoing. If the project is determined
technically feasible and economically meritorious through licensing, construction, and operation.
The estimated cost projection for licensing and study of the Dixon Diversion Project is $12 million.
The Railbelt utilities and AEA are continuing to engineer the project and are examining how best to
finance project costs. It is anticipated that costs will be borne by the State and the utilities.
Currently, the total cost of studies, licensing, feasibility analysis, engineering, and subsequent
construction is estimated between $400 and $600 million.
Once constructed the diversion will provide the power equivalent to as many as 25,000 homes.
Bradley Lake currently provides the power equivalent to more than 54,000 homes.
2. What are the fuel cost savings associated with Slides 12 and 13?
Slides 12 and 13 show theoretical dispatch charts for how an 80% RPS would function under peak
load in a high-hydro scenario and in a high-wind and solar scenario. These scenarios were produced
by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and published in the Alaska Railbelt RPS
feasibility study in February. NREL would need to perform an economic analysis to determine the
fuel cost savings for this theoretical 24-hour period.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 8
While not specific to slides 12 and 13, the
average fuel cost savings for a 24-hour period
can be calculated fairly easily based on NREL’s
annual fuel cost savings figures. Using AEA’s
estimates of $16.60/MMBTU blended fuel
prices, NREL predicts an annual fuel cost savings
of $426 million to $506 million in 2040. Dividing
this range by 365 days results in an estimated
daily fuel savings of $1.17 million to $1.39
million in an 80% RPS scenario. In the theoretical
peak demand scenarios shown in the slides, this
range would be higher than the average day, but
the exact amount is a question that should be
directed to the report authors.
3. Please provide a breakdown of other states’ RPS Programs and what their benchmarks are as they
compare to those in HB 301.
More than half of RPS
states have set long-term
targets (2030 or beyond).
The proposed 2030 and
2035 targets in SB 179 are
on the low end of these
targets. For example, for
the 2030 timeframe, Maine
has set a target of 80%,1
Nevada has set a target of
50%,2 and Hawaii has a
target of 40%.3
Of states and territories
with 2040 targets or
beyond, the proposed 2040
target is slightly below
average. For example, the
2040 target of 80% is above
Oregon (50% by 2040)4 and slightly above Massachusetts (80% by 2050),5 but below New Mexico
1 https://www.maine.gov/energy/initiatives/renewable-energy/renewable-portfolio-standards
2 https://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program/detail/373/energy-portfolio-standard
3 https://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program/detail/606
4 https://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program/detail/2594
5 https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=MA
Proposed benchmarks compared to select final targets across the country.
NREL fuel cost savings chart from pg. 30 of their report.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 3 of 8
(100% by 2045),6 below Virginia (100% by 2045 or 2050),7 and below fellow islanded locales like
Hawaii (100% by 2045),8 Guam (100% by 2045),9 and Puerto Rico (100% by 2050).10
Note that the Oregon RPS is an outlier in that it contains a long-term target, but was passed 15 years
ago, thus it is significantly lower than other long-term targets.
The chart on the right is provided by Berkeley Labs. This data is approximately one year old and does
not reflect recent updates, but it helps to visualize the proposed targets.
Please also see attachment 1.
4.In reference to slide six, is data available from other states on the economic impacts, specifically
impacts on ratepayers?
Data on economic impacts can be grouped into three categories:
1.The incremental cost to implement the RPS is generally understood as the difference in rates (up
or down) as the RPS ramps up compared to the base case.
2.The temporary economic impacts of significant infrastructure projects throughout the lifetime
of the RPS.
3.The lasting economic impact of the completed RPS in terms of fuel cost savings, economic
growth, and ancillary impacts on society.
In addition to the answers below, additional information on the economic case for the RPS can be
found in the Governor’s February 15, 2022 letter to the Regulatory Commission of Alaska.11
Category #1: Incremental costs during RPS ramp-up
In 2019, RPS compliance costs averaged 2.6% across the country.12 However, states with the most
significant increases, including New Jersey and Massachusetts, have solar carve-outs built into their
RPS – a primary driver of higher incremental costs not found in HB 301. Many also exclude
conventional hydro, which is currently the cheapest form of power in the Railbelt by a significant
margin. This is not the case with the proposed Alaska RPS.
This is also average and does not reflect the entire nation. In Maine, modeling sponsored by the
state energy office shows negligible consumer rate impacts despite their very high target of 100%
renewable energy by 2050.13
6 https://www.utilitydive.com/news/threes-company-new-mexico-joins-california-hawaii-in-approving-100-
clea/550390/
7 https://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program/detail/22133/renewable -portfolio-standard
8 https://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program/detail/606
9 https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=GQ
10 https://www.energy.gov/oe/puerto-rico-grid-resilience-and-transitions-100-renewable-energy-study-pr100
11 http://rca.alaska.gov/RCAWeb/ViewFile.aspx?id=377B67BC-2A41-429F-B208-28DD6EC952DC
12 https://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/rps_status_update-2021_early_release.pdf
13 https://www.maine.gov/energy/sites/maine.gov.energy/files/inline-
files/GEO_State%20of%20Maine%20Renewable%20Energy%20Goals%20Market%20Assessment_Final_March%20
2021_1.pdf (pg. 62)
Alaska Energy Authority Page 4 of 8
In Colorado, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, which supplies 17 Colorado
cooperatives, announced they would achieve 50% renewable power by 2024 while cutting
wholesale rates by 8%.14
In the similarly fuel-dependent state of Hawaii,15 a 100% RPS has existed since 2015. Despite major
efforts to meet renewable targets in a state with similar infrastructure issues, Hawaii’s rate
increases since 2015 are almost identical to those in Alaska at 29.8% and 28.5% respectively.
While there is a wide range of opinions on whether rates will slightly decrease or slightly increase
during the RPS as we develop much-needed infrastructure.
Category #2: Temporary economic impacts
The impact of new infrastructure projects, while not the aim of RPS policy, should also be
considered. In the mid-2000’s, Montana passed a small, 15% RPS. Despite its very small goal and
“negligible” impact on rates, it resulted in $423 million in investment, 482 temporary construction
jobs, and 26.5 full-time jobs.16 In Colorado, 6,000 renewable energy jobs were created in the four
years that followed the passage of their RPS ballot initiative.17
A 2016 NREL study found that RPS’s supported about 200,000 jobs and $20 billion in GDP output at
the time.18 They also determined that 4.7 million to 11.5 million renewable energy jobs will be
needed to meet RPS demands across the country (partially offset by contractions in other areas).19
Category #3: Lasting economic impacts after RPS completion
One of the primary drivers of this RPS is the cost savings that will be achieved by diversifying from a
fuel source that has increased by 270% since 1991. Obtaining data from other states on this
category is not possible because none have completed a high-percentage RPS nor do they share our
challenges in terms of fuel prices and isolation.
Instead, we rely on modeling such as the data provided by NREL which indicates an annual fuel cost
savings of $426 million to $506 million by 2040 in perpetuity. Further modeling suggests that the
capital costs of the proposed RPS will equate to less than half of the potential fuel savings. Less
expensive electricity also has the potential to drive industry investment in the Railbelt, creating jobs
as well as population and GDP growth.
Other ancillary economic benefits have also been posited in other states. For example, a 2019 study
of RPS policy in the Rust Belt estimated health benefits of 8 to 14 cents/kWh.20 A 2016 NREL study
estimated 2.4 to 5.0 cents/kWh in air quality impacts.21
14 https://www.denverpost.com/2020/10/07/tri-state-rates-renewable-energy/
15 https://www.eia.gov/state/data.php?sid=HI#Prices
16 https://leg.mt.gov/content/Committees/Interim/2013-2014/Energy-and-
Telecommunications/Legislation/RPSFinal.pdf
17 https://cnee.colostate.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Blue-Print-for-the-New-Energy-Economy-Colorado.pdf
(pg. 29)
18 https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy16osti/65005.pdf
19 https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1344104
20 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab31d9/pdf
21 https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1344104
Alaska Energy Authority Page 5 of 8
Please also see attachment 2.
5. Is there is information about Pumped Storage capacity in Alaska?
In addition to building pumped storage capacity, battery energy storage systems (BESS), located
strategically in each of the three Railbelt regions, are fully capable of loading variable renewables,
especially when backed up by thermal generation which will continue to exist even after 2040.
NREL’s Railbelt feasibility study determined that a 46 MW, 8-hour battery will be required in
Fairbanks (a significant upgrade over GVEA’s existing BESS22), a 46.5 MW 4-hour battery will be
required in Homer (already in place23), and a 70 MW 4-hour battery will be required in Anchorage.24
Regardless of what mix of pumped storage or BESS systems are utilized, NREL found that resource
adequacy and operational reliability are fully achievable under an 80% renewable scenario.25
“All modeled scenarios can achieve 80% renewable energy while maintaining a balance of supply
and demand with no unserved energy or reserve shortages during normal operations. The system
can also serve load under severe outage conditions in all cases, although the 80% RPS may not be
achieved if very long outages were to occur on some parts of the grid. This finding depends on the
continued use of best practices and the engineering approaches historically deployed by Alaska’s
Railbelt utilities, particularly about the use of state-of-the-art (but proven) technologies.”
6. Have there been any studies on what Alaska’s Energy Composition should be and whether there
was a study that might have established a prior baseline.
AEA has participated in several studies to varying degrees that address Alaska’s Energy Composition.
Those studies include:
1. Alaska Railbelt Electrical Grid Authority Study (September 12, 2008)
2. Alaska Energy: A First Step Toward Energy Independence (January 2009)
3. Alaska Railbelt Integrated Resource Plan (RIRP) Study (February 2010)
4. Alaska Energy Pathway: Toward Energy Independence (July 2010)
5. The Alaska Affordable Energy Strategy (2017)
6. Renewable Energy Atlas of Alaska (2019)
22 https://gvea.com/battery-system/
23 https://www.homerelectric.com/my -cooperative/power-generation/battery-energy-storage-system-has-
arrived/
24 https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/81698.pdf (pg. 16)
25 Ibid. (pg. 20)
Alaska Energy Authority Page 6 of 8
7.Is there funding requests on this year’s (infrastructure) projects and whether the effects on
ratepayers was quantified?
The Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project Power Sales Agreement (PSA) provides for payment to be
made by the purchasing utilities after the bonded debt for construction of the project is retired. The
purpose of excess payments is to provide a means whereby the necessary costs for modernization
or repairs on the existing project can be funded jointly by those purchasing power from the project
so that continuing necessary maintenance and upgrades can be readily funded by the purchasers.
These excess payments are estimated to fund project improvements totaling $225 million, which is
close to the $261 million as shown on page 15 of the AEA presentation made to the committee on
March 8, 2022. Required Project Work is defined in the PSA to mean “…repairs, maintenance,
renewals, replacements, improvements or betterments required by federal or state law … to keep
the project in good and efficient operating condition, consistent with sound economics for the
project and the purchasers and national standards for the industry.” Upgraded transmission lines, a
battery for grid stabilization, and the study of benefits and costs for an alternative pathway to move
power north by means of an alternative pathway off the Kenai Peninsula are not expected to have a
significant cost to ratepayers over time and should provide both stability and reliability benefits. This
Required Project Work is necessary for greater penetration of renewable energy resources in
Alaska’s Railbelt energy portfolio.
This Required Project Work will result in one of the most significant improvements to the electrical
transmission system in Alaska’s history. This work will eliminate the constraints on exiting
transmission systems and stabilize rates for consumers throughout the Railbelt by increasing the
deliverability of energy from the Project while providing jobs and other economic development
opportunities from the Kenai to Fairbanks without any burden on the State’s budget. A “win-win”
for all Alaskans.
8.How would the entire state see a benefit since the bill is by its text impacts only Railbelt electric
utilities?
The Administration has introduced several energy bills and funding proposals targeted at different
areas of Alaska. For example, the Governor’s budget included a significant $15 million
recapitalization of the Renewable Energy Fund. The Governor has also made significant efforts to
protect Power Cost Equalization and enshrine it in the Constitution.
This year, the Governor introduced HB 299, An Act relating to microreactors, to develop a path
forward for microreactors with the stated goal of reducing power costs and providing cleaner power
in rural Alaska. While the currently proposed projects are urban or semi-urban (Eielson and Valdez),
the Administration believes the primary use case for microreactors will ultimately be rural Alaska.
There has been some understandable confusion over the rural impacts of HB 299. AEA agrees that a
microreactor being built in a truly rural location is not feasible because on-site teams will likely
always be a requirement no matter how safe the technology may be. However, a microreactor could
be built in proximity to a rural hub city that desires to pursue such a project. That microreactor
could supply power to more remote villages via high-voltage DC transmission lines or be used to
convert hydrogen into ammonia fuel. Providing rural communities with options should be one of the
primary goals of this HB 299.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 7 of 8
9.What would the potential carbon reductions would look like over time given the percentage of
renewable energy to be achieved by stated times set out in HB 301 to be achieved by certain
dates.
The NREL feasibility study did not analyze carbon reductions as the Governor did not introduce the
RPS for this purpose. While most Alaskans, including the Governor, support cleaner air, the primary
goals of HB 301 are energy independence and long-term cost reductions by reducing our reliance on
an expensive and unpredictable energy source and by utilizing a larger fraction of the abundant
renewable energy sources available in the Railbelt region.
It should be noted that NREL’s research did include estimates for the reduction of fuel that would be
achieved by 2040.26 If desired, these numbers could be compared to U.S. Energy Information
Administration data on emissions27 and used to estimate carbon reductions, however, AEA would
respectfully recommend reaching out to the report authors to make these scientific calculations.
10.Please provide a breakdown of electricity generation within the Railbelt by fuel type and utility
service area.
I hope you will find this information to be useful. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have
further questions.
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
Attachments:
1.National Conference of State Legislature, State Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards and Goals
(August 13, 2021)
26 https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/81698.pdf (pg. 30)
27 https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/co2_vol_mass.php
Railbelt Energy Generation
By Fuel Source, By Utility / Service Area
Fuel Source Type CEA (MWh)% of Total Energy GVEA (MWh)% of Total Energy HEA (MWh)*% of Total Energy MEA (MWh)% of Total Energy Railbelt (MWh)% of Total Energy
Non-Renewable 1,039,087 75%1,153,284 90%444,331 91%739,461 88%3,376,164 85%
Coal - 0%544,222 43%- 0%183 0%544,405 14%
Diesel - 0%173,832 14%122 0%- 0%173,954 4%
Naptha - 0%385,999 30%- 0%- 0%385,999 10%
Natural Gas 1,039,087 75%49,231 4%444,209 91%739,278 88%2,271,805 57%
Renewable 337,317 25%123,408 10%42,182 9%98,103 12%601,010 15%
Hydro 291,355 21%73,531 6%41,953 9%96,795 12%503,634 13%
Solar - 0%656 0%229 0%1,308 0%2,193 0%
Wind 45,962 3%49,220 4%- 0%- 0%95,182 2%
Total 1,376,405 100%1,276,692 100%486,513 100%837,564 100%3,977,174 100%
Notes:
*Solar figure for HEA is applying an assumption that 100% of the "consumer generation", as listed under purchased power for its submitted RCA annual report, is solar power
Source:
2020 Railbelt Utility Annual Reports to the RCA
Alaska Energy Authority Page 8 of 8
2.Working Paper, No. 2019-62, Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago, Do Renewable
Portfolio Standards Deliver? (April 2019)
Cc: House Energy Committee
Vasilios Gialopos, Legislative Director
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:Rep. Zack Fields; TW Patch
Cc:Rep. Calvin Schrage; Kookesh, Melissa M (CED); Jennifer L. Bertolini; Curtis W. Thayer
Subject:RE: energy generation by source for railbelt
Date:Tuesday, March 22, 2022 2:59:41 PM
Attachments:image003.png
image004.png
image002.png
We had included your response in overall document responded to the other questions from the committee. However, I believe this
what you are looking for:
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
From: Rep. Zack Fields <Rep.Zack.Fields@akleg.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 2:40 PM
To: Curtis W. Thayer <cthayer@akenergyauthority.org>; TW Patch <TPatch@akenergyauthority.org>
Cc: Rep. Calvin Schrage <Rep.Calvin.Schrage@akleg.gov>; Kookesh, Melissa M (CED) <melissa.kookesh@alaska.gov>
Subject: RE: energy generation by source for railbelt
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Hi Curtis & TW,
I’m following up on this request for data on railbelt electricity generation. Do you have that data available to share with me?
