HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-05-25 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
RGYAUTHORITY.ORG
Alaska Energy Authority
Board Meeting
Wednesday May 25, 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 – April 13, 2022
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS (2 minutes per person) see call in number above
6. NEW BUSINESS- NONE
7. OLD BUSINESS
A. Required Project Work Update – Department of Law Memos:
i. May 19, 2022 Memo – Soldotna to Sterling Transmission Line
ii. April 27, 2022 Memo-BESS Purchase
iii. March 7, 2022 Memo-Bradley Junction to Soldotna Transmission Line
Upgrade
iv. January 24, 2022 Memo-D. Hitle & Associates Report on repair and
replacement of infrastructure and equipment
v. November 10, 2021 Memo-Sterling to Quartz Creek Transmission Line
Upgrade
8. DIRECTOR COMMENTS
A. Response to Board Questions
B. AEA Budget Update
i. Operating-FY23
ii. Captial-FY23
C. Bradley Lake Hydroelectric update – Battle Creek Diversion Project Callback
Acceptance
D. Dixon Diversion Project Update
E. Hydro Update
F. VW Settlement Update
G. Electric Vehicle (EV) update
H. Electric Utility Relief Program (EURP) Update
I. Village Energy Efficiency Program (VEEP) Update
J. Power Cost Equalization Update
K. Legislative Update
L. Community Outreach
M. Articles of Interest
N. Next Regularly Scheduled AEA Board Meeting Wednesday, June 29, 2022
9. EXECUTIVE SESSION –NONE
10. BOARD COMMENTS
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2
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.
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 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
Alaska Energy Authority DRAFT BOARD MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, April 13, 2022 Anchorage, Alaska 1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Pruhs called the meeting of the Alaska Energy Authority to order on April 13, 2022, at 8:30
am. A quorum was established.
2. ROLL CALL BOARD MEMBERS
Members present: Chair Dana Pruhs (Public Member); Vice-Chair Bill Kendig (Public Member); Julie
Sande (Commissioner DCCED); Albert Fogle (Public Member); Deven Mitchell (SOA-DOR); Bill
Vivlamore (Public Member); and Randy Eledge (Public Member).
3. AGENDA APPROVAL
Chair Pruhs indicated that the revised agenda has no items under 7. Old Business. There were no objections or questions. MOTION: A motion was made by Vice-Chair Kendig to approve the agenda, as revised. Motion seconded by Mr. Fogle.
The motion to approve the revised agenda, passed without objection. 4. PRIOR MINUTES – March 2, 2022 MOTION: A motion was made by Mr. Fogle to approve the prior minutes of March 2, 2022. Motion seconded by Vice-Chair Kendig.
The motion to approve the minutes of the March 2, 2022, minutes passed without objection. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS (2 minutes per person)
Chair Pruhs requested comments to be limited to two minutes. He asked that each person clearly
state their name for the record. There were no members of the public in-person who wished to
make a public comment. Chair Pruhs asked Jennifer Bertolini, AEA, to give directions for public
comments. Ms. Bertolini provided directions.
Ken Castner from Homer stated that the description for the Executive Session on the agenda
contains more specificity than normal and he has comments regarding the early retirement of
debt. Mr. Castner expressed his interest in debt management and the use and utility of capital in
an inflationary environment. He noted his interest in understanding the relationship between
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 11
debt and tariff, and how the debt is tied into the methods of collecting the tariff to pay the debt. Mr. Castner believes these discussions should occur before the public. He does not understand why the discussion of debt management needs to be during an Executive Session. He reiterated his continued lament for AEA to stop meeting in secret and to conduct the process in public. The Open Meetings Act is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of law. Mr. Castner believes the Open Meetings Act is clearly designed to bring everything out into the open and into the daylight. There being no other apparent public comments, Chair Pruhs closed the public comment session.
Chair Pruhs requested to skip to Item 9. Executive Session for discussion. There was no objection,
and the meeting continued at Item 9. Executive Session.
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. Resolution 2022-02 Transfer of Assets to Utilities
Mr. Thayer discussed the brief memorandum and resolution within the Board packet. The
resolution includes language regarding the Intertie Management Committee (IMC), which consists
of Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA), AEA, Chugach Electric Association (CEA), and
Matanuska Electric Association (MEA). Mr. Thayer gave a description of the background information from the 1988 agreement. He explained Resolution 2022-02 transfers certain listed and depreciated equipment in Cantwell to GVEA. Upgrades to the line and equipment in the amount of $300,000 are anticipated and GVEA will pay for the upgrades. GVEA requests clear resolution to the ownership of the equipment. There was no listing in the 1988 transfer. Mr. Thayer discussed that the information also contains a list of equipment that shall remain as State owned assets. These are items required for the transmission system. He noted that the list of Cantwell Substation equipment to be transferred to GVEA is not transmission grade and is serving the community of Cantwell. Chair Pruhs asked if there are any other assets that are clouded within the original 1988 transfer. Mr. Thayer stated there were no other clouded assets particular to this Intertie transfer. He advised that there are two small transmission lines from the 1980’s in rural Alaska that AEA owns and was unaware of ownership. The right-of-ways are being updated and the proper procurement process
is underway to divest AEA of those two transmission lines. These lines were thought to have been
extinguished in the 1980’s. Additional information will be forthcoming at future meetings.
MOTION: A motion was made by Vice-Chair Kendig to approve Resolution 2022-02,
authorization for Executive Director to transfer certain equipment in Cantwell, Alaska to
Golden Valley Electric Association. Motion seconded by Mr. Fogle.
A roll call was taken, and the motion to approve Resolution 2022-02 passed unanimously.
B. BPMC Required Project Work
Mr. Thayer provided a historical background of AEA’s Bradley Lake hydropower project for the
Alaska Energy Authority Page 3 of 11
new Board members. He discussed that Bradley Lake was paid for by State appropriation and bonding. The utilities have paid the debt service and the bonds were fully defeased this year. The Power Sales Agreement allowed for any excess funding to go to the Railbelt Energy Fund, subject to appropriations by the Legislature, or to be deemed required project work and used to further advance the project. Any required project work has to be approved by the Department of Law (DOL) and has to obtain a third-party engineering analysis to ensure it is prudent utility practice that will benefit the Bradley Lake project or the transmission of power from Bradley Lake.
Mr. Thayer discussed that the SSQ Line was burned in the Swan Lake fire in 2019. AEA purchased
the line from HEA using excess payments. The purchase was cleared through DOL as an allowable
purpose and intent of required work. Chair Pruhs asked if DOL reviewed and confirmed that the
purchase met the intent of the purpose of required project work. Mr. Thayer agreed.
Mr. Thayer explained that any upgrades on the line serving the northern utilities north of Homer
from the project up to Sterling/Soldotna is required project work. In addition, any upgrades on
the line that AEA owns from Sterling/Soldotna to Quartz Creek is required project work. Mr.
Thayer discussed that the D. Hittle Report is a five-year look-forward regarding the needed capital
projects for Bradley Lake. DOL reviewed the D. Hittle Report and approved the projects as
required project work.
Mr. Thayer discussed that DOL is reviewing the prospect of placement of a utility-sized battery on the system in multiple locations, including Homer, Anchorage, and Fairbanks. DOL has not delivered a determination on the prospect. Mr. Thayer believes that a prorated share will be deemed required project work for Bradley Lake. He discussed Bradley Lake’s oscillation study and the need for batteries to assist with issues. Mr. Thayer noted that upgrades to the lines out of the Kenai peninsula are necessary before any more renewable energy can be introduced. Mr. Thayer discussed the possibility of bonding $200 million to $225 million using the excess payment as debt service to begin the upgrades. The total upgrade package was estimated at less than $300 million without inflation and without logistical. Mr. Thayer reviewed that the Dixon Glacier diversion project at Bradley Lake will be discussed at the next meeting. It has the possibility of electrifying an additional 24,000 homes on the Railbelt. Currently, Bradley Lake services 54,000 homes. The upgrades and the diversion project can occur simultaneously.
Chair Pruhs asked for the estimated cost of the Dixon Glacier diversion project. Mr. Thayer noted
that the estimate is between $400 million to $500 million. Chair Pruhs commented that the
upgrades and diversion project will total approximately $750 million. He asked for the number of
people that will service. Mr. Thayer indicated that will service 550,000 people. He explained 80%
of the energy needs are provided by one natural gas company in Cook Inlet. As part of divesting
supply and focusing on the Governor’s bill in the Legislature to take the Railbelt to 80%
renewables by 2040, additional renewables need to be introduced to the system.
Chair Pruhs asked if the focus is to change from one power source to another power source. Mr.
Thayer agreed. Chair Pruhs commented that the number of 24,000 homes is not actually an
increase, but rather that the supply is being replaced with a different type of energy. Mr. Thayer
Alaska Energy Authority Page 4 of 11
agreed. Chair Pruhs asked how the decrease in natural gas volume will affect the price. Mr. Thayer explained that Bradley power is .04 cent power on the Railbelt. Natural gas is running from $7 to $8, and Fire Island is the highest cost on the Railbelt at $9.70. The goal is that the introduction of renewables is less than natural gas. Mr. Thayer discussed that natural gas is running out in Cook Inlet and part of the equation is to ensure there is enough gas for home heating. Mr. Thayer indicated that Enstar is taking on additional gas storage to meet the winter demands. The utilities do not have a constant load. They need a lot of gas in the wintertime and they do not need as much gas in the summertime. This is causing a disruption in the market because the utility loads
are small compared to large industrial customers. Another concern is who gets the market share
as the gas supply dwindles. The electrical utilities have a choice to utilize renewable energy.
Chair Pruhs discussed the holistic view of the energy system. He noted that effects on one leg of
the system affects the other legs and should be considered. Chair Pruhs requested that the big-
picture effects and ramifications of spending approximately $750 million is explained and
reviewed for consideration. Mr. Thayer explained that AEA is piece of the Governor’s policy with
the Legislature, but AEA is not a driver in that conversation. Chair Pruhs requested additional
information regarding the benefits of the approximately $200 million in upgrades. Mr. Thayer
explained that the funding that would be used for the upgrades to the transmission line would
not pose an additional cost to the rate payers and it would not cost the State Treasury any money
because of the continual power cost adjustments paid by the utilities that is still owed for roughly 20 more years. Mr. Mitchell commented that the larger discussion will occur in the future, and he believes that Mr. Thayer’s suggestions make sense, given the Governor’s renewable energy goal declaration. Mr. Mitchell requested to know the cost per kilowatt hour for the Dixon Glacier project. He believes Chair Pruhs’ comments are well-founded. Mr. Thayer continued the discussion and explained that according to the Power Sales Agreement, required project work monies have to be spent in that year. As staff is creating the financing package for the overall upgrade, there is approximately $12.5 million that has to be spent by June 30th. In consultation with DOL and the attached memos, the intention of Bradley Lake Management Committee (BPMC) is to pay the $12.5 million against the $17 million SSQ Line debt, of which approximately $11.8 million will be a principal payment. Mr. Thayer explained that AIDEA provided the financing and there is a prepayment penalty of $700,000. He discussed that by April
2023, BPMC anticipates to present an overall bonding package for the transmission upgrades and
the assumption of the larger debt using the excess payments.