Zack
From: Rep. Zack Fields
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2022 2:52 PM
To: Curtis W. Thayer <cthayer@akenergyauthority.org>
Cc: Rep. Calvin Schrage <Rep.Calvin.Schrage@akleg.gov>
Subject: energy generation by source for railbelt
Hi Curtis,
In the context of the RPS bill, I was hoping to understand the breakdown of electricity generation within the railbelt, broken down by
type (gas, coal, wind, solar, hydro, ….). Does AEA have that?
If AEA also this generation % breakdown by utility service area, that would be useful too. Thank you,
Zack
Representative Zack Fields
House District 20
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:Senator Natasha Vonlmhof
Cc:Curtis W. Thayer; Jennifer L. Bertolini
Subject:AEA & IIJA
Date:Monday, March 21, 2022 2:02:38 PM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act - H.R. 3684 - AEA Summary - Feb 2 2022_.xlsx
Per our conversation, the list is ever evolving as we receive additional information from the Feds.
Curtis
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act - H.R. 3684 - AEA Summary
Updated: 02/02/2022 Page 1 of 4 4/4/2022
Section
(IIJA)
Program Title Technology
Program
Description/Notes Aggregate Federal Funding
Appropriation
Estimated Funding for AK State of AK Match Requirement Notes on AK Funding Estimate
11109 Surface
Transportation Block
Grant
Electric Vehicles -
Betsy
In addition to standard eligible infrastructure projects, this section adds the installation of electric vehicle charging
infrastructure and vehicle-to-grid infrastructure as eligible projects.
Total Federal Appropriation
=$273,150,000,000
28.74% of base appropriation for Surface
Transportation Block Program
Total appropriation by FY:
FY22: $52,488,065,375
FY23: $53,537,826,683
FY24: $54,608,583,217
FY25: $55,700,754,881
FY26: $56,814,769,844
$990,000,000 DOTPF DOTPF may have higher priority eligible infrastructure projects than
EVSE. The State is required to allocate a proportion of funds on
certain types of projects as well as by population and to prioritize
some geographic locations. Projects also need to be included in the
STIP.
Amount AK will receive was based on 2% more than AK's FY21
apportionment with penalties, and 1% more than previous FY. 28.74%
of base appropriation allocated for Surface Transportation Block
Program.
11401 Grants for Charging
and Fueling
Infrastructure
Electric Vehicles -
Betsy
Alternative Fuel Corridor Redesignation
Within 180 days of enactment, the Transportation Secretary is required to consult with federal agencies, state and local
officials, as well as other entities to redisgnate highway corridors as Alternative Fuel Corridor Ready (corridor with EV DC fast
chargers or alternative fueling stations located no more than 50 miles apart) or Corridor Pending (corridor that is targeted
to achieve Corridor Ready status, but does not yet meet the criteria).
Alternate Fuel Corridor Grants
Within a year of enactment, a grant program will be established for state, local, and tribal governments, port authorities or
metropolitan planning organizations to work with private entities to acquire, install, and operate and maintain alternative
fuel infrastructure along FHWA-designated Alternative Fuel Corridors for 5 years.
Community Grants
50% of program funds will be set-aside annually for competitive grants to expand publically-accessible alternative fuel
infrastructure with priority to rural, underserved communities, and multi-unit dwellings. Community grants can also be used
for preconstruction work, such as, planning, feasibility analysis, environmental review, revenue forecasting, preliminary
design and engineering; and up to 5% can be used for public education and outreach. Community grants are capped at
$15M per project.
Total: $2,500,000,000
FY22: $300,000,000
FY23: $400,000,000
FY24: $500,000,000
FY25: $600,000,000
FY26: $700,000,000
Competitive application
process
Administration's goal is to
have 500,000 EV charging
stations to meet projected
2030 EV market. Based on
population, AK would need
1,097 charging stations to
meet that goal.
Federal share not to exceed 80%
total project costs; Private Entities
(subgrantees) required to provide
20% match.
No State match requirement.
However, AEA estimates a need for
$200,000 annually for staff time for
planning and preparation of grant
applications; procurements;
distributing the funds; and
managing subgrants/projects.
About half of these funds can only be used for purposes of EV
charging infrastructure development along designated alternative
fuel corridors (AFCs). It is important for the State to get clarification
on flexibility of AFC criteria and then decide to nominate the National
Highway System highways and ferry/port terminals, and other roads
if allowed, as Corridor Pending to make full use of these funds.
Alaska currently has one Corridor Pending highway route from
Anchorage to Fairbanks and no Corridor Ready routes.
11507 Denali Commission Rural - Tim For an additional amount for "Denali Commission", $75,000,000 to remain available until expended: Provided further, that
such amount is designated by the Congress as being for an emergency requirement pursuant to section 4112(a) of H. Con.
Res. 71 (115th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018 and to section 251(b) of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Control Act of 1985.
$75,000,000 $75,000,000 $15,000,000
40101 Grid Resilience and
Reliability
Transmission -
Kirk
$5B to be allocated FY2022 to FY2026, with $2.5B as competitive Federal Grant Program and $2.5B for formula-based
State/Tribal Grant Program, for grid resiliency and reliability initiatives. activities, technologies, equipment, and hardening
measures to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events, including: weatherization technologies and
equipment; fire-resistant technologies and fire prevention systems; monitoring and control technologies; the
undergrounding of electrical equipment; utility pole management; the relocation of power lines or the reconductoring of
power lines with low-sag, advanced conductors; vegetation and fuel-load management; the use or construction of
distributed energy resources for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events (including microgrids and
battery-storage subcomponents); adaptive protection technologies; advanced modeling technologies; hardening of power
lines, facilities, substations, of other systems; and the replacement of old overhead conductors and underground cables.
Federal Grant Program - Competitive Program
Grant program set aside for activities that are supplemental to existing hardening efforts planned for any given year; and
reduce the risk of any power lines owned or operated by the eligible entity causing a wildfire; or increase the ability of the
eligible entity to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events. Eligible entities include: electric grid operator;
electricity storage operator; electricity generator; transmission owner or operator; distribution provider; fuel supplier; and
any other relevant entity. Must submit a report detailing past, current, and future efforts by the eligible entity to reduce the
likelihood and consequences of disruptive events. Grant amounts cannot exceed total amount the eligible entity has spent
in the previous 3 years on efforts to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events.
Priority will be given to projects that generate the greatest community benefit (whether rural or urban) in reducing the
likelihood and consequences of disruptive events. Small utility (<4M MWh annually) set aside of a minimum of 30% of
program funds. Small utility (<4M MWh annually) required to match 1⁄3 of the amount of the grant.
$2,500,000,000
30% minimum set-aside for small utilities
(<4M MWh annually)
Competitive application
process
Small utility match = 1/3 Small utility match = 1/3
Eligible entities include: electric grid operator; electricity storage
operator; electricity generator; transmission owner or operator;
distribution provider; fuel supplier. AEA would be eligible as owner of
Bradley Lake Hydro Project and transmission lines.
At least 30% of program funds will be set aside for small utilities.
Grant amounts cannot exceed total amount the eligible entity has
spent in the previous 3 years on efforts to reduce the likelihood and
consequences of disruptive events.
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act - H.R. 3684 - AEA Summary
Updated: 02/02/2022 Page 2 of 4 4/4/2022
Section
(IIJA)
Program Title Technology
Program
Description/Notes Aggregate Federal Funding
Appropriation
Estimated Funding for AK State of AK Match Requirement Notes on AK Funding Estimate
40101 Grid Resilience and
Reliability
Transmission -
Kirk
$5B to be allocated, with $2.5B eligible for use by States for FY2022 to FY2026, for grid resiliency and reliability initiatives.
activities, technologies, equipment, and hardening measures to reduce the likelihood
and consequences of disruptive events, including: weatherization technologies and equipment; fire-resistant technologies
and fire prevention systems; monitoring and control technologies; the undergrounding of electrical equipment; utility pole
management; the relocation of power lines or the reconductoring of power lines with low-sag, advanced conductors;
vegetation and fuel-load management; the use or construction of distributed energy resources for enhancing system
adaptive capacity during disruptive events (including microgrids and battery-storage subcomponents); adaptive protection
technologies; advanced modeling technologies; hardening of power lines, facilities, substations, of other systems; and the
replacement of old overhead conductors and underground cables.
State/Tribal Grant Program - Formula Based
50% formula-based set aside for states and tribes to issue grants to eligible entities. Grant funding allocations are based on
total population; total area; areas with low ratio of electricity customers to power lines; probability of disruptive events
during previous 10 years based on federally declared disasters or emergencies; number and severity of events; amount of
funds expended over past 10 years on percapita basis to mitigate or reduce severity or consequences over previous 10
years; among other factors.
State/Tribe must submit a plan each FY for disbursing the funds. Small utilitiy set aside (<4M MWh annually) cannot be less
than the percentage of all customers in the State/Tribe that are served by those eligible entities. 15% match requirement for
State or Tribe. Small utility (<4M MWh annually) required to match 1⁄3 of the amount of the grant.
$2,500,000,000 Not estimated 15% state match requirement
and
Small utility match = 1/3
State Cost Share = 15%
Formula-based grant requiring 15% state match and 1/3 match from
small utilities. The State/Tribe must submit a plan with the application.
The State/Tribe may use up to 5% for providing technical assistance
and administration expenses. Utility contributions to Bradley Lake
transmission projects should count as State match funds.
40103 Energy Infrastructure
Federal Financial
Assistance Program -
Program Upgrading
Our Electric Grid and
Ensuring Reliability
and Resiliency
Transmission $5B for FY2022 to FY2026 to create the "Program Upgrading Our Electric Grid and Ensuring Reliability and Resiliency". The
purpose of the program being to "to demonstrate innovative approaches to transmission, storage, and distribution
infrastructure to harden and enhance resilience and reliability; and to demonstrate new approaches to enhance regional
grid resilience, implemented through States by public and rural electric cooperative entities on a cost-shared basis."
Competitive application program for Federal Assistance.
Eligible entities include: State; combination of 2 or more States; Indian Tribe; unit of local government; and public utility
commission.
$5,000,000,000 Competitive application
process
20% match requirement as per 42
U.S. Code § 16352
State Cost Share: 20%
40103 Energy Improvement
in Rural or Remote
Areas, and Energy
Infrastructure
Resilience
Framework
Rural $1B for FY2022 to FY2026 to supplement the "Program Upgrading Our Electric Grid and Ensuring Reliability and Resiliency"
with specific guidance relating to Federal financial assistance for rural and remote areas (city, town, or unincorporated area
with less than <10K inhabitants). Such eligible projects include but are not limited to: "overall cost-effectiveness of energy
generation, transmission, or distribution systems; siting or upgrading transmission and distribution lines; and reducing
greenhouse gas emissions from energy generation by rural or remote areas."
$1,000,000,000 Competitive application
process
20% match requirement as per 42
U.S. Code § 16352
State Cost Share = 20%
40106 Transmission
Facilitation Program
Transmission -
Kirk
$50M for FY2022 to FY2026 for the establishment of a "Transmission Facilitation Fund" by which the DOE shall facilitate the
construction of electric power transmission lines and related facilities. In addition to the 5 year $10M appropriation, the
program will also establish a $2.5B revolving loan fund that allows DOE to serve as an “anchor tenant” for a new
transmission line or an upgrade of an existing line. DL: eligible transmission lines required to have capacity of 1GW if new.
Upgrades to existing lines or new lines in existing corridors must have 500MW capacity. These minimums are much greater
than currently contemplated transmission line upgrades in Alaska. The only exceptions are an HVDC line from the North
Slope to the Railbelt or a connection to Canada. This should be confirmed with the Railbelt utilities.
$50,000,000 Competitive application
process
100% match Loan program (100% match) - subject to some potential loan
forgiveness clauses.
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act - H.R. 3684 - AEA Summary
Updated: 02/02/2022 Page 3 of 4 4/4/2022
Section
(IIJA)
Program Title Technology
Program
Description/Notes Aggregate Federal Funding
Appropriation
Estimated Funding for AK State of AK Match Requirement Notes on AK Funding Estimate
40109 State Energy
Program
AEEE - Taylor Allocates $500M, distributed in accordance with the applicable distribution formula in effect for 01/01/2021. Funds are to
be made available for, but not limited to, "[...] the electrification of, State government vehicles, fleet vehicles, taxis and
ridesharing services, mass transit, school buses, ferries, and privately owned passenger and medium- and heavy-duty-
vehicles." SEP funding for AK for FY2021 was $445,730 of a total $56M, or 0.79%. At $100M per annum, it is estimated AK
will receive $795,946/yr ($3.98M total).
$500,000,000 $3,979,732 None required Changes some of the regulation of the SEP for this bill and going
forward: ‘‘(7) the mandatory conduct of activities to support
transmission
and distribution planning, including—
‘‘(A) support for local governments and Indian Tribes;
‘‘(B) feasibility studies for transmission line routes and
alternatives;
‘‘(C) preparation of necessary project design and permits;
and
‘‘(D) outreach to affected stakeholders.’’
40331 Hydroelectric
Production
incentives
Hydro - Bryan $125M for FY2022 to remain available until expended for DOE to make incentive payments for electric energy generated
and sold by a qualified hydroelectric facility during the incentive period. "Payments made by the Secretary under this
section to the owner or operator of a qualified hydroelectric facility shall be based on the number of kilowatt hours of
hydroelectric energy generated by the facility during the incentive period. For any such facility, the amount of such payment
shall be 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour (adjusted as provided in paragraph (2) [for inflation]), subject to the availability of
appropriations under subsection (g), except that no facility may receive more than $1,000,000 in 1 calendar year."
$125,000,000 Competitive application
process
Incentive payments capped at $1M
per year for 10 years, or $10M total
for a single qualifying facility.
Incentive program based on energy generation; cost share is 100%
with incentive acting only as a discount towards hydro facility O&M
costs.
40332 Hydroelectric
Efficiency
improvement
incentives
Hydro - Bryan $75M for FY2022 to remain available until expended for DOE to make incentive payments to the owners or operators of
hydroelectric facilities at existing dams to be used to make capital improvements in the facilities that are directly related to
improving the efficiency of such facilities by at least 3 percent. Incentive payments under this section shall not exceed 30
percent of the costs of the capital improvement concerned and not more than 1 payment may be made with respect to
improvements at a single facility. No payment in excess of $5,000,000 may be made with respect to improvements at a
single facility.
$75,000,000 Competitive application
process
Incentive payment capped at 30%
of capital cost of improvement(s),
not to exceed $5M. As pursuant to
42 U.S. Code § 15882
State Cost Share is total capital cost of improvement(s). Incentive
payment can be construed as a percentage discount to overall project
cost. Incentive payment increases with capital cost, capped at 30%,
not to exceed $5M. Utility contributions to Bradley should count as
state match funds.