Mr. Thayer discussed that the BPMC members consist of the utilities that use Bradley Lake’s power
and AEA, as Secretary. He explained that the Chair of the BPMC rotates and that AEA has veto
power within their fiduciary responsibility. Mr. Thayer indicated that the BPMC members have
worked well together to move this package forward. It is the BPMC’s intent to use the excess
payments to pay down $11.8 million worth of debt by June 30th. The DOL has concluded that this is an allowable expense under the Power Sales Agreement, as referenced in the DOL memo in the
Board packet dated April 5th.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 5 of 11
Mr. Vivlamore inquired as to other available options for the use of the $11.8 million, and he asked what happens to the money if it is not spent as suggested. Mr. Thayer noted that the excess payments would have to be spent by June 30th. The engineering and cost estimates for the larger upgrade package will take eight to 12 months to prepare and this is a way to pay down the debt. Mr. Fogle provided background information for the new members and discussed that when he joined the Board, all the utilities were fighting each other and AEA was not very strong. Mr. Fogle commented that Mr. Thayer’s leadership has worked well with the utilities to look forward to the
future, rather than fighting. Mr. Fogle expressed appreciation to Mr. Thayer for his continued
efforts in upholding AEA’s mission to lower the cost of energy for Alaskans.
Mr. Thayer informed that a resolution regarding this agenda item of paying down the SQ Line
debt is not needed.
Mr. Mitchell asked if there is a private activity bond cap for the transmission line financing. Mr.
Thayer indicated that legal counsel is currently reviewing that process. The determination is based
on the financing entity and the individual utilities.
Chair Pruhs requested a brief at-ease. There was no objection.
7. OLD BUSINESS
A. None
8. DIRECTOR COMMENTS A. Response to Board Questions Chair Pruhs resumed the meeting, and Mr. Thayer discussed the provided National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) information regarding the Board questions concerning BESS batteries, grid-scale batteries, and cost projections. Also included in the Board packet is a spreadsheet of the Alaska Energy Storage Systems. There were no questions. B. Power Project Fund Loan Dashboard Mr. Thayer discussed the Loan Dashboard Report with 20 outstanding loans and no delinquent
amounts. There is $10 million in uncommitted cash balances and a couple of applications in the
pipeline. There were no questions.
C. Renewable Energy Fund Grant Program – Round 14 Update
Mr. Thayer noted that there is a more recent update to the one provided in the packet. The
Governor asked the Legislature for $15 million for this round. There are currently over 99 active
projects in Alaska and 39 projects in development. The Renewable Energy Fund Advisory
Committee (REFAC) consists of four legislators and five public members and will meet on Friday
Alaska Energy Authority Page 6 of 11
to review staff’s recommendations of the specific projects for the $15 million that will be submitted to the Legislature for Round 14. The information will be shared with the Board at the next meeting. Mr. Thayer noted that the Governor indicated that he would like another $15 million in the following year’s budget. The grant program expires in June 2023, and there is current legislation to extend the program to 2033. Mr. Thayer commented that the program is popular and there is no opposition to the proposed extension. Mr. Fogle stated that he does not see any money allocated for Susitna-Watana. He asked if there
is funding in the House budget for continuing the licensing process. Mr. Thayer informed that
the Renewable Energy Fund is for projects of a smaller size. He explained that the State is about
$100 million shy of having a FERC license for Susitna-Watana. Mr. Thayer noted that it is yet to
be seen whether or not that funding is included in this year’s budget. Congressional delegation
conversations are ongoing and have not yet been resolved. Mr. Thayer commented that there
are also land issues being addressed regarding the transfer of land into State ownership. There
were no additional questions.
D. Electric Utility Relief Program (EURP) Update
Mr. Thayer discussed the Electric Utility Relief Program Update included in the Board packet. He
explained that AEA was asked to distribute the available $7 million in COVID-19 relief funds for
reimbursement to utilities for residential debt during the pandemic emergency period. The 35 applicants and the total disbursed amounts of less than $3 million for Round 1 are shown in the report. The relief funding amount cannot be duplicative and some entities received relief funding elsewhere. Round 2 was released and six utilities applied for a total of $42,000. AEA is in discussions with Department of Commerce and the Governor’s Office to return almost $4 million of the restricted COVID-19 funding back to the State. There were no questions. E. Denali Commission Update Mr. Thayer discussed the Denali Commission update, including the current and active awards. The Denali Commission received funds of close to $75 million through the Infrastructure Bill to be used for program funding and competitive funding. AEA is within program funding and Denali Commission usually provides a dollar-for-dollar match. There is money for bulk fuel and powerhouses in the capital budget and there are other federal revenue sources as well.
Chair Pruhs requested additional discussion and background information on the Denali
Commission for the new Board members. Mr. Thayer requested Tim Sandstrom, AEA Chief
Operating Officer, to provide an overview. Mr. Sandstrom explained the Denali Commission
provides funding for AEA’s rural programs in amounts ranging between $5 million to $12 million
a year. This year, Denali Commission received a large tranche of funding through IIJA.
Approximately $32 million of the funding will be competitive and AEA expects to apply for some
of the competitive awards. Approximately $32 million of the funding will be programmatic and
AEA anticipates receiving between $15 million to $25 million in funding through the match for
programs.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 7 of 11
Chair Pruhs asked who competes for the competitive funding. Mr. Sandstrom noted the funding is open for Alaskans, including individuals, companies, Tribes, and organizations who can all submit applications for the competitive grants. Mr. Sandstrom described the process by which AEA deploys Denali Commission funding to rural communities. There has been a recent effort of coordination between AEA and Denali Commission to avoid duplication of services. Mr. Thayer explained the establishment of the Denali Commission. The Board of Directors is overseen by a federal Co-Chair, who is recommended by Congress and appointed by the President
through the Department of Commerce. The current Co-Chair is Garret Boyles. The State Co-Chair
is Commissioner Lindbeck from the Department of Labor.
Chair Pruhs discussed the importance of the Denali Commission to AEA and to rural Alaska. He
reiterated the benefits of coordination to ensure the capital is deployed efficiently and
appropriately. Mr. Thayer informed that grant funding from the Denali Commission helps to pay
for AEA employees who travel and provide training in rural Alaska. The grant funding also helps
to pay for the online library of public reports. Mr. Sandstrom explained that the Circuit Rider
Program is guided by regulation. It consists of technical personnel who are deployed throughout
the year as a resource to rural utilities to conduct trainings and work on systems such as engines,
switch gears, SCADA, and distribution. AEA is careful not to compete with the private market.
Mr. Eledge asked if the Circuit Rider information is placed in a maintenance database in order to be proactive and predictive regarding maintenance. Mr. Sandstrom agreed, and noted an inventory and assessment of the powerhouses was completed recently and provides a robust set of data. During each visit, the data is recaptured and updated electronically. The database is reflective of the location of need and efforts. This information is used to target AEA’s responses. Mr. Thayer indicated that system was established at the request of the Board approximately three years ago. Chair Pruhs asked Mr. Sandstrom to present an overview of the database at the next Board meeting. Mr. Sandstrom agreed. Commissioner Sande asked if the online portal is similar to the portal that DCRA is using for the online community data. Mr. Sandstrom explained that the database is different. He noted that there is another effort to create a similar portal to the one utilized by DCRA.
F. Rural Update
Mr. Thayer requested Mr. Sandstrom provide the Rural Update. Mr. Sandstrom highlighted that
the training funded through the Denali Commission has trained 219 powerplant and bulk fuel
operators over the last five years. This is an ongoing challenge for communities. Once the
operators are trained, they sometimes have other opportunities and move on. During COVID-19,
the training was conducted both online and in-lab.
Mr. Sandstrom discussed there are two new powerhouse modules for construction in 2023. He
indicated that bids are being received at 50% to 100% over the engineer estimates and sometimes
Alaska Energy Authority Page 8 of 11
there is only a single bidder. Mr. Sandstrom noted the analysis regarding slowing the construction. There are indications that logistics may resolve in 2023 or 2024. The hope is that more competition will enter the market. Mr. Sandstrom reviewed the bulk fuel and inventory effort is similar to the powerhouse inventory effort. There are approximately 400 bulk fuel facilities and data is being collected. Chair Pruhs commented that he is in the construction business and confirms that pricing and availability in the supply chain and manpower are very challenging issues in the industry. He gave
an anecdotal example of prices doubling in 12 months. Chair Pruhs emphasized the importance
of management and expressed appreciation to Mr. Sandstrom for the efforts.
Mr. Eledge inquired as to how far in advance the engineering analysis is completed. Mr.
Sandstrom noted that the engineering analysis is historically completed about a year in advance
during the beginning of conceptual design. Currently, the engineering analysis is continuously
updated and staff reviews the numbers to understand the increases. Fuel costs can be quantified.
Logistics and supply chain delays can be quantified. There are some increased costs that remain
questionable and need additional consideration. Mr. Eledge speculated that a portion of the
increase is due to lack of staffing and having to utilize overtime hours to complete projects. Mr.
Sandstrom discussed reports of some industries that receive union wages and bonuses in order
to work in rural areas during these challenging times. G. Railbelt Reliability Council (RRC) Update Mr. Thayer gave the update and background for the RRC. Several years ago, the Legislature passed legislation championed by Senator John Coghill which established the RRC. The 12-member Board consists of the five utilities, AEA, five NGO’s, and the CEO. The CEO position is not yet filled and will have the tie-braking vote. The staff will be paid for by the rate payers of the utilities. The purpose of the RRC is to establish an Integrated Resource Plan. Work on the plan has been ongoing for 20 months. The application to Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) is 300 pages long. The expectation is that the RCA will make a determination at the end of 2022 or the beginning of 2023. Mr. Thayer explained AEA is not on the Executive Committee, but is a voting member of the Board. AEA is the largest transmission owner on the Railbelt, including Bradley Lake and the Alaska Intertie. There were no questions.