40333 Maintaining and
Enhancing
Hydroelectricity
Incentives
Hydro - Bryan $553.6M for FY2022 to remain available until expended for DOE to make payments to the owners or operators of qualified
hydroelectric facilities at existing dams to be used to make improvements related to dam safety, grid resiliency, and
environmental improvements. Incentive payments under this section shall not exceed 30 percent of the costs of the capital
improvement concerned and not more than 1 payment may be made with respect to improvements at a single facility. No
payment in excess of $5,000,000 may be made with respect to improvements at a single facility.
$553,600,000 Competitive application
process
Incentive payment capped at 30%
of capital cost of improvement(s),
not to exceed $5M.
Incentive payment increases with capital cost, capped at 30%, not to
exceed $5M. Utility contributions to Bradley should count as state
match funds.
40334 Pumped Storage
Hydropower Wind
and Solar
Integration and
System Reliability
Initiative
AEEE - Audrey $10M for FY2022 to FY2026 for purposes of no later than 09/30/2023 the DOE "enter[ing] into an agreement with an eligible
to provide financial assistance to the eligible entity to carry out project design, transmission studies, power market
assessments, and permitting for a pumped storage hydropower project to facilitate the long duration storage of intermittent
renewable electricity." Eligibility for assistance is subject to a potential project being "(i) designed to provide not less than
1,000MW of storage capacity; (ii) be able to provide energy and capacity of use in more than 1 organized electricity market;
(iii) be able to store electricity generated by intermittent renewable electricity projects located on Tribal land; and (iv) have
received a preliminary permit from FERC."
$10,000,000 Competitive application
process
100% match State Cost Share = 100%
40502 Energy Efficiency
Revolving Loan Fund
Grant Program
Energy Efficiency
- Taylor
$250M to be allocated for FY2022, available until expended. Maximum of $15M in grant funds to be allocated to each State
to establish OR utilize an existing revolving loan fund for purposes of conducting commercial and residential energy audits
and commercial and residential energy upgrades and retrofits. Additional funding may be available for those priority states
which "are among the 15 States with the highest annual per-capita combined residential and commercial sector energy
consumption, per the EIA; or the 15 States with the highest annual per-capita energy-related carbon dioxide emissions by
State, per the EIA". While State matching funds are not required, the leveraging of private capital via the grant funds is
highly encouraged.
$250,000,000 $795,946 None required This program flows through SEP and will be subject to the same
reporting requirements/platform. AHFC may be interested, still
awaiting answer as of 01/28/2022. AEA/AIDEA would need to
administer a Commercial Loan/Grant program.
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act - H.R. 3684 - AEA Summary
Updated: 02/02/2022 Page 4 of 4 4/4/2022
Section
(IIJA)
Program Title Technology
Program
Description/Notes Aggregate Federal Funding
Appropriation
Estimated Funding for AK State of AK Match Requirement Notes on AK Funding Estimate
40503 Energy Auditor
Training Grant
Program
Energy Efficiency
- Taylor
$40M to be allocated for FY2022 to FY 2026. Grant allocation to States is subject to formula calculation based on
population and shall not exceed $2M. Grants to be made available to States to "train individuals to conduct energy audits
or surveys of commercial and residential buildings."
$40,000,000 $2,000,000 None required $2M is maximum amount per State.
This program flows through SEP and will be subject to the same
reporting requirements/platform. AHFC may be interested, answer
expected week of 11/22
40552 Energy Efficiency
and Conservation
Block Grant Program
Energy Efficiency
- Taylor
$550M to be allocated for FY2022, until expended. Funding amount calculated per formula. Adding "programs for
financing energy efficiency, renewable energy, and zero-emission transportation (and associated infrastructure), capital
investments, projects, and programs, which may include loan programs and performance contracting programs, for
leveraging of additional public and private sector funds, and programs that allow rebates, grants, or other incentives for the
purchase and installation of energy efficiency, renewable energy, and zero-emission transportation (and associated
infrastructure) measures" to EECBG program.
$550,000,000 $1,925,000 None required NASEO reports 68% going to the 10 largest city or boroughs in the
state direct from DOE. 28% to smaller cities, to be run through AEA.
2% to tribes (last time that was direct from DOE, and 2% for
competitive projects.
41007 Renewable Energy
Projects
AEEE - Audrey This section plans to administer funding for RE projects through DOE, EERE and other federal agencies. Similar to other DOE
RE programs, the match requirement and state applicant eligibility is defined on a case by case basis, depending on the
agency that the funds are administered through. More information should become available on these programs as the
adminstration plan is revealed by DOE. The Funding Opportunity Working Group will continue to monitor the relevant
offices for funding announcements. Funding appears to be focused heavily on Research and Development type projects.
Geothermal:
$84,000,000 for FY 2022 - 2025
Wind Energy:
$100,000,000 for FY 2022 - 2025
Solar Energy:
$80,000,000 for FY 2022 - 2025
Competitive application
process
Varies depending on program
Section J
Title VIII
National Electric
Vehicle Formula
Program
Electric Vehicles -
Betsy
Formula based funds under Section 104(c) of title 23 USC for the development of publically available networked EV charging
infrastructure along deisgnated alternative fuel corridors. Must develop a plan for disbursing the funds and developing the
charging network and submit to Department of Transportation for approval. If the plan is not submitted or approved, the
funds for that FY will be provided to localities within the state or disbursed to other states if they cannot be used by the
localities.
$5,000,000,000 total
$300,000,000 for Federal Joint Office
10% set aside for assistance grants for
States and localities
Remaining funds follow base
apportionment under Section 104(c) of
title 23 USC.
$51,000,000 $1,500,000
Federal share not to exceed 80%
total project costs; State or Private
Entities (subgrantees) can provide
20% match. State will need to fund
planning, interagency coordination,
stakeholder outreach, GIS support,
and reporting prior to federal
funding being available. If 10% set
aside for assistance is apportioned
to AK and state required to provide
20% match, then state would need
$1,500,000.
These funds can only be used for purposes of EV charging
infrastructure development. Amount AK will receive was estimated
from AK's FY21 apportionment after penalties applied to 90% of the
funds. The AK funding estimate does not include the 10% set aside
for assistance grants to states and localities because it is not clear if
that will be competitive or apportioned.
These funds can only be used for purposes of EV charging
infrastructure development along designated alternative fuel
corridors (AFCs) until they are fully built out. It is important for the
State to get clarification on flexibility of AFC criteria and then decide
to nominate the National Highway System highways and ferry/port
terminals and other roads if allowed as Corridor Pending to make full
use of these funds.
Alaska currently has one Corridor Pending highway route from
Anchorage to Fairbanks and no Corridor Ready routes.
HB 301 OVERVIEW
T.W. Patch, JD
Director of Planning
House Energy Committee
March 8, 2022
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
Railbelt Energy –AEA owns the Bradley
Lake Hydroelectric Project, the Alaska
Intertie, and the Sterling to Quartz Creek
Transmission Line —all of which benefit
Railbelt consumers by reducing the cost
of power.
Power Cost Equalization (PCE) –PCE
reduces the cost of electricity in rural
Alaska for residential customers and
community facilities, which helps ensure
the sustainability of centralized power.
Rural Energy –AEA constructs bulk fuel
tank farms, diesel powerhouses, and
electrical distribution grids in rural
villages. AEA supports the operation of
these facilities through circuit rider and
emergency response programs.
Alternative Energy and Energy Efficiency
–AEA provides funding, technical
assistance, and analysis on alternative
energy technologies to benefit Alaskans.
These include biomass, hydro, solar,
wind, and others.
Grants and Loans –AEA provides loans
to local utilities, local governments, and
independent power producers for the
construction or upgrade of power
generation and other energy facilities.
Energy Planning –In collaboration with
local and regional partners, AEA
provides economic and engineering
analysis to plan the development of
cost-effective energy infrastructure.
AEA Programs and Services
AEA works to diversify
Alaska’s energy
portfolio, engages on
energy planning and
policy, invests in
Alaska’s energy
infrastructure, and
provides rural Alaska
with technical and
community
assistance.
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 02
What is a Renewable Portfolio Standard?
Renewable
Portfolio
Standard
(RPS)
A requirement on retail electric suppliers…
To supply a minimum percentage or amount of their retail load…
With eligible sources of renewable energy
Typically Backed with incentives of some form (financial or other)
Often Accompanied by a tradable renewable energy certificate (REC)
program to facilitate compliance
Never Designed the same in any two states
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 03
House Bill 301
House Bill (HB) 301 promotes energy independence, long-term
cost reductions, and competitive markets in Alaska’s Railbelt.
HB 301 aligns Alaska with 30 states and two territories in creating
a renewable portfolio standard on the Railbelt.
A key element of the Governor’s RPS is a firm commitment to
transition to 30% renewable power by 2030 and 80% by 2040.
Expanding our renewable energy portfolio is the best way to
diversify our supply thus increasing Alaska’s energy security.
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 04
Prior Legislative Action
AN ACT DECLARING A STATE ENERGY POLICY.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Alaska
*Section 1. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is amended by adding a new section to read:
LEGISLATIVE INTENT. It is the intent of the legislature that
(1) the state achieve a 15 percent increase in energy efficiency on a per capita basis between 2010 and 2020;
(2) the state receive 50 percent of its electric generation from renewable and alternative energy sources by 2025;
(3) the state work to ensure a reliable in-state gas supply for residents of the state;
(4) the power project fund (AS 42.45.010) serve as the main source of state assistance for energy projects;
(5) the state remain a leader in petroleum and natural gas production and become a leader in renewable and
alternative energy development.
Section 2. Permanent law. See Table of Disposition of Acts.
Approved: June 16, 2010
2010 Temporary Special Acts and Resolves, An Act Declaring a State Energy Policy, Chapter 82 Effective: September 14, 2010
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 05
Recent Evolution RPS Standards and Goals
RPS policies exist in 30 States and DC; apply to 58% of total U.S. retail electricity sales
JANUARY 2012
Source: N.C. Solar Center at N.C. State University, Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency (accessed
July 2012). (Correction: Amended source corrects the source listed in original publication of February 3, 2012.)
Note: The map includes West Virginia as a State with a Renewable Portfolio Standard, although the Interstate
Renewable Energy Council categorizes it as a goal State rather than an RPS State.
Source: Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy & Efficiency® September 2020
SEPTEMBER 2020
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 06
HOW DO WE GET THERE
U.S.AK
34%
58%
6%2%
AK*
Energy Production Profile by Source (%)
Oil and Gas Coal Renewable Energy
(Biomass, Solar, Wind)
Hydroelectric
(*With Susitna-Watana)
Nuclear Power
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 08
Soldotna
Homer
Seward
Location –The Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project is located
27‐air miles northeast of Homer on the Kenai Peninsula
Benefits –Provide low cost energy to 550,000+ members of
Chugach Electric Association, City of Seward, Golden Valley
Electric Association, Homer Electric Association, and Matanuska
Electric Association
Annual Energy Production –~10% of Railbelt electricity at 4.5
cents/kWh (or ~54,400 homes/year) and over $20 million in
savings per year to Railbelt utilities from Bradley Lake versus
natural gas
Status –Energized in 1991
Dam Height –125 feet
Dam Elevation –1,190 Feet
Reservoir Length –4 miles
Reservoir Width –1.3 miles
Installed Capacity –120 MW
Annual Energy –400,000 MWh
Cost –~$400 Million
Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project
Hydroelectric power is Alaska’s largest source of renewable
energy —and Bradley Lake is Alaska’s largest hydro facility.
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 09
Installed Capacity –≤ 180 MW
Annual Energy –100,000-
500,000 MWh
Cost –~$160-500 Million
Location –The Dixon Diversion Project is located five
miles southwest of Bradley Lake
Studying Two Options –
-Alternative 1 –Tunnel to Bradley Lake
-Alternative 2 –Run-of-River Powerhouse on Martin
River
Benefits –Could provide annual electric energy for
17,000-40,000 homes on the Railbelt. (Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project: 54,000 homes)
Status –Alternative analysis underway
Dixon Diversion Project
The proposed Dixon Diversion Project would expand the
size of the largest hydro project in Alaska —the Bradley
Lake Hydroelectric Project.
Soldotna
Homer
Seward
10
$345,000 $1.5 Million $2.5 Million
Feasibility Design and
Hydrology
Environmental Studies
Draft License Amendment
Detailed Geotechnical
Investigations
Operations/Power
Modeling
Environmental Assessment
Fiscal Year 2024
Detailed
mapping/topography
License Amendment
Consultations
Environmental Studies
Hydrology Studies
Initial Geotechnical
Investigations
Preliminary Design
Fiscal Year 2023
Establish river gauge
Initiate Bradley Lake FERC
License Amendment
Alternatives Analysis
Report (Conceptual
Design
Fiscal Year 2022
Dixon Diversion: Next Steps
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 11
Peak Demand Scenario on Coldest Day of Year —Hydro
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 12
Peak Demand Scenario on Coldest Day of Year —Wind & Solar
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 13
Railbelt
Infrastructure
Upgrades
The Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project is managed by the Bradley Lake Project
Management Committee (BPMC), which is comprised of a member from each of
the five participating Railbelt utilities —Chugach Electric Association, Golden
Valley Electric Association, Homer Electric Association, Matanuska Electric
Association, Seward Electric Association —and AEA.
AEA and the BPMC have identified several opportunities to optimize the value
provided by the project to more than 550,000 Alaskans along the Railbelt.
These projects will remove transmission constraints, improve grid resiliency, and
allow for better use of the Bradley Project’s potential by increasing its ability to
deliver more low-cost, renewable energy throughout the Railbelt grid and
enhance our ability to utilize that power most flexibly and cost-effectively.
The Railbelt region of the State has seen significant changes
to its energy infrastructure in the last 10 years. As a result of
these changes transmission enhancements are necessary.
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 14
Project Name Scope Schedule Budget
Upgrade Transmission Line from
Bradley Junction to Soldotna
Construction of a second 115 kV transmission line
from Bradley Junction to the Soldotna Substation 2022-2029 $66 Million
Upgrade Transmission Line from
Soldotna to Sterling
Upgrade of the transmission line from 115 kV to
230 kV from the Soldotna Substation to the
Sterling Substation in accordance with the results
of engineering studies
2022-2029 $17 Million
Upgrade Transmission Line from
Sterling to Quartz Creek
Upgrade of the transmission line between the
Sterling Substation and Quartz Creek Substation
(SSQ Line) from 115 kV to 230 kV
2022-2029 $53 Million
Battery Energy Storage Systems
for Grid Stabilization
Upgrade to existing BESS system in Fairbanks, and
also new BESS systems in the Kenai, and Central
regions of the grid
2019-2025 $115 Million
Study of Alternative Path to Export
Energy Off Kenai Peninsula
Study the feasibility of the best alternative
transmission line path to deliver Bradley Project
energy off the Kenai Peninsula
2022-2024 $10 Million
Required Project Work Summary
Total $261 MillionAEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 15
Constructed in the mid-1980s, the Alaska
Intertie is a 170 mile-long, 345 kilovolt (kV)
transmission line from Willow to Healy
Operated by AEA and Railbelt utilities, the
transmission line improves reliability within
Railbelt system
Allows Golden Valley Electric Association
(GVEA) to connect to and benefit from
lower cost power
Between 2008 and 2018, the
Intertie provided an average
annual cost savings of
$30 million to GVEA
customers
Alaska Intertie
16
Maximizing Clean
Energy for the Railbelt
Bradley Lake Expansion (Spillway Raise) –$4 million
Bradley-Soldotna 115kV Line –$66 million
Soldotna-Quartz Creek (and Substation) –$70 million
Bernice Lake-Beluga HVDC –$185 million
Dave’s Creek-University 230kV Line –$58 million
Grid Stabilization –$115 million
17
2019
Abeyance Rescinded
2017
Licensing Abeyance
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project History
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 18
Cook Inlet Natural Gas Value into the Future
Opportunities:
Home heating on the Railbelt (including potential future expansion)
Power generation fuel on an as-needed basis and gas storage
(CINGSA)
Industrial customers in the Cook Inlet
-Combined heat and power applications stand alone
customers
-Possibility for green hydrogen production
-In-state industrial use
-Potential pipeline transport for minerals extraction
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 19
813 W Northern Lights Blvd.
Anchorage, AK 99503
Main: (907) 771-3000
Fax: (907) 771-3044
akenergyauthority.org
@alaskaenergyauthority
@alaskaenergyauthority
Alaska Energy Authority
AEA provides
energy solutions
to meet the
unique needs of
Alaska’s rural
and urban
communities.