H. Legislative Update
Mr. Thayer discussed that all of the responses to legislators are included in the Board packet. The
House approved the Governor’s recommendation for the operating budget and it is now in the
Senate. Last week, the Governor introduced the Infrastructure Bill of HB414 and SB241 that
contains about $10 million into AEA, including $5 million for electrical grid modernization
reliability for transmission opportunities, $1 million to help coordinate the plan through the
competitive process, $2 million receipt authority for the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block
Grant Program, and $800,000 to the existing Revolving Loan Fund. Mr. Thayer explained that the
development of a State Energy Plan and auditor training must occur. Some of the efforts are in
conjunction with Alaska Housing Finance. AEA received the funding for the State Energy Plan
Alaska Energy Authority Page 9 of 11
from the federal government and the program money will be distributed over five years. Mr. Thayer discussed that AEA continues to work with State Department of Transportation (DOT). He noted that there is $50 million in program money with the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure, of which the first year’s funding is $7.7 million. A completed highway corridor and marine highway system plan is required to be submitted to the U.S. DOT by August 1st. Mr. Thayer explained the ongoing work with these efforts under an MOU with State DOT. Two national standard issues have been identified with U.S. DOT; the 50-mile distance requirement and the 150
kW charger requirement, which is larger than the power used in some of the communities on a
year-round basis. Other states are challenged with the same issues and collaborative work to
resolve the issues is occurring.
Commissioner Sande asked what the State match is on the program. Mr. Thayer indicated that
there is a 20% State match. The initial funding this year from IIJA is $7.7 million. The
Administration has the match in a supplemental and in some of AEA’s planning monies.
Chair Pruhs inquired as to status on the airport project with DOT. Mr. Thayer explained that AEA
applied for a build grant through the U.S. DOT to help build an Alaska cargo and cold storage
facility at the airport. The total cost was approximately $200 million, of which AEA received a $21
million grant for energy efficiency and renewables for the facility. McKinley Capital Management is the primary on the project and there are other partners. Mr. Thayer indicated that he recently spoke with Rob Gillam of McKinley and the plan is for groundbreaking to occur this year. The size and scope of the project has shifted to a smaller facility with more aircraft parking. One of the issues is that the U.S. DOT wants AEA to be part of Transportation Planning and Programming (TPP). AEA applied to the TPP, even though the facility is behind the fence and on the masterplan for the airport. Those issues are being worked through with the federal delegation to provide clarity on the intention of the grant money and how to keep the process and the project moving forward. Chair Pruhs inquired as to the provided PCE data for Inside Passage Electric (IPEC). Mr. Thayer explained that information was provided in response to a legislative inquiry from Senator Stedman. Chair Pruhs asked if there is a typographical error regarding 2018 showing an average price of fuel per gallon at $7.34. No response was given. Chair Pruhs commented that the average price of fuel decreased from 2018 to 2021, but the reported residential rate increased 10% for that
same time period. Chair Pruhs requested information as to the cause of that happening. Mr.
Thayer noted that the information provided is in response to a request for information for the
Inside Passage Electric utility three-year average. Mr. Thayer stated that he can provide an analysis
of the data.
Chair Pruhs explained that he is curious that in 2018, the average price of fuel was $2.45 per gallon
and in 2021, the average price of fuel reduced about 30% to $1.98 per gallon, but that the rate
based on 500 kWh increased from .56 cents to .61 cents in the same time period. Mr. Thayer
noted that IPE also introduced and removed hydro energy over the time period. He suggested
that some of the costs could be a fluctuation in the amount of fuel they needed to purchase
during that time.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 10 of 11
Mr. Fogle discussed that AEA used a portion of the VW Settlement funds to begin the implementation of an electric vehicle (EV) corridor between Homer and Fairbanks. He requested Mr. Thayer explain to the new members and to the public how AEA began the EV corridor process and the plan of continued growth. Mr. Thayer explained that AEA was the recipient of the VW Settlement regarding the emissions issue. Alaska’s portion was $8.7 million. The plan was developed through a Court Trustee. The funding was used to replace 33 older school busses, one electric school bus in Tok, one electric bus in Juneau, one box truck in Anchorage, and for the Diesel Emission Reduction Act (DERA) program in rural Alaska. Additionally, 15% of the funds
were set aside for EVs. An RFP went out for possible site host charging stations from Homer to
Fairbanks. The RFP required a 20% match and required a fast charger.
Mr. Thayer discussed that 24 applicants responded to the RFP and one was disqualified due to
location of more than five miles off the road system. There were funds available for nine charging
stations. The first charging station that went online was in Homer. The plan was to conduct Phase
2 for Tok, Glennallen, and Delta Junction. This plan was paused because the IIJA funding came
through and provided program money for Alaska. AEA is using planning money to help establish
the plan for AEA to meet the qualifications to receive funding over the next five years. AEA intends
to submit an RFI for the plan development of the highway corridor to identify which communities
want charging stations. The aim is to conduct another grant program with an 80/20 match
structure for the charging stations. Mr. Thayer explained that the grant program has requirements for the first three to five years that AEA would have to meet and maintain, but AEA would not own the charging stations. The business location of the charging station absorbs the liability of the charging station. Chair Pruhs asked if the business location has to carry minimum liability insurance. Mr. Thayer noted that he would have to provide that information to the Chair. He explained that AEA selected nine vendors that met certain qualifications for Alaska and the individual site hosts had the flexibility to choose the from the list of vendors. Mr. Eledge asked Mr. Thayer if there is a financial penalty for the federal funding if the minimum of 50 miles is not met. Mr. Thayer discussed there is not a penalty because that is one of the challenges for most of the western states. He noted that the current status is to communicate what standards cannot be met. Mr. Thayer believes the national plan was built for east of the Mississippi River. There were no additional questions.
I. Community Outreach
Mr. Thayer informed that community outreach program is ongoing, and the presentations are
included in the packet. He highlighted that the Governor is hosting an Alaska Sustainability
Conference in May for three days in Anchorage, which coincides, but does not interfere with the
next Board meeting. Mr. Thayer advised that there were issues with planning, and Brandy Dixon,
AEA, has stepped in to efficiently coordinate the activities.
Mr. Thayer introduced Megan Schmidt, AEA HR Director, who is taking Linda Senn’s position after
retirement. Mr. Thayer expressed appreciation to Ms. Senn for her service. Chair Pruhs welcomed
Alaska Energy Authority Page 11 of 11
Ms. Schmidt and requested that she provide her background information. Ms. Schmidt gave a brief biographical and professional background. Chair Pruhs expressed appreciation to Ms. Senn for her dedication. J. Articles of Interest – Included in packet. K. Next Regularly Scheduled AEA Board Meeting Wednesday, May 25, 2022
9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: None
Chair Pruhs requested that Curtis Thayer, Executive Director, discuss the item. Mr. Thayer
indicated that after consultation with the Department of Law (DOL), the Executive Session does
not need to occur. The discussion points are contained within the posted agenda for required
project work. This includes the attorney/client communications memo that was publicly released.
There was no objection to modifying today’s agenda to eliminate Item 9. Executive Session. Chair
Pruhs returned the meeting to Item 6. New Business.
10. BOARD COMMENTS Mr. Fogle commented on today’s discussions regarding AEA’s current improvements which are a positive result of Mr. Thayer’s leadership, including the relationship with the utilities, the creation of a maintenance database for rural Alaska, and the overall improvements to the day-to-day operations. Mr. Fogle welcomed Mr. Sandstrom to his new position. Chair Pruhs welcomed Mr. Mitchell to the Board. Mr. Mitchell provided a brief description of his professional background. Chair Pruhs expressed appreciation to Mr. Thayer, staff, and to Ms. Bertolini. 11. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business of the Board, the AEA meeting adjourned at 9:58 am.
____________________________________________
Curtis W. Thayer, Executive Director / Secretary
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 WWW.AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
MEMORANDUM
TO: Curtis W. Thayer, Executive Director
FROM: Bryan Carey, P.E., Director of Owned Assets
DATE: May 11, 2022
RE: Bradley Lake Required Project Work
The Department of Law has issued the following memos regarding Bradley Lake Required
Project Work:
SQL Upgrade
DH repair and replacement
BJS Upgrade
BESS Purchase
An independent engineer, GDS Associates, was contracted to provide expert analysis on the
Bradley Lake Required Project work is consistent with sound economic and national standards in
the industry as required by the Bradley Lake Power Sales Agreement. The independent engineer
will provide an opinion if the projects conforms to Prudent Utility Practice, which is a
requirement of Department of Law.
In December 2021 the Bradley Lake Project Management Committee (BPMC) adopted
Resolution 21-02 settig forth its intent to improve the transmission grid from Homer to
Fairbanks. In order to implement Resolution 21-02, the BPMC determined Chugach Electric
Association (CEA) is best able to proceed quickly with design and procurement services to
complete the design of the SSQ Line.
In April 2022, the Bradley Lake Project Management Committee (BPMC) approved Resolution
22-05 specifically authorizing Chugach Electric Association (CEA) to competitively procure
materials and services for the planned upgrades to the SSQ Line. CEA has Request for Proposals
for engineering services to the rebuild to the Quartz to Sterling section of the SSQ Line.
This work is to be funded by AEA Bonds and /or IIJA Funding.
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:
May 19, 2022
2021103317
(907) 269-6612
Bradley Lake Project -
Whether the upgrade of the
SS Line meets the definition
of “Required Project Work”
CONFIDENTIAL—DOCUMENT
The participants in the Bradley Lake hydroelectric facility (“Bradley Lake
Project”) have requested the Department of Law to review whether a series of proposed
developments can be considered required project work under the Power Sales Agreement
(“PSA”). For the purpose of this memorandum, we will consider these proposed
developments to be agreed upon by all participants.
In this memorandum, we review the upgrade of the Soldotna to Sterling
transmission line, whether as a new line or the replacement of the existing line (the line,
“SS line” and the upgrade or replacement work, “SS Upgrade”).1
This analysis is important for State financial reasons, because if found to be
required project work as defined in the PSA (“Required Project Work”), future payments
paid by the participating utilities to the State of Alaska under the PSA could be reduced
by the debt service payments related to the work.
1. Transmission Line Upgrade within the Bradley Lake Project
Issue: Does the SS Upgrade meet the requirements of the PSA to be considered
Required Project Work?
1 We have researched this question internally at the Department of Law, and
reviewed historical documents concerning AEA and the Bradley Lake Project. However,
we have not analyzed other aspects of this transaction, such as the political, financial, tax
or accounting aspects.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director May 19, 2022
Re: Is the SS Upgrade Required Project Work? Page 2 of 5
CONFIDENTIAL - DOCUMENT
Short Answer: The SS Upgrade should be considered Required Project Work
under the PSA. Additional analysis required by the PSA should also be done by the
relevant experts regarding its economics and consistency with national standards in the
industry.
2. Recent DOL interpretations of Required Project Work
The BPMC has begun work on the following developments and asked the
Department of Law whether they constitute Required Project Work under the PSA:
1. The purchase of certain transmission line assets, including the
Sterling to Quartz Creek line (SQL) from HEA;
2. The upgrade of the SQL;
3. The long-term repair and replacement program at the Project;
4. The upgrade of the Bradley Junction to Soldotna transmission line
(BJS line); and
5. The purchase of three battery energy storage systems (BESS).
The Department of Law, in memoranda dated May 19, 2020, November 10, 2021,
January 24, 2022, March 7, 2022 and April 27, 2022, concluded that these developments
were considered Required Project Work under the PSA. In each case, it was also
concluded that AEA had the statutory authority to improve the Bradley Lake Project
under AS 44.83.080(5) which grants AEA the authority “to improve, equip, operate, and
maintain power projects.”
Our memoranda came to the following relevant conclusions that do not need to be
re-analyzed here.
• Required Project Work appears to be a catch-all that combines several
different types of developments for the benefit of the Bradley Lake Project,
such as repair, maintenance, renewal, replacement, improvements or
betterments.
• There is no requirement in the PSA that the Required Project Work be
located in areas originally part of the Bradley Lake Project such as that
identified in Exhibit C of the PSA, which describes some of the project
assets.
• A development may have non-Project uses and still be considered Required
Project Work.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director May 19, 2022
Re: Is the SS Upgrade Required Project Work? Page 3 of 5
CONFIDENTIAL - DOCUMENT
3. Can the SS Upgrade be considered Required Project Work?
a. Description of SS Upgrade
The utilities are now seeking to finance the upgrade of the transmission line from
Soldotna to Sterling on the Kenai Peninsula (SS Line). The estimated cost of this
upgrade is $14-15 million.
The Bradley Lake Project already owns two segments of the main transmission
path northwards: the 20-mile transmission line from the powerhouse to Bradley Junction,
and the 40-mile transmission line from Sterling to Quartz Creek. The Bradley Lake
Project also already owns certain rights on the SS line, namely transmission capacity
subject to HEA’s native load and rights to require maintenance and upgrades to the line.
The utilities plan for the upgrade of the SS line is still unclear, because design and
planning has not started. The tentative plan is to build a new 230kV transmission line.
The utilities have presented a preliminary agreement in the form of a letter of intent to
AEA, dated Februar y 16, 2022. In summary, the letter of intent provides that AEA on
behalf of the Project would take ownership of the facilities added and increased
capability as assets of the Project. HEA would retain its current rights in existing
infrastructure and rights of way.
While the line loss due to the state of the line has not been calculated for the SS
line, it is thought to be less than the SQL, which is approximately $672,950 per year.
While the line losses are not eliminated with an upgrade, the larger capacity lines at 230
kV have significantly less line losses.
b. Statutory analysis
AEA is no longer allowed to construct or acquire new power projects, such as
hydroelectric facilities or interties, without legislative approval.2 However, AEA has the
power to “improve, equip, operate and maintain power projects”, such as the Bradley
Lake Project, which has been approved by the legislature.3 Additionally, AEA has the
power to “enter into contracts with any person … for the purchase, sale, exchange,
transmission or use of any power from a project, or any right to the capacity of it.4
2 SLA 1993, ch. 18, Sec. 10.
3 AS 44.83.080(5).
4 AS 44.84.080(11).
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director May 19, 2022
Re: Is the SS Upgrade Required Project Work? Page 4 of 5
CONFIDENTIAL - DOCUMENT
Because this project will significantly improve the Bradley Lake Project, we
conclude that the SS Upgrade is within AEA’s statutory powers.
c. Contractual analysis
As mentioned, the Required Project Work definition in the PSA combines several
types of projects:
“Required Project Work” means repairs, maintenance, renewals, replacements,
improvements or betterments required by federal or state law, a licensing or
regulatory agency with jurisdiction over the Project, or this Agreement, or
otherwise necessary to keep the Project in good and efficient operating condition,
consistent with (1) sound economics for the Project and the Purchasers, and (2)
national standards for the industry.5
The SS Upgrade can be described as an improvement or betterment of the Bradley
Lake Project because of its benefits to the transmission of Bradley Lake-generated power.
The utilities argue that major infrastructure assets such as the SS line should become part
of the project. This will allow them to be managed by the BPMC, costs will be
mutualized and disputes should be minimized.
Finally, the BPMC must approve any alternative methods of carrying out and
funding Required Project Work, inherently protecting all participants’ rights. There may
be alternative methods of carrying out and funding this project, so the BPMC may also
review these specific alternatives prior to the agreement on the SS Upgrade.
d. Comparison with previous project works
There are two earlier developments that the SS Upgrade can be compared to, the
upgrade of the SQL and the BESS purchase.
We argued that the purchase and the upgrade to the SQL was Required Project
Work because it was clearly an improvement to the Project as it is critical for the
transmission of Project power. Similarly, an upgrade to the SS line is also critical for the
transmission of Project power.
While reviewing the BESS purchase, we determined that non-Project uses do not
by themselves limit the determination of whether a development is Required Project
Work. There may also be non-Project uses for the upgraded SS line, such as transmission
5 Section 1(hh), p.7, PSA.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director May 19, 2022
Re: Is the SS Upgrade Required Project Work? Page 5 of 5
CONFIDENTIAL - DOCUMENT
of HEA’s native load, but they do not take away from the significance of the line for the
Project.
In summary, the SS Upgrade would not be a completely unique transaction for the
Bradley Lake Project, and projects with similar characteristics were thought to be
Required Project Work.
4. Conclusion
The Department of Law concludes that the SS Upgrade should be considered
Required Project Work under the PSA as an improvement work for the Bradley Lake
Project. With the approval of all Parties to the PSA, and opinions supporting the
economics and compliance with industry standards, the SS Upgrade can be seen as
necessary to keep the Bradley Lake Project in good and efficient operating condition.
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 27, 2022
2021103317
(907) 269-6612
Bradley Lake Project -
Whether the purchase of
battery systems meets the
definition of “Required
Project Work”
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The participants in the Bradley Lake hydroelectric facility (“Bradley Lake
Project”) have requested the Department of Law to review whether a series of
infrastructure upgrades and equipment purchases can be considered required project work
under the governing agreement. In this memorandum, we review the purchase of battery
energy storage systems (“BESS”).1
This analysis is important for State financial reasons, because if found to be
required project work (“Required Project Work”) as defined in the Power Sales
Agreement (“PSA”), future payments paid by the participating utilities to the State of
Alaska under the PSA could be reduced or eliminated by the costs related to such
development. However, since we have already approved as Required Project Work
sufficient developments to expend all payments due to the State, there is also the question
of prioritization and financing of Required Project Work and AEA’s involvement.
1. Purchase of BESS by the Bradley Lake Project
Question A: Does the purchase of BESS meet the requirements of the PSA to be
considered Required Project Work?
1 We have researched this question internally at the Department of Law, and
reviewed historical documents concerning AEA and the Bradley Lake Project. However,
we have not analyzed other aspects of this transaction, such as the political, financial, tax
or accounting aspects.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 27, 2022
Re: Is the BESS purchase “Required Project Work”? Page 2 of 11
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
Short Answer A: The purchase of BESS should be considered Required Project
Work under the PSA. Additional analysis required by the PSA should also be done by the
relevant experts with respect to how this purchase is consistent with sound economics
and national standards in the industry.
Question B: What are AEA’s rights with respect to prioritization or other
determinations about Required Project Work?
Short Answer B: It should be noted that AEA has considerable rights under the
PSA and the BPMC bylaws to determine the necessity, scheduling and the approaches to
financing of Required Project Work. To the extent that AEA has preferences, AEA is
able to make these known at the BPMC and may exert control over certain approval
issues.
2. Most recent DOL interpretations of Required Project Work
The BPMC has recommended the following proposed developments and asked the
Department of Law whether they constitute Required Project Work under the PSA:
1. The purchase of certain transmission line assets, including the Sterling to
Quartz Creek (“SQ line”) from HEA;
2. The upgrade of the SQ line;
3. The long-term (34 years) repair and replacement program at the Bradley
Lake Project; and
4. The upgrade of the Bradley Junction to Soldotna transmission line (“BJS
line”).
The Department of Law, in memoranda dated May 19, 2020, November 10, 2021,
January 24, 2022, and March 7, 2022 concluded that AEA had the legal authority to carry
out these four developments, and that they were authorized under the PSA’s Required
Project Work provision.
Our memoranda and related analysis came to the following conclusions that do not need
to be re-analyzed here.
Required Project Work appears to be a catch-all that combines several
different types of projects, such as construction, maintenance, repair or
purchase of new equipment whether to improve operations or to replace
existing equipment.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 27, 2022
Re: Is the BESS purchase “Required Project Work”? Page 3 of 11
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
AEA has the statutory powers to carry out transactions considered a
replacement, repair or improvement of assets related to the Bradley Lake
Project.
Historically, the Bradley Lake Project has not carried out many large
replacement or improvement developments, which make comparisons
difficult. These upcoming developments are breaking new ground under
the PSA.
With the approval of all Parties to the PSA, and studies or reports
supporting the economics and industry standards, large replacements and
improvements to the Bradley Lake Project can be seen as Required Project
Work necessary to keep it in good and efficient operating condition.
The payments to the State under the PSA can be reduced or eliminated by
annual debt service for Reduced Project Work.
The location of the developments is not required to be within the historical
boundaries as outlined in the PSA, so long as the development can be
substantially linked to the Bradley Lake Project.
3. Can the BESS purchase be considered as Required Project Work?
a. Description of BESS
The utilities are now suggesting the purchase by the Bradley Lake Project of
BESS. The ask is for three systems, estimated at a cost of $115-145 million:
1. The HEA BESS, operating in Soldotna since January 19, 2022, and
valued at $45 million, with financing from commercial lenders;
2. The Anchorage BESS, estimated to cost $60 million, and the
procurement process has been started; and
3. A replacement or significant upgrade to Golden Valley Electric’s
(GVEA) existing BESS, estimated to cost between $10-40 million.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 27, 2022
Re: Is the BESS purchase “Required Project Work”? Page 4 of 11
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
BESS have many uses. GVEA on its website focuses on the impact of its battery
on power outages.2 In 2019, 49 outages were prevented.3 HEA also features its battery on
its website.4 It focuses on the benefits of renewable energy integration and lowered
greenhouse gas emissions during outages due to use of batteries, instead of firing up a
diesel or natural gas-powered generator. Neither of the pages mention that the batteries
could have uses with respect to the Bradley Lake Project.