20
APPENDIX
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Timeline
AEA HB 301 Overview | House Energy Committee | March 8, 2022 22
CAPITAL BUDGET
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
Senate and House Finance Committee
March 7, 2022
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
AEA Active Projects
and Services
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 02
Program Funding Sources FY2023 Proposed
Electrical Emergencies State General Fund $ 200.0
Strategic Plan for Railbelt Assets Fiscal Year 2022 Supplemental General Fund 2,500.0
Bulk Fuel Tank Farm Upgrades State Match 5,500.0
Bulk Fuel Tank Farm Upgrades Federal Receipt Authority 7,500.0
Renewable Energy Fund (REF)PCE Excess Earnings via REF Capitalization 15,000.0
Rural Power System Upgrades PCE Excess Earnings 10,000.0
Rural Power System Upgrades Federal Receipt Authority 10,000.0
Volkswagen Settlement Interest Earnings Receipt Authority (Statutory Designated)400.0
Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Fiscal Year 2022 Supplemental General Fund 1,500.0
Total $ 52,600.0
FY2023 Capital Budget Overview (Thousands)
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 03
AEA provides support when an electric
utility has lost, or will lose ability to
generate or transmit power
In the Fiscal Year 2022, $200,000 was
appropriated.
During the last five years there have
been four electrical emergencies on
average
The average cost of an electrical
emergency assistance is approximately
$45,000 eachState General Fund: $200,000CAPITAL
REQUEST:
Electrical Emergency
Response
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 04
Develop an updated Railbelt
Integrated Resource Plan
Focus on un-constraining
transmission congestion on the
bulk power system
Utilize the least cost power
opportunities on the
interconnected transmission
system FY22 Supplemental General Fund:
$2.5 Million
CAPITAL
REQUEST:
Strategic Plan For
Railbelt Assets
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 05
~400 rural bulk fuel facilities
Goal —code compliant fuel storage
facilities and prevention of spills and
contamination
Aging infrastructure, erosion, and
catastrophic failure
Active projects —8 full and 18
Maintenance and Improvement
Deferred maintenance unmet
$800 million
State Match: $5.5 MillionFederal Receipt Authority:$7.5 Million
CAPITAL
REQUEST:
Bulk Fuel Tank Farm
Upgrades
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 06
REF incentivizes the development of qualifying and
competitively selected renewable energy projects
Since inception, the program to date has awarded 244
grants totaling $275 million; 99 projects are in operation,
27 are in development
Legislature approved all 11 AEA-recommended
projects as submitted for Round 13, for a total of $4.75
million in available grant funds
Solicited for Round 14; application deadline was
January 18, 2022; 39 applicants —$15 million in
Governor’s Fiscal Year 2023 proposed budget
Alaska Statute 42.45.085(B)(PCE Excess Earnings)
REF program sunsets on June 30, 2023
PCE Excess Earnings:
$15 Million
CAPITAL
REQUEST:
Renewable Energy
Fund (REF)
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 07
~197 eligible communities
Goal —improve power system
efficiency, safety, and reliability
Aging infrastructure and Operation and
Maintenance
Active projects —11 full and 40
Maintenance and Improvement / Diesel
Emissions Reduction Act
Deferred maintenance unmet is over
$300 million
Alaska Statute 42.45.085(B) (PCE Excess
Earnings)
PCE Excess Earnings: $10 Million
Federal Receipt Authority:
$10 Million
CAPITALREQUEST:
Rural Power
System Upgrades
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 08
VW Trust Agreement requires
consistency with the terms of the
agreement approved by the Trustee
Allocation of VW Trust Interest Earnings
is estimated at $400,000:
-School Bus Replacement –65%
-DERA Diesel Genset Replacement –15%
-Electric Vehicle Infrastructure –15%
-Public Transit Bus Replacement –5%Receipt Authority (Statutory
Designated): $400,000
CAPITAL
REQUEST:
Volkswagen (VW) Settlement
Interest Earnings
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 09
Build out of Phase 2 and 3 of
an EV fast-charging network on
Alaska’s highway system and
community-based Level 2 EV
chargers to resolve range
anxiety
Capital request would be used
to leverage federal match
FY22 Supplemental General
Fund: $1.5 Million
CAPITAL
REQUEST:
Electric Vehicle
Infrastructure
AEA Capital Budget Presentation | Senate and House Finance Committee| March 7, 2022 10
813 W Northern Lights Blvd.
Anchorage, AK 99503
Main: (907) 771-3000
Fax: (907) 771-3044
akenergyauthority.org
@alaskaenergyauthority
@alaskaenergyauthority
Alaska Energy Authority
AEA provides
energy solutions
to meet the
unique needs of
Alaska’s rural
and urban
communities.
11
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:Rep. Calvin Schrage
Cc:"Rep. Bryce Edgmon"; Rep. Chris Tuck; Representative Tiffany Zulkosky; Rep. Matt Claman; Rep. George
Rauscher; Rep. Zack Fields; Rep. James Kaufman; Curtis W. Thayer; Jennifer L. Bertolini; TW Patch
Subject:AEA 2022.03.01 HB 358 Energy Committee Response.docx
Date:Wednesday, March 2, 2022 12:51:27 PM
Attachments:2022.03.01 HB 358 Energy Committee Response.pdf
image001.png
image002.png
Mr., Chairman,
Attached is the Energy Committee’s request for a “look back” regarding the cost of
administering the Renewable Energy Grant Fund program. Please let me know if you need any
additional information. Appreciate your efforts in advancing this legislation.
Curtis
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
From: Jennifer L. Bertolini <JBertolini@akenergyauthority.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 12:43 PM
To: Curtis W. Thayer <cthayer@akenergyauthority.org>
Subject: 2022.03.01 HB 358 Energy Committee Response.docx
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
RGYAUTHORITY.ORG
Renewable Energy Grant Fund
3 YR Look Back
Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) program administration includes:
Program Management and oversight
Grant Management
Project Management
Technical Support
Accounting Support
The costs of administrering the program are dependent on:
Program funding levels
Volume of active projects in a given year
Technical oversight required for new and existing
Out year costs are dependent on those factors and therefore not known at this
time.
Alaska Energy Authority
Renewable Energy Grant (38 Active Grants)
Administrative Expenses YOY 2019-2021
No.Name FY19 FY20 FY21
72000 Travel 6,610.02$ 1,500.65$ 164.00$
73000 Contractual 1,042,410.56$ 887,931.88$ 1,030,923.82$
74000 Supplies 7,441.95$ 4,517.66$ 14,413.59$
75000 Equipment & Other 1,759.67$ 2,311.09$ 1,728.89$
TOTAL 1,058,222.20$ 896,261.28$ 1,047,230.30$
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2
Renewable Energy Grant Fund
FY 2021 Detail
No.Name Net Change Balance
70000 State AR Expense
71002 Personal Services
72000 Travel
72508 Field Per Diem-In State 164.00 164.00
73000 Contractual
73115 Other Professional Services 104,282.28 104,282.28
73116 Other Professional Servc.-SOA 101,035.86 101,035.86
73141 Legal Services-SOA 1,232.79 1,232.79
73150 AIDEA Staff-Prof Services 786,335.38 786,335.38
73301 Telephone, Internet, and Cable 17,162.76 17,162.76
73302 Postage 1,997.90 1,997.90
73460 Freight & Express Charges 19.52 19.52
73502 Advertising/Printing/Binding 4,157.03 4,157.03
73503 Subscriptions & Info Services 6,731.24 6,731.24
73600 Building Utilities 6,520.38 6,520.38
73710 Other R&M 665.42 665.42
73900 Building Other 256.10 256.10
73903 Employee Tuition & Fees 264.66 264.66
73905 Recording Fees 262.50 262.50
74000 Supplies
74220 Stationery & Office Supplies 8,019.78 8,019.78
74221 Food Supplies 240.79 240.79
74560 Computer Commodities 3,031.42 3,031.42
74760 Vehicle R&M and Gas 779.74 779.74
74800 Materials & Supplies-Warehouse 1,726.69 1,726.69
74910 Other Supplies 615.17 615.17
75000 Equipment & Other
75050 Office Equipment & Furniture 1,728.89 1,728.89
79999 General & Admin Exp, Total 1,047,230.30 1,047,230.30
DATE DESCRIPTION AUDIENCE LOCATION TEAM MEMBERMarch 29, 2022 Legislative Hearing House Bill 271: AIDEA: Membership; Responsibilities Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 25, 2022 AEA Dixon Overview Bradley Lake Project Management Committee In Person Bryan CareyMach 23, 2022 Attendee Thayer Creek Hydroelectric Funders Summit Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 17, 2022 Legislative HearingSenate Finance Committee - Senate Bill 202: Renewable Energy Grant FundVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 17, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Energy Committee - House Bill 301: Utilities - Renewable Portfolio StandardVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 16, 2022 AttendeeDepartment of Commerce, Community and Economic Development Budget OverviewVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 15, 2022 AttendeeStatewide Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Committee Kick-Off MeetingVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 10, 2022 Attendee Special Bradley Lake Project Management Committee Meeting Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 10, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Ways & Means - House Bill 223: Repealing Funds, Accounts, and ProgramsVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 10, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Ways & Means Committee - House Bill 301: Renewable Energy PortfolioVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 9, 2022 Media InterviewImpact of high oil and gas prices on Remote Villages for Alaska's News SourcesPhone Curtis W. ThayerMarch 9, 2022 AEA EV Update Presentation Alaska Municipal League Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 8, 2022 House Bill 301 Overview Presentation House Energy Committee Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 7, 2022 Capital Budget Presentation Senate and House Finance Committee Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 3, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Energy Committee - House Bill 247 and House Bill 358: Power Cost Equalization Fund; Renewable Energy Grant FundVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 1, 2022 Brief RemarksAlaska Sustainable Energy Conference: Pre-Event Virtual Workshop Series - Hydrogen in AlaskaVirtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 25. 2022 AEA EV Partnership Presentation Department of Transportation In Person Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 23. 2022 AEA SB 179 PresentationSenate Labor & Commerce Committee - Senate Bill 179: Utilities: Renewable Portfolio StandardVirtualCurtis W. Thayer T.W. PatchFebruary 22, 2022 Legislative Hearing Senate Finance Budget Subcommittee Virtual Curtis W. ThayerAEA COMMUNITY OUTREACHUpdated on March 30, 2022 (6-Month Look Back)813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 • Phone: (907) 771‐3000 • Fax: (907) 771‐3044 • Email: info@akenergyauthority.org • Web: akenergyauthority.org
DATE DESCRIPTION AUDIENCE LOCATION TEAM MEMBERFebruary 21, 2022 Legislative HearingSenate Labor and Commerce Committee - Renewable Portfolio Standards BillVirtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 18, 2022 Seward Infrastructure Projects City of Seward Seward, AK Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 15, 2022 Legislative Hearing House Energy Committee - House Bill 247: Power Cost Equalization Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 11, 2022 Presenter NASEO Regional IIJA Roundtable Washington, DC Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 9, 2022 Attendee Southeast Conference Mid-Session Conference Juneau, AK Tim SandstromFebruary 9, 2022 Legislative HearingSenate Finance Committee - Senate Bill 154: Capital Budget (Supplemental) Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 9, 2022 AEA Update Presentation Southeast Conference Mid-Session Conference Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 9, 2022 AEA Dixon Overview Presentation Multi-Agency Partners Virtual Bryan CareyFebruary 9, 2022 Media Interview Summer Construction Forecast for Alaska Public Media Phone Tim SandstromFebruary 9, 2022 Speaker Alaska Forum on the Environment Virtual David LockardFebruary 8-11, 2022 Attendee NASEO Energy Policy Outlook Conference Washington, DC Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 7-8, 2022 AEA UpdateAlaska Congressional Delegation Meeting: Senator Murkowski, Senator Sullivan, and Congressman YoungWashington, DC Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 4, 2022 Legislative Hearing Senate Finance Committee Senate Bill 164 - Capital Budget Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 3, 2022 Legislative Hearing House Finance Committee - Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 2, 2022 AEA Update Presentation Alaska Power Association Legislative Conference Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 2, 2022 Legislative Hearing House Bill 283 and 285 Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 1-2, 2022 ModeratorAlaska Sustainable Energy Conference: Pre-Event Virtual Workshop Series - Nuclear Energy in AlaskaVirtual David LockardFebruary 1, 2022 Brief RemarksAlaska Sustainable Energy Conference: Pre-Event Virtual Workshop Series - Nuclear Energy in AlaskaVirtual Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 26, 2022 Attendee NASEO Regional Board Meeting Virtual Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 19, 2022 Attendee Anchorage C-PACE New Year ReceptionCowork by RSD Anchorage, AKCurtis W. ThayerT.W. PatchJanuary 20, 2022 Railbelt Meeting Berkshire Hathaway Energy/Utilities Virtual Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 19, 2022 Media InterviewInfrastructure Bill and Its Opportunities for Alaska for Alaska BusinessPhone Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 18, 2022 AEA EV Program Update Utilities Virtual Betsy McGregorJanuary 14, 2022 AEA Update Commissioner Corri Feige, Department of Natural Resources Phone Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 12, 2022 House Bill 223 Representative Kaufman Phone Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 11, 2022 AEA EV Program Update Department of Transportation Anchorage, AK Curtis W. ThayerAEA Community OutreachPage 2 of 3
DATE DESCRIPTION AUDIENCE LOCATION TEAM MEMBERJanuary 10, 2022 AEA Overview Denali Commission VirtualCurtis W. ThayerTim SandstromDecember 29, 2021 Media InquirySolar Energy Projects and REF for Arctic Sounder and Anchorage Daily NewsEmail Curtis W. ThayerDecember 16, 2021 AEA Owned-Assets Seward Electric Virtual Curtis W. ThayerDecember 14, 2021 AEA Overview McKinley Capital Management, LLC Virtual Curtis W. ThayerDecember 3, 2021 Media Inquiry Future State of Energy Policies for The Associated Press Email Curtis W. ThayerNovember 30, 2021 AEA Overview Sustainable Energy Class at UAF Bristol Bay Campus Virtual Taylor AsherNovember 18, 2021 AEA Overview Alaska Government Finance Officers AssociationHotel Captain Cook Anchorage, AKCurtis W. ThayerNovember 16, 2021 PCE OverviewAlaska Municipal League 71st Annual Local Government ConferenceHotel Captain Cook Anchorage, AKT.W. PatchNovember 15, 2021 AEA OverviewAlaska Municipal League 71st Annual Local Government ConferenceHotel Captain Cook Anchorage, AKTim SandstromNovember 11, 2021 Media Inquiry Electric Vehicles (EV) for Anchorage Daily News Email Curtis W. ThayerNovember 9, 2021AIDEA and AEA — Advancing Prosperity for AlaskansGreater Fairbanks Chamber of CommerceEvent Center & LoungeFairbanks, AKCurtis W. ThayerAlan WeitznerNovember 4, 2021 Media Inquiry EV Infrastructure for Anchorage Daily News Phone Curtis W. ThayerNovember 4, 2021 Media Inquiry Renewable Energy Projects for Alaska Economic Report Phone Curtis W. ThayerNovember 3, 2021 Media Inquiry Dixon Expansion Project for Petroleum News Phone Curtis W. ThayerNovember 2, 2021 Media Inquiry Renewable Energy for Alaska Economic Report Phone/Email Curtis W. ThayerOctober 27, 2021 Media Inquiry AEA Quote for FreeWire Technologies White Paper Email Curtis W. ThayerOctober 25-28, 2021 Presenter and Attendee 2021 Electrify Alaska! ConferenceThe Cordova Center Cordova, AKTaylor AsherConner EricksonOctober 19, 2021 Media Inquiry EV Supply and Use in Alaska for Alaska Business Email Curtis W. ThayerOctober 11-15, 2021 Attendee Regulatory Training for Public Utilities Albuquerque, New Mexico Curtis W. ThayerOctober 4, 2021 Media Inquiry EV Charger and Infrastructure for Alaska Economic Report Email Curtis W. ThayerAEA Community OutreachPage 3 of 3