While BESS have the uses as outlined above, the link to the Bradley Lake Project
is highly technical. The utilities received a new power engineer’s report showing that the
BESS will improve power oscillations that may be caused and/or exacerbated by the
Bradley Lake Project. Such oscillations could cause damage to the power grid and the
Bradley Lake powerhouse in a severe case. According to the utilities, as the Railbelt grid
has evolved, these oscillations have increased in recent years. The report has been
prepared by Electric Power Systems, Inc., based in Anchorage, and it is entitled Railbelt
Oscillation Investigation and Mitigation Study, which is dated February 21, 2022
(“Engineer’s Report”). The Engineer’s Report analyzes historical data, in particular, data
recorded during and after a sudden, large outage on June 3, 2021, and makes conclusions
on whether the damaging oscillations were caused by the Bradley Lake Project and what
might cause, dampen or resolve the oscillations when they might re-occur.
The Engineer’s Report analyzes the potential mitigation effects of the existing
HEA battery, the Soldotna BESS, on the oscillations related to the Bradley Lake Project.
It concludes the existing HEA battery to be sufficient to mitigate the impacts of the
oscillations.
The addition of either the HVDC line or Soldotna BESS can
provides (sp) a beneficial impact on the transient response of the
system. In the base case without the HVDC line and the Soldotna
BESS, the transient response of the system is unstable. In the
subsequent cases where either the HVDC line, the Soldotna BESS,
or both components are in-service, the transient response of the
system is stable.5
2 See https://gvea.com/battery-system/.
3 Id.
4 See https://www.homerelectric.com/my-cooperative/power-generation/battery-
energy-storage-system-has-arrived/
5 Engineer’s Report, p.18.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 27, 2022
Re: Is the BESS purchase “Required Project Work”? Page 5 of 11
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The report also mentions that an Anchorage-located BESS would also be helpful
to mitigate the damaging oscillations.
We also note that the control of over frequency on the Kenai could
be accomplished with the proposed Anchorage area BESS for loss of
the Anchorage – Fairbanks intertie and some contingencies may
require the combined capability of both BESS systems. For system
reliability and performance, both BESS locations should be used to
ensure adequate capability to prevent the severe oscillations. For the
purposes of this study, references to the Soldotna BESS should also
include the understanding that the Anchorage area BESS is also part
of the proposed solution.6
However, nowhere in this report is the current or future upgrade to the GVEA
BESS mentioned. When this point was raised by AEA, the utilities received a new report
from their engineer. This addendum report is entitled, “Addendum to the Railbelt
Oscillation Investigation and Mitigation Study” and dated March 28, 2022
(“Addendum”).7 It focuses on the value of an upgraded GVEA BESS. It uses a
hypothetical situation, where a very large load such as a mining operation in the GVEA
service territory is suddenly disconnected from the grid. This would likely cause large
damaging oscillations, but with batteries at Soldotna and Fairbanks, so long as properly
optimized for this purpose, the grid and the Bradley Lake Project could be protected from
the damaging oscillations. The Addendum concludes:
The additional of (sp) BESSs in Fairbanks and in Anchorage and/or
the Kenai can stabilize the system and reduce the risk of the Bradley
Lake plant going out of step. However, the BESSs logic must be
revised such that each BESS resource contributes during the over-
frequency condition and helps stabilize the overall Railbelt
response.8
The BPMC recognizes the responsibility of the Bradley Lake Project for these
oscillation incidents and to maintain operations in good repair. The Bradley Lake Project
can be seen as responsible for correcting the instability issue on the Railbelt System
caused or exacerbated by its facilities in the most economical manner and in accordance
with prudent utility practice. Re-working the Bradley Lake powerhouse is not as
6 Id., p.12.
7 Note that the Addendum was received by email on April 8, 2022.
8 Addendum, p.1.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 27, 2022
Re: Is the BESS purchase “Required Project Work”? Page 6 of 11
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
economically reasonable or practical as purchasing BESS, primarily because of the high
cost of shutting down power generation. The purchase of the existing BESS in Soldotna,
the installation of one in Southcentral Alaska, and the upgrade or replacement of one in
the Interior, appears to be necessary to keep the Bradley Lake Project in good and
efficient operating condition and is supported by the Engineer’s Report and the
Addendum.
The corresponding bond issuances are estimated at approximately $115-145
million for the BESS purchase. The financing structure has not been determined yet. The
financing needs for the battery development is likely to be combined with the other
development work in process. It is likely that AEA issues one series of long-term bonds
in the amount of $200-300 million in the near future to take advantage of the current
interest rates. These AEA bonds issued on behalf of the Bradley Lake Project should be
cost effective, taking advantage of lower costs of a government issuer, the cost shifting
allowed under the PSA, i.e. no repayment to the State since it is Required Project Work,
and perhaps other federal subsidies and programs designed to incentivize new energy
projects.
b. Statutory analysis
AEA has broad statutory authority with respect to the Bradley Lake Project and in
particular to comply with the terms of the PSA. However, AEA is no longer allowed to
construct or acquire new power projects, such as hydroelectric facilities or interties,
without legislative approval.9 AEA also has the power to “improve, equip, operate and
maintain power projects,” such as the Bradley Lake Project, which has been approved by
the legislature.10 Additionally, AEA has the power to “enter into contracts with any
person … for the purchase, sale, exchange, transmission or use of any power from a
project, or any right to the capacity of it.11
Statutory changes in 1993 eliminated AEA’s power to construct and acquire new
power projects, and AEA’s ongoing powers were strictly limited to the Energy Program
for Alaska, namely Bradley Lake Project and the Alaska Intertie.12 When a BESS is not
used for the Bradley Lake Project, this could be considered an unauthorized power
9 SLA 1993, ch. 18, Sec. 10.
10 AS 44.83.080(5).
11 AS 44.84.080(11).
12 Chap. 18 SLA 1993. Specifically, the words “construct, acquire, construction,
acquisition” were deleted, and new power projects were made subject to legislative
approval.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 27, 2022
Re: Is the BESS purchase “Required Project Work”? Page 7 of 11
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
project. In such characterization, AEA would not have the powers to acquire or manage
it, except with legislative approval.
There is little evidence to support this argument. The Engineer’s report and
Addendum supports the linkage of the BESS to the Bradley Lake Project using historical
data and simulations. The utilities are in favor of managing the BESS for the Bradley
Lake Project. It is uncertain how it will be managed among the utilities, other than such
use and management will be beneficial to ratepayers and the public in general and will
support AEA’s statutory purpose.
Note, however, that it is unlikely that AEA, as potential owner of the BESS, will
be paid directly by utilities for non-Project uses of the BESS, such as for outage
management. This is not in itself a problem for AEA. It is also permitted to “to make
grants or loans to any person and enter into contracts or other transactions regarding the
grants or loans.”13 So AEA can grant use of the BESS to the participating utilities when
not used by the Bradley Lake Project.
Based primarily on the Engineer’s Report and Addendum, the Department of Law
concludes that the purchase of BESS for the Bradley Lake Project is within AEA’s
statutory powers.
c. Contractual language analysis
As mentioned, the Required Project Work definition in the PSA combines several
types of projects:
“Required Project Work” means repairs, maintenance, renewals,
replacements, improvements or betterments required by federal or
state law, a licensing or regulatory agency with jurisdiction over the
Project, or this Agreement, or otherwise necessary to keep the
Project in good and efficient operating condition, consistent with (1)
sound economics for the Project and the Purchasers, and (2) national
standards for the industry.14
As explained by the Engineer’s Report and Addendum, the purchase of BESS can
be described as an improvement or betterment of the Bradley Lake Project. It should be
considered as Required Project Work as defined in the PSA.
13 AS 44.83.080(16).
14 Section 1(hh), p.7, PSA.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 27, 2022
Re: Is the BESS purchase “Required Project Work”? Page 8 of 11
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The utilities are confident that the BESS purchase is consistent with sound
economics and will meet national standards for the industry. To that end a formal
economic analysis will be carried out, and a consultant or engineer will opine on the
consistency of the BESS purchase with national standards for the industry. This is also
being done prior to the other developments deemed Required Project Work.
Finally, the BPMC must approve any alternative methods of carrying out and
funding Required Project Work, inherently protecting all participants’ rights. There may
be alternative methods of carrying out and funding this purchase, so the BPMC may also
review these specific alternatives.
d. Comparison with previous project works
There are two earlier developments that the BESS purchase can be compared to,
the 2016 decision to replace the static VAR compensation systems (SVCs) and the 2020
decision to purchase the SQ line and other transmission assets and rights.
In summary, the purchase of the BESS would not be a completely unique
transaction for the Bradley Lake Project, and similar projects were thought to be
Required Project Work.
i. SVCs
As part of the Bradley Lake Project in 1993, AEA installed two static VAR
compensation systems (SVCs), which control line voltages, to improve the transmission
of Bradley Lake power. They are located in utility-owned substations in Soldotna and
Dave’s Creek on the Kenai Peninsula. Both substations are along the transmission path of
Bradley Lake power.
On April 21, 2016, as the original SVCs were nearing the end of their life, the
BPMC decided to replace them with a full system upgrade. The approximate cost of this
work was $7.2 million with a service life of at least 20 years. AEA determined that the
SVC replacement was Required Project Work in accordance with the PSA. However, for
financial reasons, this expenditure was not financed using AEA bonding, and so did not
impact payments to the State under the PSA.
There are several similarities with the purchase of BESS. Both are large technical
equipment related to the power transmission of the Bradley Lake Project. Both are
improvement projects to equipment benefitting the Bradley Lake Project. In terms of
location, both the SVCs and BESS are located similarly on the transmission path of
Bradley Lake power, and somewhat distant to the core part of the Bradley Lake Project,
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 27, 2022
Re: Is the BESS purchase “Required Project Work”? Page 9 of 11
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
comprising the powerhouse, the dam and the lake. In fact, one of the BESS and SVC are
located in Soldotna.
The main difference is that the original SVC equipment was part of the Bradley
Lake Project from the start, and SVCs can be thought of as early stage batteries with
respect to managing power transmission. A BESS is fairly new technology, and BESS
were not available at the start of the Bradley Lake Project in the early 1990’s.
ii. SQ Line Acquisition
In 2020, the BPMC approved the purchase of certain assets (“SQL acquisition”)
for $17 million: the SQ line; transmission capacity from Soldotna to Sterling, and other
agreements between the parties.
The Department of Law, in a May 19, 2020 memorandum, concluded that AEA
had the legal authority to acquire the SQ line and related assets, concluding that the
transaction was authorized under the PSA contract’s Required Project Work provision in
order to improve delivery of power from the Bradley Lake Project. It was also concluded
that AEA had the statutory authority to acquire the transmission line as an improvement
to the Bradley Lake Project under AS 44.83.080(5) which grants AEA the authority “to
improve, equip, operate, and maintain power projects.”15
There are several similarities with the purchase of BESS. Both are large
infrastructure related to the power transmission of the Bradley Lake Project. Both are
acquisition projects of infrastructure, benefitting the Bradley Lake Project as shown by
expert opinions and the utilities. In terms of location, both the SQ line and BESS are
located similarly on the transmission path of Bradley Lake power, and somewhat distant
to the core part of the Bradley Lake Project.
The main difference is that the SQ acquisition is for traditional transmission assets
wholly dedicated to the Bradley Lake Project and was important to transmission of
project power from the start. As mentioned, BESS is fairly new technology, which was
not contemplated at the start of the Bradley Lake Project, but now can be shown to be
important to its efficiency.
15 There were also two technical opinions received approving the acquisition: O&D
(Operations and Dispatch) Subcommittee of the BPMC, comprising engineers from the
participating utilities, and an independent consultant, EES Consulting, approved the SQL
acquisition with respect to compliance with national standards in the industry and
declaring it sound economically.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 27, 2022
Re: Is the BESS purchase “Required Project Work”? Page 10 of 11
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
4. AEA’s Role in Required Project Work
The utilities have been busy planning to spend monies made available under the
PSA. Once financed by AEA as Required Project Work, the costs of these developments
will be subsidized because they will reduce payments to the State due under the PSA.
However, there is a limit to the subsidy provided by the State to roughly $12.45 million
in debt service per year. To the extent that financing costs exceed this amount, a
prioritization of developments is likely to occur to reduce cost and minimize any out of
pocket amounts needed.
The PSA provides AEA with considerable rights to carry out and finance Required
Project Work.16 Additionally, the BPMC Bylaws require AEA approval, along with a
majority of utility interest, to determine the scheduling and financing of such work.17 The
BPMC bylaws state the following:
5.10.5 The following matters shall require the affirmative vote of
at least four representatives of the Purchasers whose percentage
shares of Project capacity are greater than 51% plus the affirmative
vote of the representative of the Authority.
…
(e) Evaluation of necessity for and scheduling of Required
Project Work.
…
(f) Selection among alternative methods that involve the
Authority for funding Required Project Work.
(emphasis added).
5. Conclusion
The BESS purchase should be considered Required Project Work under the PSA
as an improvement work for the Bradley Lake Project. AEA has certain rights under the
PSA and bylaws to determine necessity, scheduling and financing for Required Project
16 PSA, Sec. 4(c), p.9.
17 Bylaws of BPMC, p.4, section 5.10.5(e), (h).
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director April 27, 2022
Re: Is the BESS purchase “Required Project Work”? Page 11 of 11
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
Work, which AEA could use to help determine a priority of developments should
financing be constrained.
With the approval of all Parties to the PSA, and opinions supporting the
economics and compliance with industry standards, the purchase of BESS can be seen as
necessary to keep the Bradley Lake Project in good and efficient operating condition.
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:
January 24, 2022
2021103317
(907) 269-6612
Bradley Lake Project -
Whether the long-term repair
and replacement program
meets the definition of
“Required Project Work”
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The participants in the Bradley Lake hydroelectric facility (“Bradley Lake
Project”) have requested the Department of Law to review whether a series of upgrades
and equipment purchases can be considered required project work under the project
agreement. The proposed work is outlined in a letter from the Bradley Project
Management Committee (“BPMC”), dated August 20, 2021, and for the purpose of this
memorandum will be considered to be agreed upon by all participants. The main
agreement governing the Bradley Lake Project is the Power Sales Agreement (“PSA”).
The BPMC has encouraged the Department of Law to break up the review of the
list of requested upgrades and equipment purchases. In this memorandum, we review the
long-term repair and replacement of infrastructure and equipment at the Bradley Lake
Project as outlined in a detailed report by D. Hittle & Associates, Inc., dated
December 7, 2021 (“engineer’s report”).1
This analysis may have an important fiscal impact to the State, because if found to
be required project work as defined in the PSA (“Required Project Work”), future
payments paid by the participating utilities to the State of Alaska under the PSA could be
reduced or eliminated.
1 We have researched this question internally at the Department of Law, and
reviewed historical documents concerning AEA and the Bradley Lake Project. However,
we have not analyzed other aspects of this transaction, such as the political, financial, tax
or accounting aspects.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director January 24, 2022
Re: Is long-term repair and replacement “Required Project Work”? Page 2 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
1. Long-term repair and replacement within the Bradley Lake Project
Issue: Is the long-term repair and replacement program as outlined in the
engineer’s report Required Project Work?
Short Answer: The long-term repair and replacement program as outlined in the
engineer’s report should be considered Required Project Work under the PSA.
2. Recent DOL interpretations of Required Project Work
The Department of Law most recently reviewed work on the Bradley Lake Project
in 2020 and 2021.2 Those transactions involved the purchase (“SQ Acquisition”) and
upgrade (“SQ Upgrade”) of the transmission lines in the Soldotna to Quartz Creek area
and related assets and rights, which improve transmission of Bradley Lake power. We
found that the SQ Acquisition and Upgrade would constitute Required Project Work.
The SQL Acquisition closed on December 17, 2020. It was financed through the
issuance of $17 million in bonds by AEA that were purchased by AIDEA in a private
placement transaction. Because this was Required Project Work, all debt service will be
deductible against payments owed to the State during the term of the bonds. This will
result in a reduction of approximately $23.9 million being paid to the State.
The SQL Upgrade has been approved by the BPMC, but financing is still under
discussion. It will take some time to determine the design, procure services and
equipment, and carry out the eventual construction. The cost estimate for the SQ Upgrade
is $53 million.
Our memoranda and related analysis came to the following conclusions that do not
need to be re-analyzed here.
Required Project Work in the PSA appears to be a catch-all that combines
several different types of projects, such as construction, infrastructure
upgrade or replacement or purchase of new equipment and related rights.
AEA has the statutory powers to carry out such work because they were
considered an addition or improvement of the existing Bradley Lake
Project. However, considering the potential impact to State government
2 The memorandum, dated November 10, 2021, reviews the PSA and historical
project work in more detail than this memorandum.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director January 24, 2022
Re: Is long-term repair and replacement “Required Project Work”? Page 3 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
finances, it is something that should be made publically known, such as by
communication with the legislature.
With the approval of all Parties to the PSA, and studies or reports
supporting the economics and industry standards, the works could be seen
as Required Project Work necessary to keep the Bradley Lake Project in
good and efficient operating condition.
3. Can the long-term repair and replacement outlined in the engineer’s report
be considered as Required Project Work?
a. Description of the long-term repair and replacement program -
engineer’s report
On a regular basis, the long-term repair and replacement costs at the
Bradley Lake Project are estimated by a specialty engineering firm, D. Hittle &
Associates, Inc. The report contains inspection notes, recommendations and projected
expenditures. Except for the transmission lines, it reviews all of the infrastructure and
equipment comprising the Bradley Lake Project. The infrastructure inspected includes
the powerhouse, living quarters, dams, roads, bridges, and airport. Systems and
equipment inspected include the electrical, water and sewage systems, boats, trucks,
heavy machinery and snow machines. The latest report is dated December 7, 2021, and
estimates approximately $64.1 million in repair and replacement costs for a period from
2022 to 2056, or an average annual cost of about $1.7 million.
The report provides extensive guidance. A noteworthy comment in the
report is:
Another significant issue for the [Bradley Lake Project] is the obsolescence of
certain components and equipment. In particular, control systems over the years
have transitioned from mechanical relays and manual switches to digital controls.
The systems at [Bradley Lake Project] have generally been upgraded over time,
however, some components are in need of replacement since parts are no longer
readily available.3
Of particular interest for this memo, it notes that “[t]he [Bradley Lake Project] is
of an age when small things need attention” and “as the [Bradley Lake Project] ages
these small things will become bigger problems and increase the level of maintenance
3 Estimated Long-Term Repair and Replacement Costs, D. Hittle & Associates, Inc., Dec.
7, 2021, at page 3.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director January 24, 2022
Re: Is long-term repair and replacement “Required Project Work”? Page 4 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
required to maintain a first-class facility or allow for conditions to deteriorate to the point
that major capital replacements will be required that could have been deferred.”4
Historically, these on-going capital costs have been paid for by the utilities with
annual contributions to the budget and without financing through an AEA bond issuance.
However, because the utilities are planning several other projects requiring bond
financing, these costs could now be included in a new AEA bond issuance.
These repair and replacement works would likely be overseen by the BPMC with
direct supervision by Homer Electric Association, who contracts with AEA to operate
and maintain the Bradley Lake Project.
b. Statutory analysis
AEA has broad statutory authority with respect to the Bradley Lake Project and in
particular to comply with the terms of the PSA. However, AEA is no longer allowed to
develop, construct or acquire new power projects, such as hydroelectric facilities or
interties, without legislative approval.5 AEA does have the power to “improve, equip,
operate and maintain power projects”, such as the Bradley Lake Project, which project
has been approved by the legislature.6
Because this work will repair, replace and/or maintain the assets of the Bradley
Lake Project, the Department of Law concludes that this work is within AEA’s statutory
powers.
c. Contractual language analysis
As mentioned, the Required Project Work definition in the PSA combines several
types of projects:
“Required Project Work” means repairs, maintenance, renewals, replacements,
improvements or betterments required by federal or state law, a licensing or
regulatory agency with jurisdiction over the Project, or this Agreement, or
otherwise necessary to keep the Project in good and efficient operating condition,
4 Id. at page 4.
5 SLA 1993, ch. 18, Sec. 10.
6 AS 44.83.080(5).
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director January 24, 2022
Re: Is long-term repair and replacement “Required Project Work”? Page 5 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
consistent with (1) sound economics for the Project and the Purchasers, and (2)
national standards for the industry.7
The repair and replacement program in the engineer’s report should clearly be
considered required project work. The engineer’s report also provides support for the
work to be considered “necessary to keep the Project in good and efficient operating
condition, consistent with (1) sound economics for the Project and the Purchasers, and (2)
national standards for the industry.”
Even though this repair and replacement program has not been considered
Required Project Work in the past, there is no indication in the PSA that this change in
financing of this program should have any impact on its status as Required Project Work.
Section 24 (Waiver Not Continuing) of the PSA is helpful in that “[a]ny waiver at any
time by either party … shall not be considered a waiver with respect to any subsequent
default, right or matter.”