DATE DESCRIPTION AUDIENCE LOCATION TEAM MEMBERMarch 29, 2022 Legislative Hearing House Bill 271: AIDEA: Membership; Responsibilities Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 25, 2022 AEA Dixon Overview Bradley Lake Project Management Committee In Person Bryan CareyMach 23, 2022 Attendee Thayer Creek Hydroelectric Funders Summit Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 17, 2022 Legislative HearingSenate Finance Committee - Senate Bill 202: Renewable Energy Grant FundVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 17, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Energy Committee - House Bill 301: Utilities - Renewable Portfolio StandardVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 16, 2022 AttendeeDepartment of Commerce, Community and Economic Development Budget OverviewVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 15, 2022 AttendeeStatewide Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy Committee Kick-Off MeetingVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 10, 2022 Attendee Special Bradley Lake Project Management Committee Meeting Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 10, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Ways & Means - House Bill 223: Repealing Funds, Accounts, and ProgramsVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 10, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Ways & Means Committee - House Bill 301: Renewable Energy PortfolioVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 9, 2022 Media InterviewImpact of high oil and gas prices on Remote Villages for Alaska's News SourcesPhone Curtis W. ThayerMarch 9, 2022 AEA EV Update Presentation Alaska Municipal League Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 8, 2022 House Bill 301 Overview Presentation House Energy Committee Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 7, 2022 Capital Budget Presentation Senate and House Finance Committee Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 3, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Energy Committee - House Bill 247 and House Bill 358: Power Cost Equalization Fund; Renewable Energy Grant FundVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 1, 2022 Brief RemarksAlaska Sustainable Energy Conference: Pre-Event Virtual Workshop Series - Hydrogen in AlaskaVirtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 25. 2022 AEA EV Partnership Presentation Department of Transportation In Person Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 23. 2022 AEA SB 179 PresentationSenate Labor & Commerce Committee - Senate Bill 179: Utilities: Renewable Portfolio StandardVirtualCurtis W. Thayer T.W. PatchFebruary 22, 2022 Legislative Hearing Senate Finance Budget Subcommittee Virtual Curtis W. ThayerAEA COMMUNITY OUTREACHUpdated on March 30, 2022 (6-Month Look Back)813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 • Phone: (907) 771‐3000 • Fax: (907) 771‐3044 • Email: info@akenergyauthority.org • Web: akenergyauthority.org
DATE DESCRIPTION AUDIENCE LOCATION TEAM MEMBERFebruary 21, 2022 Legislative HearingSenate Labor and Commerce Committee - Renewable Portfolio Standards BillVirtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 18, 2022 Seward Infrastructure Projects City of Seward Seward, AK Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 15, 2022 Legislative Hearing House Energy Committee - House Bill 247: Power Cost Equalization Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 11, 2022 Presenter NASEO Regional IIJA Roundtable Washington, DC Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 9, 2022 Attendee Southeast Conference Mid-Session Conference Juneau, AK Tim SandstromFebruary 9, 2022 Legislative HearingSenate Finance Committee - Senate Bill 154: Capital Budget (Supplemental) Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 9, 2022 AEA Update Presentation Southeast Conference Mid-Session Conference Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 9, 2022 AEA Dixon Overview Presentation Multi-Agency Partners Virtual Bryan CareyFebruary 9, 2022 Media Interview Summer Construction Forecast for Alaska Public Media Phone Tim SandstromFebruary 9, 2022 Speaker Alaska Forum on the Environment Virtual David LockardFebruary 8-11, 2022 Attendee NASEO Energy Policy Outlook Conference Washington, DC Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 7-8, 2022 AEA UpdateAlaska Congressional Delegation Meeting: Senator Murkowski, Senator Sullivan, and Congressman YoungWashington, DC Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 4, 2022 Legislative Hearing Senate Finance Committee Senate Bill 164 - Capital Budget Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 3, 2022 Legislative Hearing House Finance Committee - Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 2, 2022 AEA Update Presentation Alaska Power Association Legislative Conference Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 2, 2022 Legislative Hearing House Bill 283 and 285 Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 1-2, 2022 ModeratorAlaska Sustainable Energy Conference: Pre-Event Virtual Workshop Series - Nuclear Energy in AlaskaVirtual David LockardFebruary 1, 2022 Brief RemarksAlaska Sustainable Energy Conference: Pre-Event Virtual Workshop Series - Nuclear Energy in AlaskaVirtual Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 26, 2022 Attendee NASEO Regional Board Meeting Virtual Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 19, 2022 Attendee Anchorage C-PACE New Year ReceptionCowork by RSD Anchorage, AKCurtis W. ThayerT.W. PatchJanuary 20, 2022 Railbelt Meeting Berkshire Hathaway Energy/Utilities Virtual Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 19, 2022 Media InterviewInfrastructure Bill and Its Opportunities for Alaska for Alaska BusinessPhone Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 18, 2022 AEA EV Program Update Utilities Virtual Betsy McGregorJanuary 14, 2022 AEA Update Commissioner Corri Feige, Department of Natural Resources Phone Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 12, 2022 House Bill 223 Representative Kaufman Phone Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 11, 2022 AEA EV Program Update Department of Transportation Anchorage, AK Curtis W. ThayerAEA Community OutreachPage 2 of 3
DATE DESCRIPTION AUDIENCE LOCATION TEAM MEMBERJanuary 10, 2022 AEA Overview Denali Commission VirtualCurtis W. ThayerTim SandstromDecember 29, 2021 Media InquirySolar Energy Projects and REF for Arctic Sounder and Anchorage Daily NewsEmail Curtis W. ThayerDecember 16, 2021 AEA Owned-Assets Seward Electric Virtual Curtis W. ThayerDecember 14, 2021 AEA Overview McKinley Capital Management, LLC Virtual Curtis W. ThayerDecember 3, 2021 Media Inquiry Future State of Energy Policies for The Associated Press Email Curtis W. ThayerNovember 30, 2021 AEA Overview Sustainable Energy Class at UAF Bristol Bay Campus Virtual Taylor AsherNovember 18, 2021 AEA Overview Alaska Government Finance Officers AssociationHotel Captain Cook Anchorage, AKCurtis W. ThayerNovember 16, 2021 PCE OverviewAlaska Municipal League 71st Annual Local Government ConferenceHotel Captain Cook Anchorage, AKT.W. PatchNovember 15, 2021 AEA OverviewAlaska Municipal League 71st Annual Local Government ConferenceHotel Captain Cook Anchorage, AKTim SandstromNovember 11, 2021 Media Inquiry Electric Vehicles (EV) for Anchorage Daily News Email Curtis W. ThayerNovember 9, 2021AIDEA and AEA — Advancing Prosperity for AlaskansGreater Fairbanks Chamber of CommerceEvent Center & LoungeFairbanks, AKCurtis W. ThayerAlan WeitznerNovember 4, 2021 Media Inquiry EV Infrastructure for Anchorage Daily News Phone Curtis W. ThayerNovember 4, 2021 Media Inquiry Renewable Energy Projects for Alaska Economic Report Phone Curtis W. ThayerNovember 3, 2021 Media Inquiry Dixon Expansion Project for Petroleum News Phone Curtis W. ThayerNovember 2, 2021 Media Inquiry Renewable Energy for Alaska Economic Report Phone/Email Curtis W. ThayerOctober 27, 2021 Media Inquiry AEA Quote for FreeWire Technologies White Paper Email Curtis W. ThayerOctober 25-28, 2021 Presenter and Attendee 2021 Electrify Alaska! ConferenceThe Cordova Center Cordova, AKTaylor AsherConner EricksonOctober 19, 2021 Media Inquiry EV Supply and Use in Alaska for Alaska Business Email Curtis W. ThayerOctober 11-15, 2021 Attendee Regulatory Training for Public Utilities Albuquerque, New Mexico Curtis W. ThayerOctober 4, 2021 Media Inquiry EV Charger and Infrastructure for Alaska Economic Report Email Curtis W. ThayerAEA Community OutreachPage 3 of 3
Page 2Alaska Legislative Digest No. 7/2022
Renewable energy standards, SB 172, up for hearing in Senate Labor and Commerce
The governor’s SB 172, setting minimum renewable energy standards for Alaska electric utilities, was
up for its first hearing last Thursday in the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee. This bill sets manda-
tory standards to be met similar to those in 30 states and two U.S. territories. Standards would be en-
forced by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska, or RCA, Curtis Thayer, executive director of the Alaska
Energy Authority, told the committee. Gov. Mike Dunleavy wants utilities to make firm commitments to
achieve 30 percent of power supplied by renewables statewide by 2030 and 80 percent by 2040.
Thirty percent by 2030 is quite doable because the state is basically at 27 percent now with existing
hydro and wind power, Thayer said, but the committee asked questions about how 80 percent can be
achieved in the next 18 years. Construction of the Susitna hydro project would be a big step, getting the
state from 27 percent to 58 percent. There are a lot of ways it could be done, including expansion of the
existing Bradley Lake hydro project near Homer. Bradley Lake now supplies 10 percent of the South-
central-Interior “railbelt” needs and an expansion could increase supply 16 percent to 17 percent, Thayer
said. However, upgrades of transmission lines are needed to efficiently move expanded Bradley Lake or
other renewable power. Bradley Lake now provides about 18 percent of power needs in Interior Alaska
but the “line loss” of power transported over aged transmission lines results in costs of $500,000 annually
to consumers along the railbelt, Thayer told the committee.
Before introducing SB 172 the governor consulted with the Department of Energy’s National Renew-
able Energy Laboratory, or NREL, who had developed a plan as to how 80 percent can be achieved,
Thayer said. NREL will speak at a future hearing on the bill. The state now has renewable energy “goals”
set in 2010 that include 50 percent renewable by 2025, but SB 172 puts teeth into this because the bench-
marks will be set as requirements by the RCA. Utilities have yet to weigh in on this bill. The companion
house bill, HB 301, is in the House Energy Committee and has not yet had a hearing.
Microreactors still several years away even if Legislature approves HB 299 or SB 177
Legislators are very interested in the new-technology advanced microreactors, the governor’s HB 299
and SB 177 would streamline state permitting, and there are proposals for siting the facilities in Alaska,
a 5 megawatt unit is proposed for Eielson Air Force Base and a larger unit in Valdez by Copper Valley
Electric Assoc. However, it will be several years before one can be built because companies must still
obtain licenses for the technology from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, University of Alas-
ka scientists told the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee Thursday. The cost of the power is still
unknown. Right now Bradley Lake hydro is the cheapest in the state at 4 cents/kilowatt hour followed by
natural gas at 7 cents to 9 cents/ kilowatt hour. Fire Island wind power is generated for 9.7 cents/ kilowatt
hour, the Alaska Energy Authority told the Senate committee.
. . . Energy . . .
Page 2Alaska Legislative Digest No. 8/2022
. . . Infrastructure . . .
– Continued on bottom, page 3
Guidelines on infrastructure funding coming, but slowly
– Continued from top, page 1
The bulk of the new federal IIJA money is in transportation with much of it in established formula pro-
grams in which there is little flexibility. Alaska is expected to get $664.3 million in federal Fiscal Year
2022, or FFY 2022 (Oct. 1-Sept. 30). That’s a $115.4 million increase from the $548.9 million allocated
in FFY 2021. However, the $664.3 million expected next year will increase when an expected additional
allocation of money for bridges, ferries and emergency relief and other adjustments are added. The in-
crease is now estimated at $100 million but it may well be more, possibly an added $140 million to $150
million. DOT&PF expects to get a better estimate from the federal government on or before March 11,
the data the continuing resolution expires and Congress is expected to pass the full year appropriation.
Most of the money is in core federal highways program
Meanwhile, most of the $664.3 million, or $337.3 million, is in the core federal national highway
construction program where projects are listed in the five-year Surface Transportation and Improvement
Program, or STIP. In addition to the national highways money there is a $8.9 million increase in surface
transportation block grants (STGB), which has flexibility to make changes. Most new, non-formula pro-
grams for Alaska in the IIJA (where the state has flexibility) are in the STGB program, which for Alaska
include some new things like ice roads, seasonal road maintenance and rural ports and barge landings.
However, a point made by DOTPF is that there is only a 6.7 percent increase in the block grant category
in the IIJA compared with a 17.2 percent increase for the core national highway program. The one federal
program with flexibility was given only a modest increase. It was also pointed out that the 6.7 percent
increase appears offset by the estimated of 7.5 percent inflation this year.
Bridges, ferry system, electric vehicle charging
Outside of funds for the traditional highway program, what is known now is that $45 million will be
available this year in new money for bridges and $25 million to $35 million to support ferry system op-
erations. DOT&PF also told the Finance Committee that it was recently notified that $7.8 million will be
available for an electric vehicle network. However, to obtain the electric vehicle money the state (like-
ly the Alaska Energy Authority in coordination with DOT&PF) must develop an EV Deployment Plan
showing the highway corridors with the charging stations. A complication is that the stations must be no
more than 50 miles apart, which is a challenge for Alaska with its long-distance highways. An addition-
al technical complication is that electricity supplied will have to be “stepped down” from high-voltage
transmission to 240 volts for auto recharging. Charging sites must also contain, at minimum, 3 chargers
and have a minimum “up” time for continuous service. The state is exploring exceptions to these rules
due to extreme conditions in Alaska. Another new program in transportation this year is $17.9 million for
a new “PROTECT” program intended to add resiliency to transportation infrastructure against natural
Page 3Alaska Legislative Digest No. 8/2022
. . . Education/ Energy . . .
events and extreme weather, such as protecting highways from climate-related rockfalls, coastal flooding,
and earthquakes and to offer similar protection to communities, such as evacuation routes and access to
emergency facilities. Guidance is expected on how these funds can be used including whether they can
be available to communities, DOT&PF said.
Rural lawmakers are interested in development of rural community docks, and these are eligible and
fall under the $142 million available for transportation block grants ($7.1 million up from $133.3 million
this year). The money can be used anywhere in the state, but it’s not a big pool of cash. “This is far more
modest than what I expected,” Rep. Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, said in the House Finance meeting.
James Marks, DOT&PF’s director of planning, responded: “There will be a lot of money available
through other avenues, outside the federal highway program, under which Alaska will benefit including
the discretionary grants, one or two of which are virtually guaranteed.”
House Democrats’ objections to pre-K bill a puzzle to supporters
– Continued from bottom, page 1
The objections by several House Democrats to the bills expanding pre-K and early reading instruc-
tion, in HB 185, are a puzzle to fellow Democrats who are supporters, like Sen. Tom Begich, D-Anch.,
and Rep. Chris Tuck, D-Anch., both sponsors of the bills. Rural legislators are objecting, they say,
because the bills continue a framework of urban bias in education. However, they have not yet made
counter-proposals other than those in another bill allowing tribal compacting for schools. That bill is
also active in the Senate. There’s also worry about how the education department will implement the bill
through regulations. Also, it’s possible some House members hope to leverage Senate Republicans and
the governor on an inflation adjustment to the Base Student Allocation, the funding formula for schools,
in HB 272 and 273. Senate President Peter Micciche and Majority Leader Shelly Hughes, as well as the
governor, are supporters of the pre-K and reading bill. In the Senate’s work on its version of early learn-
ing, SB 111, efforts are underway to put more support for indigenous language instruction in the bill.