Finally, the BPMC must approve any alternative methods of carrying out and
funding Required Project Work, inherently protecting all participants’ rights. There may
be alternative methods of carrying out and funding this work, so the BPMC may also
review these specific alternatives prior to the agreement.
d. Comparison with previous project works
An earlier project replacing transmission equipment is most similar to this long-
term repair and replacement work. As part of the Bradley Lake Project in 1993, AEA
installed two static VAR compensation systems (SVCs), which control line voltages, to
improve the transmission of Bradley Lake power. They are located in substations in
Soldotna and Dave’s Creek on the Kenai Peninsula. Both substations are along the
transmission path of Bradley Lake power.
On April 21, 2016, as the original SVCs were nearing the end of their life, the
BPMC decided to replace them with a full system upgrade. The approximate cost of this
work was $7.2 million with a service life of at least 20 years. AEA determined that the
SVC replacement was Required Project Work in accordance with the PSA.
There are several similarities between these two projects. Both involve
replacement and improvement work to equipment that was already part of the Bradley
Lake Project. The items to be repaired or replaced in the engineer’s report are important
or even critical for the operation of the Bradley Lake Project.
7 Section 1(hh), p.7, PSA.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director January 24, 2022
Re: Is long-term repair and replacement “Required Project Work”? Page 6 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
In summary, the long-term repair and replacement work would not be a
completely unique transaction for the Bradley Lake Project, and the similar project of
SVC replacement was also thought to be Required Project Work.
4. Conclusion
The long-term repair and replacement work as outlined in the engineer’s report
should be considered Required Project Work under the PSA. With the approval of all
parties to the PSA, the long-term repair and replacement work can be seen as necessary to
keep the Bradley Lake Project in good and efficient operating condition.
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:
January 24, 2022
2021103317
(907) 269-6612
Bradley Lake Project -
Whether the long-term repair
and replacement program
meets the definition of
“Required Project Work”
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The participants in the Bradley Lake hydroelectric facility (“Bradley Lake
Project”) have requested the Department of Law to review whether a series of upgrades
and equipment purchases can be considered required project work under the project
agreement. The proposed work is outlined in a letter from the Bradley Project
Management Committee (“BPMC”), dated August 20, 2021, and for the purpose of this
memorandum will be considered to be agreed upon by all participants. The main
agreement governing the Bradley Lake Project is the Power Sales Agreement (“PSA”).
The BPMC has encouraged the Department of Law to break up the review of the
list of requested upgrades and equipment purchases. In this memorandum, we review the
long-term repair and replacement of infrastructure and equipment at the Bradley Lake
Project as outlined in a detailed report by D. Hittle & Associates, Inc., dated
December 7, 2021 (“engineer’s report”).1
This analysis may have an important fiscal impact to the State, because if found to
be required project work as defined in the PSA (“Required Project Work”), future
payments paid by the participating utilities to the State of Alaska under the PSA could be
reduced or eliminated.
1 We have researched this question internally at the Department of Law, and
reviewed historical documents concerning AEA and the Bradley Lake Project. However,
we have not analyzed other aspects of this transaction, such as the political, financial, tax
or accounting aspects.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director January 24, 2022
Re: Is long-term repair and replacement “Required Project Work”? Page 2 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
1. Long-term repair and replacement within the Bradley Lake Project
Issue: Is the long-term repair and replacement program as outlined in the
engineer’s report Required Project Work?
Short Answer: The long-term repair and replacement program as outlined in the
engineer’s report should be considered Required Project Work under the PSA.
2. Recent DOL interpretations of Required Project Work
The Department of Law most recently reviewed work on the Bradley Lake Project
in 2020 and 2021.2 Those transactions involved the purchase (“SQ Acquisition”) and
upgrade (“SQ Upgrade”) of the transmission lines in the Soldotna to Quartz Creek area
and related assets and rights, which improve transmission of Bradley Lake power. We
found that the SQ Acquisition and Upgrade would constitute Required Project Work.
The SQL Acquisition closed on December 17, 2020. It was financed through the
issuance of $17 million in bonds by AEA that were purchased by AIDEA in a private
placement transaction. Because this was Required Project Work, all debt service will be
deductible against payments owed to the State during the term of the bonds. This will
result in a reduction of approximately $23.9 million being paid to the State.
The SQL Upgrade has been approved by the BPMC, but financing is still under
discussion. It will take some time to determine the design, procure services and
equipment, and carry out the eventual construction. The cost estimate for the SQ Upgrade
is $53 million.
Our memoranda and related analysis came to the following conclusions that do not
need to be re-analyzed here.
Required Project Work in the PSA appears to be a catch-all that combines
several different types of projects, such as construction, infrastructure
upgrade or replacement or purchase of new equipment and related rights.
AEA has the statutory powers to carry out such work because they were
considered an addition or improvement of the existing Bradley Lake
Project. However, considering the potential impact to State government
2 The memorandum, dated November 10, 2021, reviews the PSA and historical
project work in more detail than this memorandum.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director January 24, 2022
Re: Is long-term repair and replacement “Required Project Work”? Page 3 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
finances, it is something that should be made publically known, such as by
communication with the legislature.
With the approval of all Parties to the PSA, and studies or reports
supporting the economics and industry standards, the works could be seen
as Required Project Work necessary to keep the Bradley Lake Project in
good and efficient operating condition.
3. Can the long-term repair and replacement outlined in the engineer’s report
be considered as Required Project Work?
a. Description of the long-term repair and replacement program -
engineer’s report
On a regular basis, the long-term repair and replacement costs at the
Bradley Lake Project are estimated by a specialty engineering firm, D. Hittle &
Associates, Inc. The report contains inspection notes, recommendations and projected
expenditures. Except for the transmission lines, it reviews all of the infrastructure and
equipment comprising the Bradley Lake Project. The infrastructure inspected includes
the powerhouse, living quarters, dams, roads, bridges, and airport. Systems and
equipment inspected include the electrical, water and sewage systems, boats, trucks,
heavy machinery and snow machines. The latest report is dated December 7, 2021, and
estimates approximately $64.1 million in repair and replacement costs for a period from
2022 to 2056, or an average annual cost of about $1.7 million.
The report provides extensive guidance. A noteworthy comment in the
report is:
Another significant issue for the [Bradley Lake Project] is the obsolescence of
certain components and equipment. In particular, control systems over the years
have transitioned from mechanical relays and manual switches to digital controls.
The systems at [Bradley Lake Project] have generally been upgraded over time,
however, some components are in need of replacement since parts are no longer
readily available.3
Of particular interest for this memo, it notes that “[t]he [Bradley Lake Project] is
of an age when small things need attention” and “as the [Bradley Lake Project] ages
these small things will become bigger problems and increase the level of maintenance
3 Estimated Long-Term Repair and Replacement Costs, D. Hittle & Associates, Inc., Dec.
7, 2021, at page 3.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director January 24, 2022
Re: Is long-term repair and replacement “Required Project Work”? Page 4 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
required to maintain a first-class facility or allow for conditions to deteriorate to the point
that major capital replacements will be required that could have been deferred.”4
Historically, these on-going capital costs have been paid for by the utilities with
annual contributions to the budget and without financing through an AEA bond issuance.
However, because the utilities are planning several other projects requiring bond
financing, these costs could now be included in a new AEA bond issuance.
These repair and replacement works would likely be overseen by the BPMC with
direct supervision by Homer Electric Association, who contracts with AEA to operate
and maintain the Bradley Lake Project.
b. Statutory analysis
AEA has broad statutory authority with respect to the Bradley Lake Project and in
particular to comply with the terms of the PSA. However, AEA is no longer allowed to
develop, construct or acquire new power projects, such as hydroelectric facilities or
interties, without legislative approval.5 AEA does have the power to “improve, equip,
operate and maintain power projects”, such as the Bradley Lake Project, which project
has been approved by the legislature.6
Because this work will repair, replace and/or maintain the assets of the Bradley
Lake Project, the Department of Law concludes that this work is within AEA’s statutory
powers.
c. Contractual language analysis
As mentioned, the Required Project Work definition in the PSA combines several
types of projects:
“Required Project Work” means repairs, maintenance, renewals, replacements,
improvements or betterments required by federal or state law, a licensing or
regulatory agency with jurisdiction over the Project, or this Agreement, or
otherwise necessary to keep the Project in good and efficient operating condition,
4 Id. at page 4.
5 SLA 1993, ch. 18, Sec. 10.
6 AS 44.83.080(5).
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director January 24, 2022
Re: Is long-term repair and replacement “Required Project Work”? Page 5 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
consistent with (1) sound economics for the Project and the Purchasers, and (2)
national standards for the industry.7
The repair and replacement program in the engineer’s report should clearly be
considered required project work. The engineer’s report also provides support for the
work to be considered “necessary to keep the Project in good and efficient operating
condition, consistent with (1) sound economics for the Project and the Purchasers, and (2)
national standards for the industry.”
Even though this repair and replacement program has not been considered
Required Project Work in the past, there is no indication in the PSA that this change in
financing of this program should have any impact on its status as Required Project Work.
Section 24 (Waiver Not Continuing) of the PSA is helpful in that “[a]ny waiver at any
time by either party … shall not be considered a waiver with respect to any subsequent
default, right or matter.”
Finally, the BPMC must approve any alternative methods of carrying out and
funding Required Project Work, inherently protecting all participants’ rights. There may
be alternative methods of carrying out and funding this work, so the BPMC may also
review these specific alternatives prior to the agreement.
d. Comparison with previous project works
An earlier project replacing transmission equipment is most similar to this long-
term repair and replacement work. As part of the Bradley Lake Project in 1993, AEA
installed two static VAR compensation systems (SVCs), which control line voltages, to
improve the transmission of Bradley Lake power. They are located in substations in
Soldotna and Dave’s Creek on the Kenai Peninsula. Both substations are along the
transmission path of Bradley Lake power.
On April 21, 2016, as the original SVCs were nearing the end of their life, the
BPMC decided to replace them with a full system upgrade. The approximate cost of this
work was $7.2 million with a service life of at least 20 years. AEA determined that the
SVC replacement was Required Project Work in accordance with the PSA.
There are several similarities between these two projects. Both involve
replacement and improvement work to equipment that was already part of the Bradley
Lake Project. The items to be repaired or replaced in the engineer’s report are important
or even critical for the operation of the Bradley Lake Project.
7 Section 1(hh), p.7, PSA.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director January 24, 2022
Re: Is long-term repair and replacement “Required Project Work”? Page 6 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
In summary, the long-term repair and replacement work would not be a
completely unique transaction for the Bradley Lake Project, and the similar project of
SVC replacement was also thought to be Required Project Work.