Support for expansion of CTE education in Senate Finance
In last Friday’s overview session on SB 111 several senators, and education Commissioner Johnson,
voiced support for Career and Technical Education, or CTE, in K-12 because of its track record in pro-
ducing a higher overall graduation rate, particularly in rural schools. Sen. Click Bishop, R-Fairbanks,
said there will be support for CTE in the budget when it comes before the committee. Sen. Natasha von
Imhof said she supports a reintroduction of employer tax credits to support regional training centers.
Infrastructure: New money added for resiliency
– Continued from page 2
‘Pretty dramatic increases’: High fuel prices expected to hit rural Alaska hard
https://www.alaskasnewssource.com/2022/03/10/pretty-dramatic-increases-high-fuel-prices-expected-hit-rural-alaska-hard/ 1/3
JUNEAU, Alaska (KTUU) - High prices for gasoline, diesel and heating oil are expected to
hit rural Alaska hard as communities make bulk fuel purchases.
In Western Alaska, all goods are either delivered by barge or by plane. Fuel surcharges
are added to shipping costs and those are projected to shoot up with the higher cost of
energy.
The first spring barge is set to come to Western Alaska in two weeks. Mike Poston,
director of sales at Vitus Energy, LLC., explained that crude oil prices are 50% higher
than they were in June last year.
“The market should plan for increases in energy prices well over $1.50 per gallon higher
than last fall,” he said through a prepared statement on March 1.
‘Pretty dramatic increases’: High fuel prices expected to hit rural Alaska hard
https://www.alaskasnewssource.com/2022/03/10/pretty-dramatic-increases-high-fuel-prices-expected-hit-rural-alaska-hard/ 2/3
Eight days later, Vitus Energy said there had been another increase of 54 cents to the
price per gallon of diesel and gasoline.
“What we’re seeing is about the time the barges are going to load up and sail out west
to begin deliveries, (it) looks like it’s going to be right at the peak of the market,” Poston
said. “Or at least, so far, that looks like it’s going to be the peak of the market.”
This price hike is occurring at exactly the wrong time for rural Alaska. Fuel will soon start
to be delivered for use in summer. Tribal organizations, village corporations and local
governments are also planning bulk fuel purchases that need to be made well in
advance of fall deliveries for next winter.
Poston said he’s hearing concern from small communities making fuel orders at these
high price points with no sign that they will drop significantly.
“We hear things like, ‘That’s going to blow our budget,’” he said. “We hear things like,
‘Oh my, that’s horrible.’”
Eugene Asicksik, president of the Shaktoolik Native Corp., has been in conversations
with members of the Norton Sound Economic Development Corp. about ordering a
year’s worth of fuel to be delivered by supertanker to Shaktoolik and nearby
communities.
The order is set to be made by the end of the month, Asicksik said. He added that
gasoline in Shaktoolik is already selling at $4.96 per gallon with tax.
“The way projections are going, I would say you could just about double that,” he said.
For dozens of communities, power bills could increase by 50%.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative is the utility for 58 communities across rural
Alaska, including the hub community of Bethel. The cooperative burns over 8 million
gallons of diesel a year to power those communities.
Bill Stamm, CEO of the cooperative, said it buys fuel futures, a million gallons at a time,
to lock in a price for the months ahead.
“We are buying at a fixed rate, in the anticipation that the rates, when we actually need
the fuel, will be higher,” he said. “We’ve been doing a little bit of that and watching the
crazy market as things go up and down with the cost of fuel recently.”
‘Pretty dramatic increases’: High fuel prices expected to hit rural Alaska hard
https://www.alaskasnewssource.com/2022/03/10/pretty-dramatic-increases-high-fuel-prices-expected-hit-rural-alaska-hard/ 3/3
With the roller coaster in daily oil prices that shot up above $125 a barrel on Tuesday,
and back down a little on Wednesday, Stamm stressed that making bulk fuel purchases
is a “daily gamble.”
But, there is help out there. The Alaska Department of Commerce, Community and
Economic Development has a revolving loan fund for communities with 2,000 or fewer
people to help make bulk fuel buys.
The Power Cost Equalization program helps rural Alaska residents pay for their higher
energy costs. Curtis Thayer, head of the Alaska Energy Authority, said there are no cash
flow problems in getting relief out to eligible Alaskans.
He, too, has been hearing stories from communities grappling with the impacts of
higher fuel costs.
“They’re seeing some pretty dramatic increases,” he said.
The House of Representatives is debating whether to pay a $1,300 “energy relief
check” in addition to a $1,250 Permanent Fund dividend. Across the Capitol, legislators
expect a larger PFD will be paid in 2022 than in recent years.
Gov. Mike Dunleavy spoke about higher fuel prices on Tuesday and their impact on rural
Alaska. He said the PFD is the best way to disburse relief.
Copyright 2022 KTUU. All rights reserved.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 1/10
Since the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) was enacted in 2021,
State of Alaska officials have been trying to understand how best to harness
the windfall of federal resources. In January, department heads were
completing written analyses of potential projects that could benefit from IIJA
funds. So far, there are a lot of unknowns at the state level and for entities the
bill affects, such as the Denali Commission and tribal governments. The IIJA
mainly directs money to the state through existing channels, and it also sets
up new and competitive funding sources and streamlines permitting for certain
types of projects.
“The majority of these funds will come through existing federal programs, but
the legislation did establish a number of new discretionary grant programs for
which Alaska should be competitive,” says Governor Mike Dunleavy’s Deputy
Communications Director Jeff Turner. “It’s important to remember that only a
portion of the money Alaska is expected to receive will come directly to the
State, as many discretionary grant programs are open to tribes, local
governments, and other entities.”
The existing federal programs include the US Department of Transportation’s
Surface Transportation Board, the Federal Aviation Administration’s Airport
Improvement Program, the largely federally funded Village Safe Water
program, and other similar programs.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 2/10
The Alaska Legislature must authorize any funding coming directly to the
State, but Turner says state officials were still awaiting guidance from federal
officials about how to implement that authorization. As a result, some of the
funding is unlikely to be allocated in this quarter.
“We will continue to develop projections as information becomes available, but
[the Dunleavy administration] will seek appropriation authority from the
legislature for any new infrastructure funds we expect to receive in FY23
during the upcoming session,” he says.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 3/10
Finding Clarity
Some portions of the IIJA are unclear, and part of the work state leaders are
doing is simply finding out what’s expected.
“We saw a section of the bill that says they will be making determinations at
one date but taking public comment at a later date,” says Alaska Energy
Authority (AEA) Executive Director Curtis W. Thayer. “Due to its complexity
and interrelated programs, each time we read the law we find additional
nuances.”
One crucial area Thayer is seeking clarity on has to do with electric vehicle
(EV) charging infrastructure programs. The act includes $7.5 billion to build a
network of EV fast-charging stations across the nation to support the Biden
administration’s goal of having 500,000 EV charging stations to meet the
projected 2030 EV market.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 4/10
Figuring out where to place stations along an EV charging corridor is already
difficult, Thayer says. For instance, the stretch of highway between Girdwood
and Cooper Landing needs somewhere to recharge, but power is not
available in Turnagain Pass. A larger puzzle is trying to understand how rural
Alaska, far from the highway system, benefits from the EV funding program.
Formula funds earmarked for each state to use on certain types of projects
are available for EV charging stations connected to the highway system.
Whether it also covers charging stations in communities off the highway
system, like Nome or Kotzebue, Thayer can’t be sure. AEA sent a letter
seeking clarification.
Building Roads and Bridges
The language in other areas of the IIJA seems straightforward. Alaska
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) Commissioner
Ryan Anderson says some funding was already rolling out in January, such as
a $45 million bridge package.
Anderson says the formula funds the state typically receives from the federal
government—for building roads and bridges or making road corridors safer—
will increase by between 20 and 30 percent, beginning this year.
“We will spend those funds, starting this federal fiscal year. We have the
shovel-ready projects those funds will get spent on,” he says.
An uncomfortable reality that DOT&PF faces, however, is the likely effect that
inflation will have on the additional funds. Although the IIJA provides a 30 to
40 percent increase in yearly transportation funding, the department
anticipates higher steel and other material costs in the coming season may
eat into the bonus.
Discretionary funds are a different story, however. For those funds, Alaska
competes like any other state.
“There is a lot of money in the act for those discretionary grant funds,”
Anderson says. A lot of the discretionary spending is in ports and harbors, so
he hopes that critical projects, such as the roughly $1.6 billion project to
modernize and repair the Port of Alaska in Anchorage, will obtain some of
those discretionary funds.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 5/10
“I would think the importance of that port to the Alaska transportation
system—it’s critical for everyone, Anchorage, Fairbanks, and beyond to get
their food and freight and everything else—will help,” Anderson says.
Another bright spot is aviation. Airport construction spending will see a
dramatic increase—more than 40 percent for some projects and up to 80
percent more funding for others. Anderson says the department will consult
the Aviation Advisory Board regarding aviation priorities.
Anderson is hopeful the IIJA will expedite construction on some projects and
help the state get preliminary work done on others. “We’re already looking at
advancing projects from 2023 to 2022 as a result of this act; that’s a real
positive,” he says.
The state generally funds projects according to the State Transportation
Improvement Plan, or STIP, which defines the scope of projects, details their
funding needs, and ranks them according to priority. The current four-year
plan is about to expire and a new STIP is being created, Anderson says. That
document will help determine where the infrastructure spending goes.
Anderson says public comments will help make those decisions —a process
that has already begun.
The state conducted a survey in November, asking residents what
transportation modes they use most often, what modes they prioritize, and
where they would like to see improvements in the coming year. More than
1,700 Alaskans took the survey. Anderson says the state will consider those
responses and other public comments in determining where to focus
infrastructure spending.
DOT&PF is also creating an interactive map on its website which will allow
residents to drop a pin on a project or area that needs to be addressed and
then comment in more detail about their selection
Energy Boost
For energy infrastructure, Thayer says the IIJA “cuts both ways.” While there
are exciting possibilities, some aspects are disappointing.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 6/10
For example, the AEA is interested in diverting more water into Bradley Lake
north of Homer. The project would redirect water from Dixon Glacier to
increase the annual energy output of Bradley Lake, already the largest source
of hydroelectric power in the state. The diversion project has an estimated
cost of about $250 million, but the IIJA includes only $200 million throughout
the nation for hydroelectric projects. Similarly, needed power system
upgrades in rural Alaska total about $300 million, and bulk fuel tank upgrade
projects tally another $800 million. The IIJA funds neither of those project
types.
However, the IIJA could underwrite needed upgrades to the transmission line
connecting Bradley Lake to Fairbanks. Those upgrades would allow the
Bradley Lake diversion project to move forward, Thayer says—if the diversion
project went forward prior to the transmission line upgrades, he explains,
existing transmission lines wouldn’t be able to carry the extra power.
Despite not having funds for rural bulk fuel and power systems from the IIJA,
Thayer says AEA plans to go ahead with several upgrades anyway, using
state funding.
“Each year we identify communities for power system and bulk fuel tank
upgrades,” he says. “We’re looking to our partners, the Denali Commission, to
see if they can help us with that funding.”
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 7/10
Tossing Honeybuckets
Standing to gain a clear benefit from the bill are rural Alaskans in communities
currently lacking piped water and sewer. The IIJA aims to ensure those
communities finally obtain modern plumbing.
“We’re extremely excited about it,” says David Beveridge, the senior director
of environmental health and engineering for Alaska Native Tribal Health
Consortium (ANTHC).
The IIJA includes $3.5 billion nationwide to improve and provide sanitation
infrastructure for tribes across the nation. Beveridge says that number
represents the entire need outlined through the Indian Health Service national
data system. ANTHC and project managers with Village Safe Water work with
communities to identify needs, determine project costs, and relay that data to
Indian Health Service each year.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 8/10
Beveridge says sanitation funds are spread over all five years. Alaska has
about thirty communities currently without water and sewer service—most
have a washeteria where people get water for home use, take showers, and
wash clothing. That number is dynamic, he says; efforts to bring water and
sewer service to some of those communities are already underway. ANTHC
and other agencies have been working for decades to put honeybuckets in a
museum, as the saying goes; these remaining communities represent the
most difficult to provide service to, either due to geology—poor drainage, high
water tables, or other issues—or geography, where homes are distant from
each other.
“Basically, to carry out these projects in the past, we’ve had to have a
piecemeal approach. We get a couple million dollars a year, and it takes ten
years to address it,” Beveridge says. Sanitation funding went first to projects
where the per-home cost was relatively low. IIJA funding allows for a higher
cost per home, allowing the projects to move forward, he says.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 9/10
The sanitation funding also helps communities where the water and sewer
system need repairs. Beveridge says almost every rural community needs
some sort of upgrade to its sanitation system, so it’s likely the funding will
ultimately be spent in all 190 rural communities ANTHC has in its inventory.
These projects are vital, Beveridge says, because they have a direct effect on
health. A study by ANTHC and the US Centers for Disease C ontrol and
Prevention tracked hospitalization rates for infants in villages where fewer
than 10 percent of homes have water service. The study found infants in
communities without water service were eleven times more likely to be
hospitalized with pneumonia compared to infants in the rest of the United
States. They were also five times more likely to be hospitalized with a lower
respiratory tract infection and five times more likely to be hospitalized with
Respiratory Syncytial Virus, or RSV.
“It’s really important that these facilities are constructed in the communities
and that they continue to be in use, producing good water,” Beveridge says.
Readying a Workforce
With infrastructure cash already flowing, Associated General Contractors of
Alaska (AGC) Executive Director Alicia Amberg says builders are making sure
to have enough workers to bring these projects to fruition.
“When the pandemic hit, Alaska was still pulling out of a recession. A lot of the
workforce that many rely on in Alaska had moved to the Lower 48, particularly
to the Pacific Northwest, which was seeing a boom,” Amberg says.
Now Alaska is slightly behind the curve in terms of workforce readiness.
Through a partnership with the Construction Industry Progress Fund, AGC of
Alaska hopes to encourage more Alaskans to find work in the construction
industry.
“We launched this campaign in 2021 and have expanded the program and
marketing budget significantly in 2022,” Amberg says. The campaign includes
videos of craftworkers explaining why a career in construction has been
helpful and how they have contributed to the nation’s economic recovery and
remained an essential worker during the pandemic.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 10/10
“We hope these videos will reach our target audience of recent high school
grads looking for a viable long-term career path that doesn’t include college
debt; we’re also hoping it reaches those who may have been looking for a
career change or lost their job because of the pandemic and want a stable
position within the Alaska construction industry,” Amberg says.
“We’re also hoping to target influencers of people within those demographics,”
she adds, “which includes parents, grandparents, career counselors, and
others who have an influence on the decisions that younger students are
making when considering their future.” With so much infrastructure cash
sloshing around for the next five years, the construction sector can make a
strong case for workers to follow the money.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 28, 2022
Railbelt Reliability Council Submits Application to the RCA
After years of effort, the Railbelt Reliability Council (RRC), has filed an application with the Regulatory Commission of
Alaska (RCA) to become the Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) for the largest interconnected electric system in the
state, serving Alaskans from Homer to Fairbanks.
“I am humbled to file this application on behalf of the diverse and dedicated group of stakeholders who comprise the
RRC and the hundreds of thousands of Alaskans we collectively represent,” said Julie Estey, Director of External Affairs
and Strategic Affairs with Matanuska Electric Association and Chair of the RRC. “With this submission we commit to
continued collaboration, transparency, technical excellence, independence and inclusion as we work to meet the
changing needs of the Railbelt electric system and the homes and businesses it serves.”
The Railbelt Reliability Council is a diverse consortium of stakeholders interested in the Railbelt electric system, including
electric utilities, independent power producers, state agencies, consumer and environmental advocates and
independent members. If certified by the RCA as the ERO, the RRC will establish and enforce clear rules of reliable
operation for all entities connected to the electrical network to maintain the current high level of reliability for electric
power consumers and protect the system against cyber-attacks, natural disasters and other threats. The RRC will also
conduct a public integrated resource planning process for the entire Railbelt. The resulting Integrated Resource Plan
(IRP) will ensure the system’s evolving infrastructure needs are contemplated on a regional basis and that the plan is
informed by a variety of perspectives.
The RRC Implementation Committee, an informal group of volunteers, initially began work in July 2020 with the goal of
forming the RRC as an ERO applicant. Throughout the 20-month process of developing this new organization, the
Committee has been rooted in openness, collaboration, and technically strong work products that balance the diverse
interests of the membership.
“The RRC Implementation Committee was a collective of almost 30 volunteers that spent thousands of hours drafting
the documents that will facilitate regional planning and reliability of the state’s largest electric grid,” said Suzanne Settle,
Vice President of Energy, Land and Resources for Cook Inlet Regional Corporation (CIRI) and RRC Vice Chair.
“Collectively, we are striving to generate synergies through regional planning that will ultimately lower the cost of
electricity in support of a prosperous economy.”
Concurrent to the RRC effort, the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) developed regulations that provide oversight
of the ERO. These new regulations primarily address ERO application, governance, and reporting requirements along
with provisions to ensure the necessary processes and technical skills. The requirement to form an ERO for the Railbelt
was created by the legislature through passage of Senate Bill 123 in 2020.
After more than a year and a half of pre-organizational meetings, the RRC Implementation Committee incorporated the
RRC and the new corporation met for the first time on March 14 to install board members, elect officers and adopt
corporate documents. On March 23, the RRC voted to approve and submit its ERO application to the RCA. The
application can be found on the RCA website following this link: Regulatory Commission of Alaska - Docket: E-22-001.
“The concept of a collaborative structure that brings a variety of diverse perspectives together for the benefit of the
entire region has been discussed for decades and we couldn’t be happier to achieve this critical milestone,” said Estey.
“The RRC appreciates the RCA’s consideration of our application and, if approved, we stand ready to fulfill the critical
mission of the state’s first ERO.”
Primary Contact: Julie Estey, RRC Chair (907) 355-4447 or julie.estey@mea.coop.
More information: https://alaskapower.org/rrc/
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
RGYAUTHORITY.ORG
PRESS RELEASE
Brandy M. Dixon
Communications Director
(907) 771-3078
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 17, 2022
AEA Accepting Applications for Village Energy Efficiency Program Grants
Energy Efficiency Grants Available for Rural Alaska
(Anchorage) – The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) is soliciting grant applications from eligible
communities under a new Village Energy Efficiency Program (VEEP) initiative, funded by
$500,000 from the Denali Commission.
The Alaska Legislature established the VEEP grant program in 2010 to reduce per capita
consumption through energy efficiency. The goal of VEEP is to implement energy and cost-
saving efficiency measures in buildings and facilities in small, high-energy-cost Alaska
communities.
“Many rural Alaska communities have some of the highest fuel and energy costs in the nation,”
said AEA Executive Director Curtis W. Thayer. “This funding will help communities improve
energy efficiencies and lower energy costs while supporting community health and public safety.
We are grateful to the Denali Commission for their continued support of AEA’s efforts to reduce
energy costs for Alaskans.”
Alaska communities with a population no greater than 8,000 residents are invited to apply.
Recipients can use VEEP funding for a variety of needs, such as conducting energy audits,
installing energy efficiency measures in public buildings and facilities such as heating and
ventilation systems, electric systems, as well as street trail lighting, or other public infrastructure.
Funds can also be used to establish energy conservation workplace policies, design and adopt
programs for employees, and/or conduct public education to increase the implementation of
efficiency measures in the community.
The deadline to apply for VEEP funding is April 26, 2022. To view the funding opportunity
announcement and grant application, visit akenergyauthority.org/veep.
The Alaska Energy Authority is a public corporation of the state. Its mission is to reduce the cost
of energy in Alaska.
###
Page 2Alaska Legislative Digest No. 7/2022
Renewable energy standards, SB 172, up for hearing in Senate Labor and Commerce
The governor’s SB 172, setting minimum renewable energy standards for Alaska electric utilities, was
up for its first hearing last Thursday in the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee. This bill sets manda-
tory standards to be met similar to those in 30 states and two U.S. territories. Standards would be en-
forced by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska, or RCA, Curtis Thayer, executive director of the Alaska
Energy Authority, told the committee. Gov. Mike Dunleavy wants utilities to make firm commitments to
achieve 30 percent of power supplied by renewables statewide by 2030 and 80 percent by 2040.
Thirty percent by 2030 is quite doable because the state is basically at 27 percent now with existing
hydro and wind power, Thayer said, but the committee asked questions about how 80 percent can be
achieved in the next 18 years. Construction of the Susitna hydro project would be a big step, getting the
state from 27 percent to 58 percent. There are a lot of ways it could be done, including expansion of the
existing Bradley Lake hydro project near Homer. Bradley Lake now supplies 10 percent of the South-
central-Interior “railbelt” needs and an expansion could increase supply 16 percent to 17 percent, Thayer
said. However, upgrades of transmission lines are needed to efficiently move expanded Bradley Lake or
other renewable power. Bradley Lake now provides about 18 percent of power needs in Interior Alaska
but the “line loss” of power transported over aged transmission lines results in costs of $500,000 annually
to consumers along the railbelt, Thayer told the committee.
Before introducing SB 172 the governor consulted with the Department of Energy’s National Renew-
able Energy Laboratory, or NREL, who had developed a plan as to how 80 percent can be achieved,
Thayer said. NREL will speak at a future hearing on the bill. The state now has renewable energy “goals”
set in 2010 that include 50 percent renewable by 2025, but SB 172 puts teeth into this because the bench-
marks will be set as requirements by the RCA. Utilities have yet to weigh in on this bill. The companion
house bill, HB 301, is in the House Energy Committee and has not yet had a hearing.
Microreactors still several years away even if Legislature approves HB 299 or SB 177
Legislators are very interested in the new-technology advanced microreactors, the governor’s HB 299
and SB 177 would streamline state permitting, and there are proposals for siting the facilities in Alaska,
a 5 megawatt unit is proposed for Eielson Air Force Base and a larger unit in Valdez by Copper Valley
Electric Assoc. However, it will be several years before one can be built because companies must still
obtain licenses for the technology from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, University of Alas-
ka scientists told the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee Thursday. The cost of the power is still
unknown. Right now Bradley Lake hydro is the cheapest in the state at 4 cents/kilowatt hour followed by
natural gas at 7 cents to 9 cents/ kilowatt hour. Fire Island wind power is generated for 9.7 cents/ kilowatt
hour, the Alaska Energy Authority told the Senate committee.
. . . Energy . . .
Page 2Alaska Legislative Digest No. 8/2022
. . . Infrastructure . . .
– Continued on bottom, page 3
Guidelines on infrastructure funding coming, but slowly
– Continued from top, page 1
The bulk of the new federal IIJA money is in transportation with much of it in established formula pro-
grams in which there is little flexibility. Alaska is expected to get $664.3 million in federal Fiscal Year
2022, or FFY 2022 (Oct. 1-Sept. 30). That’s a $115.4 million increase from the $548.9 million allocated
in FFY 2021. However, the $664.3 million expected next year will increase when an expected additional
allocation of money for bridges, ferries and emergency relief and other adjustments are added. The in-
crease is now estimated at $100 million but it may well be more, possibly an added $140 million to $150
million. DOT&PF expects to get a better estimate from the federal government on or before March 11,
the data the continuing resolution expires and Congress is expected to pass the full year appropriation.
Most of the money is in core federal highways program
Meanwhile, most of the $664.3 million, or $337.3 million, is in the core federal national highway
construction program where projects are listed in the five-year Surface Transportation and Improvement
Program, or STIP. In addition to the national highways money there is a $8.9 million increase in surface
transportation block grants (STGB), which has flexibility to make changes. Most new, non-formula pro-
grams for Alaska in the IIJA (where the state has flexibility) are in the STGB program, which for Alaska
include some new things like ice roads, seasonal road maintenance and rural ports and barge landings.
However, a point made by DOTPF is that there is only a 6.7 percent increase in the block grant category
in the IIJA compared with a 17.2 percent increase for the core national highway program. The one federal
program with flexibility was given only a modest increase. It was also pointed out that the 6.7 percent
increase appears offset by the estimated of 7.5 percent inflation this year.
Bridges, ferry system, electric vehicle charging
Outside of funds for the traditional highway program, what is known now is that $45 million will be
available this year in new money for bridges and $25 million to $35 million to support ferry system op-
erations. DOT&PF also told the Finance Committee that it was recently notified that $7.8 million will be
available for an electric vehicle network. However, to obtain the electric vehicle money the state (like-
ly the Alaska Energy Authority in coordination with DOT&PF) must develop an EV Deployment Plan
showing the highway corridors with the charging stations. A complication is that the stations must be no
more than 50 miles apart, which is a challenge for Alaska with its long-distance highways. An addition-
al technical complication is that electricity supplied will have to be “stepped down” from high-voltage
transmission to 240 volts for auto recharging. Charging sites must also contain, at minimum, 3 chargers
and have a minimum “up” time for continuous service. The state is exploring exceptions to these rules
due to extreme conditions in Alaska. Another new program in transportation this year is $17.9 million for
a new “PROTECT” program intended to add resiliency to transportation infrastructure against natural
Page 3Alaska Legislative Digest No. 8/2022
. . . Education/ Energy . . .
events and extreme weather, such as protecting highways from climate-related rockfalls, coastal flooding,
and earthquakes and to offer similar protection to communities, such as evacuation routes and access to
emergency facilities. Guidance is expected on how these funds can be used including whether they can
be available to communities, DOT&PF said.
Rural lawmakers are interested in development of rural community docks, and these are eligible and
fall under the $142 million available for transportation block grants ($7.1 million up from $133.3 million
this year). The money can be used anywhere in the state, but it’s not a big pool of cash. “This is far more
modest than what I expected,” Rep. Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, said in the House Finance meeting.
James Marks, DOT&PF’s director of planning, responded: “There will be a lot of money available
through other avenues, outside the federal highway program, under which Alaska will benefit including
the discretionary grants, one or two of which are virtually guaranteed.”
House Democrats’ objections to pre-K bill a puzzle to supporters
– Continued from bottom, page 1
The objections by several House Democrats to the bills expanding pre-K and early reading instruc-
tion, in HB 185, are a puzzle to fellow Democrats who are supporters, like Sen. Tom Begich, D-Anch.,
and Rep. Chris Tuck, D-Anch., both sponsors of the bills. Rural legislators are objecting, they say,
because the bills continue a framework of urban bias in education. However, they have not yet made
counter-proposals other than those in another bill allowing tribal compacting for schools. That bill is
also active in the Senate. There’s also worry about how the education department will implement the bill
through regulations. Also, it’s possible some House members hope to leverage Senate Republicans and
the governor on an inflation adjustment to the Base Student Allocation, the funding formula for schools,
in HB 272 and 273. Senate President Peter Micciche and Majority Leader Shelly Hughes, as well as the
governor, are supporters of the pre-K and reading bill. In the Senate’s work on its version of early learn-
ing, SB 111, efforts are underway to put more support for indigenous language instruction in the bill.
Support for expansion of CTE education in Senate Finance
In last Friday’s overview session on SB 111 several senators, and education Commissioner Johnson,
voiced support for Career and Technical Education, or CTE, in K-12 because of its track record in pro-
ducing a higher overall graduation rate, particularly in rural schools. Sen. Click Bishop, R-Fairbanks,
said there will be support for CTE in the budget when it comes before the committee. Sen. Natasha von
Imhof said she supports a reintroduction of employer tax credits to support regional training centers.
Infrastructure: New money added for resiliency
– Continued from page 2
‘Pretty dramatic increases’: High fuel prices expected to hit rural Alaska hard
https://www.alaskasnewssource.com/2022/03/10/pretty-dramatic-increases-high-fuel-prices-expected-hit-rural-alaska-hard/ 1/3
JUNEAU, Alaska (KTUU) - High prices for gasoline, diesel and heating oil are expected to
hit rural Alaska hard as communities make bulk fuel purchases.
In Western Alaska, all goods are either delivered by barge or by plane. Fuel surcharges
are added to shipping costs and those are projected to shoot up with the higher cost of
energy.
The first spring barge is set to come to Western Alaska in two weeks. Mike Poston,
director of sales at Vitus Energy, LLC., explained that crude oil prices are 50% higher
than they were in June last year.
“The market should plan for increases in energy prices well over $1.50 per gallon higher
than last fall,” he said through a prepared statement on March 1.
‘Pretty dramatic increases’: High fuel prices expected to hit rural Alaska hard
https://www.alaskasnewssource.com/2022/03/10/pretty-dramatic-increases-high-fuel-prices-expected-hit-rural-alaska-hard/ 2/3
Eight days later, Vitus Energy said there had been another increase of 54 cents to the
price per gallon of diesel and gasoline.
“What we’re seeing is about the time the barges are going to load up and sail out west
to begin deliveries, (it) looks like it’s going to be right at the peak of the market,” Poston
said. “Or at least, so far, that looks like it’s going to be the peak of the market.”
This price hike is occurring at exactly the wrong time for rural Alaska. Fuel will soon start
to be delivered for use in summer. Tribal organizations, village corporations and local
governments are also planning bulk fuel purchases that need to be made well in
advance of fall deliveries for next winter.
Poston said he’s hearing concern from small communities making fuel orders at these
high price points with no sign that they will drop significantly.
“We hear things like, ‘That’s going to blow our budget,’” he said. “We hear things like,
‘Oh my, that’s horrible.’”
Eugene Asicksik, president of the Shaktoolik Native Corp., has been in conversations
with members of the Norton Sound Economic Development Corp. about ordering a
year’s worth of fuel to be delivered by supertanker to Shaktoolik and nearby
communities.
The order is set to be made by the end of the month, Asicksik said. He added that
gasoline in Shaktoolik is already selling at $4.96 per gallon with tax.
“The way projections are going, I would say you could just about double that,” he said.
For dozens of communities, power bills could increase by 50%.
The Alaska Village Electric Cooperative is the utility for 58 communities across rural
Alaska, including the hub community of Bethel. The cooperative burns over 8 million
gallons of diesel a year to power those communities.
Bill Stamm, CEO of the cooperative, said it buys fuel futures, a million gallons at a time,
to lock in a price for the months ahead.
“We are buying at a fixed rate, in the anticipation that the rates, when we actually need
the fuel, will be higher,” he said. “We’ve been doing a little bit of that and watching the
crazy market as things go up and down with the cost of fuel recently.”
‘Pretty dramatic increases’: High fuel prices expected to hit rural Alaska hard
https://www.alaskasnewssource.com/2022/03/10/pretty-dramatic-increases-high-fuel-prices-expected-hit-rural-alaska-hard/ 3/3
With the roller coaster in daily oil prices that shot up above $125 a barrel on Tuesday,
and back down a little on Wednesday, Stamm stressed that making bulk fuel purchases
is a “daily gamble.”
But, there is help out there. The Alaska Department of Commerce, Community and
Economic Development has a revolving loan fund for communities with 2,000 or fewer
people to help make bulk fuel buys.
The Power Cost Equalization program helps rural Alaska residents pay for their higher
energy costs. Curtis Thayer, head of the Alaska Energy Authority, said there are no cash
flow problems in getting relief out to eligible Alaskans.
He, too, has been hearing stories from communities grappling with the impacts of
higher fuel costs.
“They’re seeing some pretty dramatic increases,” he said.
The House of Representatives is debating whether to pay a $1,300 “energy relief
check” in addition to a $1,250 Permanent Fund dividend. Across the Capitol, legislators
expect a larger PFD will be paid in 2022 than in recent years.
Gov. Mike Dunleavy spoke about higher fuel prices on Tuesday and their impact on rural
Alaska. He said the PFD is the best way to disburse relief.
Copyright 2022 KTUU. All rights reserved.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 1/10
Since the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) was enacted in 2021,
State of Alaska officials have been trying to understand how best to harness
the windfall of federal resources. In January, department heads were
completing written analyses of potential projects that could benefit from IIJA
funds. So far, there are a lot of unknowns at the state level and for entities the
bill affects, such as the Denali Commission and tribal governments. The IIJA
mainly directs money to the state through existing channels, and it also sets
up new and competitive funding sources and streamlines permitting for certain
types of projects.
“The majority of these funds will come through existing federal programs, but
the legislation did establish a number of new discretionary grant programs for
which Alaska should be competitive,” says Governor Mike Dunleavy’s Deputy
Communications Director Jeff Turner. “It’s important to remember that only a
portion of the money Alaska is expected to receive will come directly to the
State, as many discretionary grant programs are open to tribes, local
governments, and other entities.”
The existing federal programs include the US Department of Transportation’s
Surface Transportation Board, the Federal Aviation Administration’s Airport
Improvement Program, the largely federally funded Village Safe Water
program, and other similar programs.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 2/10
The Alaska Legislature must authorize any funding coming directly to the
State, but Turner says state officials were still awaiting guidance from federal
officials about how to implement that authorization. As a result, some of the
funding is unlikely to be allocated in this quarter.
“We will continue to develop projections as information becomes available, but
[the Dunleavy administration] will seek appropriation authority from the
legislature for any new infrastructure funds we expect to receive in FY23
during the upcoming session,” he says.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 3/10
Finding Clarity
Some portions of the IIJA are unclear, and part of the work state leaders are
doing is simply finding out what’s expected.
“We saw a section of the bill that says they will be making determinations at
one date but taking public comment at a later date,” says Alaska Energy
Authority (AEA) Executive Director Curtis W. Thayer. “Due to its complexity
and interrelated programs, each time we read the law we find additional
nuances.”
One crucial area Thayer is seeking clarity on has to do with electric vehicle
(EV) charging infrastructure programs. The act includes $7.5 billion to build a
network of EV fast-charging stations across the nation to support the Biden
administration’s goal of having 500,000 EV charging stations to meet the
projected 2030 EV market.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 4/10
Figuring out where to place stations along an EV charging corridor is already
difficult, Thayer says. For instance, the stretch of highway between Girdwood
and Cooper Landing needs somewhere to recharge, but power is not
available in Turnagain Pass. A larger puzzle is trying to understand how rural
Alaska, far from the highway system, benefits from the EV funding program.
Formula funds earmarked for each state to use on certain types of projects
are available for EV charging stations connected to the highway system.
Whether it also covers charging stations in communities off the highway
system, like Nome or Kotzebue, Thayer can’t be sure. AEA sent a letter
seeking clarification.
Building Roads and Bridges
The language in other areas of the IIJA seems straightforward. Alaska
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) Commissioner
Ryan Anderson says some funding was already rolling out in January, such as
a $45 million bridge package.
Anderson says the formula funds the state typically receives from the federal
government—for building roads and bridges or making road corridors safer—
will increase by between 20 and 30 percent, beginning this year.
“We will spend those funds, starting this federal fiscal year. We have the
shovel-ready projects those funds will get spent on,” he says.
An uncomfortable reality that DOT&PF faces, however, is the likely effect that
inflation will have on the additional funds. Although the IIJA provides a 30 to
40 percent increase in yearly transportation funding, the department
anticipates higher steel and other material costs in the coming season may
eat into the bonus.
Discretionary funds are a different story, however. For those funds, Alaska
competes like any other state.
“There is a lot of money in the act for those discretionary grant funds,”
Anderson says. A lot of the discretionary spending is in ports and harbors, so
he hopes that critical projects, such as the roughly $1.6 billion project to
modernize and repair the Port of Alaska in Anchorage, will obtain some of
those discretionary funds.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 5/10
“I would think the importance of that port to the Alaska transportation
system—it’s critical for everyone, Anchorage, Fairbanks, and beyond to get
their food and freight and everything else—will help,” Anderson says.
Another bright spot is aviation. Airport construction spending will see a
dramatic increase—more than 40 percent for some projects and up to 80
percent more funding for others. Anderson says the department will consult
the Aviation Advisory Board regarding aviation priorities.
Anderson is hopeful the IIJA will expedite construction on some projects and
help the state get preliminary work done on others. “We’re already looking at
advancing projects from 2023 to 2022 as a result of this act; that’s a real
positive,” he says.
The state generally funds projects according to the State Transportation
Improvement Plan, or STIP, which defines the scope of projects, details their
funding needs, and ranks them according to priority. The current four-year
plan is about to expire and a new STIP is being created, Anderson says. That
document will help determine where the infrastructure spending goes.
Anderson says public comments will help make those decisions —a process
that has already begun.
The state conducted a survey in November, asking residents what
transportation modes they use most often, what modes they prioritize, and
where they would like to see improvements in the coming year. More than
1,700 Alaskans took the survey. Anderson says the state will consider those
responses and other public comments in determining where to focus
infrastructure spending.
DOT&PF is also creating an interactive map on its website which will allow
residents to drop a pin on a project or area that needs to be addressed and
then comment in more detail about their selection
Energy Boost
For energy infrastructure, Thayer says the IIJA “cuts both ways.” While there
are exciting possibilities, some aspects are disappointing.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 6/10
For example, the AEA is interested in diverting more water into Bradley Lake
north of Homer. The project would redirect water from Dixon Glacier to
increase the annual energy output of Bradley Lake, already the largest source
of hydroelectric power in the state. The diversion project has an estimated
cost of about $250 million, but the IIJA includes only $200 million throughout
the nation for hydroelectric projects. Similarly, needed power system
upgrades in rural Alaska total about $300 million, and bulk fuel tank upgrade
projects tally another $800 million. The IIJA funds neither of those project
types.
However, the IIJA could underwrite needed upgrades to the transmission line
connecting Bradley Lake to Fairbanks. Those upgrades would allow the
Bradley Lake diversion project to move forward, Thayer says—if the diversion
project went forward prior to the transmission line upgrades, he explains,
existing transmission lines wouldn’t be able to carry the extra power.
Despite not having funds for rural bulk fuel and power systems from the IIJA,
Thayer says AEA plans to go ahead with several upgrades anyway, using
state funding.
“Each year we identify communities for power system and bulk fuel tank
upgrades,” he says. “We’re looking to our partners, the Denali Commission, to
see if they can help us with that funding.”
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 7/10
Tossing Honeybuckets
Standing to gain a clear benefit from the bill are rural Alaskans in communities
currently lacking piped water and sewer. The IIJA aims to ensure those
communities finally obtain modern plumbing.
“We’re extremely excited about it,” says David Beveridge, the senior director
of environmental health and engineering for Alaska Native Tribal Health
Consortium (ANTHC).
The IIJA includes $3.5 billion nationwide to improve and provide sanitation
infrastructure for tribes across the nation. Beveridge says that number
represents the entire need outlined through the Indian Health Service national
data system. ANTHC and project managers with Village Safe Water work with
communities to identify needs, determine project costs, and relay that data to
Indian Health Service each year.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 8/10
Beveridge says sanitation funds are spread over all five years. Alaska has
about thirty communities currently without water and sewer service—most
have a washeteria where people get water for home use, take showers, and
wash clothing. That number is dynamic, he says; efforts to bring water and
sewer service to some of those communities are already underway. ANTHC
and other agencies have been working for decades to put honeybuckets in a
museum, as the saying goes; these remaining communities represent the
most difficult to provide service to, either due to geology—poor drainage, high
water tables, or other issues—or geography, where homes are distant from
each other.
“Basically, to carry out these projects in the past, we’ve had to have a
piecemeal approach. We get a couple million dollars a year, and it takes ten
years to address it,” Beveridge says. Sanitation funding went first to projects
where the per-home cost was relatively low. IIJA funding allows for a higher
cost per home, allowing the projects to move forward, he says.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 9/10
The sanitation funding also helps communities where the water and sewer
system need repairs. Beveridge says almost every rural community needs
some sort of upgrade to its sanitation system, so it’s likely the funding will
ultimately be spent in all 190 rural communities ANTHC has in its inventory.
These projects are vital, Beveridge says, because they have a direct effect on
health. A study by ANTHC and the US Centers for Disease C ontrol and
Prevention tracked hospitalization rates for infants in villages where fewer
than 10 percent of homes have water service. The study found infants in
communities without water service were eleven times more likely to be
hospitalized with pneumonia compared to infants in the rest of the United
States. They were also five times more likely to be hospitalized with a lower
respiratory tract infection and five times more likely to be hospitalized with
Respiratory Syncytial Virus, or RSV.
“It’s really important that these facilities are constructed in the communities
and that they continue to be in use, producing good water,” Beveridge says.
Readying a Workforce
With infrastructure cash already flowing, Associated General Contractors of
Alaska (AGC) Executive Director Alicia Amberg says builders are making sure
to have enough workers to bring these projects to fruition.
“When the pandemic hit, Alaska was still pulling out of a recession. A lot of the
workforce that many rely on in Alaska had moved to the Lower 48, particularly
to the Pacific Northwest, which was seeing a boom,” Amberg says.
Now Alaska is slightly behind the curve in terms of workforce readiness.
Through a partnership with the Construction Industry Progress Fund, AGC of
Alaska hopes to encourage more Alaskans to find work in the construction
industry.
“We launched this campaign in 2021 and have expanded the program and
marketing budget significantly in 2022,” Amberg says. The campaign includes
videos of craftworkers explaining why a career in construction has been
helpful and how they have contributed to the nation’s economic recovery and
remained an essential worker during the pandemic.
Energy, Sanitation, Roads & More
https://digital.akbizmag.com/issue/march-2022/energy-sanitation-roads-more/ 10/10
“We hope these videos will reach our target audience of recent high school
grads looking for a viable long-term career path that doesn’t include college
debt; we’re also hoping it reaches those who may have been looking for a
career change or lost their job because of the pandemic and want a stable
position within the Alaska construction industry,” Amberg says.
“We’re also hoping to target influencers of people within those demographics,”
she adds, “which includes parents, grandparents, career counselors, and
others who have an influence on the decisions that younger students are
making when considering their future.” With so much infrastructure cash
sloshing around for the next five years, the construction sector can make a
strong case for workers to follow the money.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 28, 2022
Railbelt Reliability Council Submits Application to the RCA
After years of effort, the Railbelt Reliability Council (RRC), has filed an application with the Regulatory Commission of
Alaska (RCA) to become the Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) for the largest interconnected electric system in the
state, serving Alaskans from Homer to Fairbanks.
“I am humbled to file this application on behalf of the diverse and dedicated group of stakeholders who comprise the
RRC and the hundreds of thousands of Alaskans we collectively represent,” said Julie Estey, Director of External Affairs
and Strategic Affairs with Matanuska Electric Association and Chair of the RRC. “With this submission we commit to
continued collaboration, transparency, technical excellence, independence and inclusion as we work to meet the
changing needs of the Railbelt electric system and the homes and businesses it serves.”
The Railbelt Reliability Council is a diverse consortium of stakeholders interested in the Railbelt electric system, including
electric utilities, independent power producers, state agencies, consumer and environmental advocates and
independent members. If certified by the RCA as the ERO, the RRC will establish and enforce clear rules of reliable
operation for all entities connected to the electrical network to maintain the current high level of reliability for electric
power consumers and protect the system against cyber-attacks, natural disasters and other threats. The RRC will also
conduct a public integrated resource planning process for the entire Railbelt. The resulting Integrated Resource Plan
(IRP) will ensure the system’s evolving infrastructure needs are contemplated on a regional basis and that the plan is
informed by a variety of perspectives.
The RRC Implementation Committee, an informal group of volunteers, initially began work in July 2020 with the goal of
forming the RRC as an ERO applicant. Throughout the 20-month process of developing this new organization, the
Committee has been rooted in openness, collaboration, and technically strong work products that balance the diverse
interests of the membership.
“The RRC Implementation Committee was a collective of almost 30 volunteers that spent thousands of hours drafting
the documents that will facilitate regional planning and reliability of the state’s largest electric grid,” said Suzanne Settle,
Vice President of Energy, Land and Resources for Cook Inlet Regional Corporation (CIRI) and RRC Vice Chair.
“Collectively, we are striving to generate synergies through regional planning that will ultimately lower the cost of
electricity in support of a prosperous economy.”
Concurrent to the RRC effort, the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) developed regulations that provide oversight
of the ERO. These new regulations primarily address ERO application, governance, and reporting requirements along
with provisions to ensure the necessary processes and technical skills. The requirement to form an ERO for the Railbelt
was created by the legislature through passage of Senate Bill 123 in 2020.
After more than a year and a half of pre-organizational meetings, the RRC Implementation Committee incorporated the
RRC and the new corporation met for the first time on March 14 to install board members, elect officers and adopt
corporate documents. On March 23, the RRC voted to approve and submit its ERO application to the RCA. The
application can be found on the RCA website following this link: Regulatory Commission of Alaska - Docket: E-22-001.
“The concept of a collaborative structure that brings a variety of diverse perspectives together for the benefit of the
entire region has been discussed for decades and we couldn’t be happier to achieve this critical milestone,” said Estey.
“The RRC appreciates the RCA’s consideration of our application and, if approved, we stand ready to fulfill the critical
mission of the state’s first ERO.”
Primary Contact: Julie Estey, RRC Chair (907) 355-4447 or julie.estey@mea.coop.
More information: https://alaskapower.org/rrc/
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
RGYAUTHORITY.ORG
PRESS RELEASE
Brandy M. Dixon
Communications Director
(907) 771-3078
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 17, 2022
AEA Accepting Applications for Village Energy Efficiency Program Grants
Energy Efficiency Grants Available for Rural Alaska
(Anchorage) – The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) is soliciting grant applications from eligible
communities under a new Village Energy Efficiency Program (VEEP) initiative, funded by
$500,000 from the Denali Commission.
The Alaska Legislature established the VEEP grant program in 2010 to reduce per capita
consumption through energy efficiency. The goal of VEEP is to implement energy and cost-
saving efficiency measures in buildings and facilities in small, high-energy-cost Alaska
communities.
“Many rural Alaska communities have some of the highest fuel and energy costs in the nation,”
said AEA Executive Director Curtis W. Thayer. “This funding will help communities improve
energy efficiencies and lower energy costs while supporting community health and public safety.
We are grateful to the Denali Commission for their continued support of AEA’s efforts to reduce
energy costs for Alaskans.”
Alaska communities with a population no greater than 8,000 residents are invited to apply.
Recipients can use VEEP funding for a variety of needs, such as conducting energy audits,
installing energy efficiency measures in public buildings and facilities such as heating and
ventilation systems, electric systems, as well as street trail lighting, or other public infrastructure.
Funds can also be used to establish energy conservation workplace policies, design and adopt
programs for employees, and/or conduct public education to increase the implementation of
efficiency measures in the community.
The deadline to apply for VEEP funding is April 26, 2022. To view the funding opportunity
announcement and grant application, visit akenergyauthority.org/veep.
The Alaska Energy Authority is a public corporation of the state. Its mission is to reduce the cost
of energy in Alaska.
###