4. Conclusion
The long-term repair and replacement work as outlined in the engineer’s report
should be considered Required Project Work under the PSA. With the approval of all
parties to the PSA, the long-term repair and replacement work can be seen as necessary to
keep the Bradley Lake Project in good and efficient operating condition.
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:
November 10, 2021
2021103317
(907) 269-6612
Bradley Lake Project -
Whether the upgrade of the
SQL meets the definition of
“Required Project Work”
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The participants in the Bradley Lake hydroelectric facility (“Bradley Lake
Project”) have requested the Department of Law to review whether a series of upgrades
and equipment purchases can be considered required project work under the project
agreement. The proposed work is outlined in a letter from the Bradley Project
Management Committee (“BPMC”), dated August 20, 2021, and for the purpose of this
memorandum will be considered to be agreed upon by all participants. The main
agreement governing the Bradley Lake Project is the Power Sales Agreement (“PSA”).
The BPMC has encouraged the Department of Law to break up the review of the
list of requested upgrades and equipment purchases. This memorandum will be one of a
series analyzing work requested by the participating utilities. In this memorandum, we
review the upgrade of the Sterling to Quartz Creek transmission line (the line, “SQL” and
the upgrade work, “SQL Upgrade”).1
This analysis is important for State financial reasons, because if found to be
required project work as defined in the PSA (“Required Project Work”), future payments
paid by the participating utilities to the State of Alaska under the PSA could be reduced
by the costs of the work.
1 We have researched this question internally at the Department of Law, and
reviewed historical documents concerning AEA and the Bradley Lake Project. However,
we have not analyzed other aspects of this transaction, such as the political, financial, tax
or accounting aspects.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director November 10, 2021
Re: Is the SQL Upgrade “Required Project Work”? Page 2 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
1. Transmission Line Upgrade within the Bradley Lake Project
Issue: Does the SQL Upgrade meet the requirements of the PSA to be considered
Required Project Work?
Short Answer: The SQL Upgrade should be considered Required Project Work
under the PSA. Additional analysis required by the PSA should also be done by the
relevant experts with respect to how the SQL Upgrade is consistent with sound
economics and national standards in the industry.
2. Most recent DOL interpretation of Required Project Work
The Department of Law most recently reviewed work on the Bradley Lake Project
in May 2020.2 That transaction involved AEA’s purchase of the SQ Line and related
assets and rights (“SQ Acquisition”) to improve transmission of Bradley Lake power. It
was structured as a purchase by AEA for the Bradley Lake Project from Homer Electric
Association. We found that the SQ Acquisition would constitute Required Project Work.
The SQL Acquisition closed on December 17, 2020. It was financed through the
issuance of $17 million in bonds by AEA that were purchased by AIDEA in a private
placement transaction. Because this was Required Project Work, all debt service will be
deductible against payments owed to the State during the term of the bonds (19 years).
This will result in a reduction of approximately $23.9 million being paid to the State.
Our memorandum and related analysis came to the following conclusions that do
not need to be re-analyzed here.
• Required Project Work appears to be a catch-all that combines several
different types of projects, such as construction, equipment replacement or
purchase of new equipment.
• AEA has the statutory powers to carry out the transaction because the SQL
Acquisition was considered an addition or improvement of the existing
Bradley Lake Project. However, considering the potential impact to State
government finances, it is something that should be made widely known
such as by communication with the legislature.
2 The memorandum, dated May 20, 2020, reviews the PSA and historical project
work in more detail than this memorandum in analyzing the prior transaction.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director November 10, 2021
Re: Is the SQL Upgrade “Required Project Work”? Page 3 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
• No other historical projects were similar to the SQL Acquisition, and other
historical analysis did not shed much light on the interpretation that should
be used for future projects. This is reasonable because due to the original
construction bond termination, the State will help to fund Required Project
Work going forward in accordance with the PSA.
• With the approval of all Parties to the PSA, and studies or reports
supporting the economics and industry standards, the SQL Acquisition can
be seen as Required Project Work necessary to keep the Bradley Lake
Project in good and efficient operating condition.
3. Can the SQL Upgrade be considered as Required Project Work?
a. Description of SQL Upgrade
The SQL Upgrade involves the replacement and upgrade of the current
transmission line from Sterling to Quartz Creek on the Kenai Peninsula, a distance of
approximately 39.3 miles. The SQL is part of the critical transmission path from Bradley
Lake to ratepayers along the Railbelt.3
An upgrade of the line, which was built in the early 1990’s, is also important for
grid stability and improvements. It will increase the line’s capacity, which is currently
115 kV. At the current capacity, there is a restriction on Bradley Lake power that may be
transferred on the SQ Line. The Bradley Lake project is rated for 120 MW, but it rarely
runs at this power level, because the transmission grid is not suitable. When it was first
built in the early 1990’s, the electrical infrastructure in Southcentral Alaska was very
different. This current medium-capacity line also incurs high line losses, which are
estimated at 13,459 MWh per year, which can be valued at $672,950 per year.
The upgrade would cost approximately $53.3 million, or a $1.4 million per mile.
The high cost per mile is because it goes through a national wildlife refuge, is partially in
an aquatic environment and is remote and subject to harsh Alaska weather. This would
upgrade the line to 230kV, which with other upgrades to the grid would allow more
utilization of Bradley Lake power. For example, Bradley Lake could be better used as a
peaking electrical generator, displacing at times natural gas turbines and perhaps even
lowering greenhouse gas emissions and costs. Line losses are estimated to be
significantly reduced to 2,315 MWh per year, resulting in an approximate savings of
$557,000 per year.
3 The current importance of SQL to the Bradley Lake Project was outlined in the previous
DOL memorandum, dated May 20, 2020.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director November 10, 2021
Re: Is the SQL Upgrade “Required Project Work”? Page 4 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The overall time period for design and construction of a new line is expected to be
6-7 years. This breaks down to about 3-4 years in design and permitting, and 2-3 years of
construction, which must be carefully planned due to weather and seasonal requirements
of the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. This large implementation project would require
specialist staff, equipment and materials to be brought in from the lower 48. The newer
higher capacity line will run along the existing easement, and would completely replace
the existing transmission line.
These works would be overseen by the BPMC, and planning, design and
construction and other rights and obligations would be done in accordance with the
Bradley Lake agreements.
The corresponding bond issuances are estimated at approximately $53.3 million
for this project. The financing structure has not been determined yet, but could include
multiple issuances of both short- and long-term financing. It may involve multiple
tranches of AEA bonds on behalf of the Bradley Lake Project, which cost to the utilities
(and ratepayers) is defrayed by the State of Alaska as part of the PSA.
b. Statutory analysis
AEA has broad statutory authority with respect to the Bradley Lake Project and in
particular to comply with the terms of the PSA. However, AEA is no longer allowed to
construct or acquire new power projects, such as hydroelectric facilities or interties,
without legislative approval.4 AEA also has the power to “improve, equip, operate and
maintain power projects”, such as the Bradley Lake Project, which project has been
approved by the legislature.5 Additionally, AEA has the power to “enter into contracts
with any person … for the purchase, sale, exchange, transmission or use of any power
from a project, or any right to the capacity of it.6
Because this project will improve and maintain the assets of the Bradley Lake
Project, the Department of Law concludes that the SQL Upgrade is within AEA’s
statutory powers.
c. Contractual language analysis
4 SLA 1993, ch. 18, Sec. 10.
5 AS 44.83.080(5).
6 AS 44.84.080(11).
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director November 10, 2021
Re: Is the SQL Upgrade “Required Project Work”? Page 5 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
As mentioned, the Required Project Work definition in the PSA combines several
types of projects:
“Required Project Work” means repairs, maintenance, renewals, replacements,
improvements or betterments required by federal or state law, a licensing or
regulatory agency with jurisdiction over the Project, or this Agreement, or
otherwise necessary to keep the Project in good and efficient operating condition,
consistent with (1) sound economics for the Project and the Purchasers, and (2)
national standards for the industry.7
As outlined above, the SQL Upgrade can be described as a renewal, replacement,
improvement or betterment of the Bradley Lake Project. It should be considered as
Required Project Work as defined in the PSA.
The utilities are confident that the SQL Upgrade is consistent with sound
economics and will meet national standards for the industry. To that end, the utilities plan
to perform a formal economic analysis and have a consultant opine on the consistency of
the SQL Upgrade with national standards for the industry. This was also done prior to the
SQL Acquisition.
Finally, the BPMC must approve any alternative methods of carrying out and
funding Required Project Work, inherently protecting all participants’ rights. There may
be alternative methods of carrying out and funding this project, so the BPMC may also
review these specific alternatives prior to the agreement on the SQL Upgrade.
d. Comparison with previous project works
An earlier project replacing transmission equipment is most similar to the SQL
Upgrade. As part of the Bradley Lake Project in 1993, AEA installed two static VAR
compensation systems (SVCs), which control line voltages, to improve the transmission
of Bradley Lake power. They are located in substations in Soldotna and Dave’s Creek on
the Kenai Peninsula. Both substations are along the transmission path of Bradley Lake
power.
On April 21, 2016, as the original SVCs were nearing the end of their life, the
BPMC decided to replace them with a full system upgrade. The approximate cost of this
work was $7.2 million with a service life of at least 20 years. AEA determined that the
SVC replacement was Required Project Work in accordance with the PSA.
7 Section 1(hh), p.7, PSA.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director November 10, 2021
Re: Is the SQL Upgrade “Required Project Work”? Page 6 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
There are several similarities between these two upgrade projects. Besides being
related to power transmission, both are replacement and improvement projects to
equipment that was already part of the Bradley Lake Project. It is clear that the SQL is
critical for transmission of Bradley Lake power to the Railbelt. In terms of location, both
the SVCs and the SQL Project are located similarly on the transmission path of Bradley
Lake power.
In summary, the SQL Upgrade would not be a completely unique transaction for
the Bradley Lake Project, and a similar project was thought to be Required Project Work.
4. Conclusion
The SQL Upgrade should be considered Required Project Work under the PSA as
a replacement and improvement work for the Bradley Lake Project. With the approval of
all Parties to the PSA, and opinions supporting the economics and compliance with
industry standards, the SQL Upgrade can be seen as necessary to keep the Bradley Lake
Project in good and efficient operating condition.
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:
November 10, 2021
2021103317
(907) 269-6612
Bradley Lake Project -
Whether the upgrade of the
SQL meets the definition of
“Required Project Work”
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The participants in the Bradley Lake hydroelectric facility (“Bradley Lake
Project”) have requested the Department of Law to review whether a series of upgrades
and equipment purchases can be considered required project work under the project
agreement. The proposed work is outlined in a letter from the Bradley Project
Management Committee (“BPMC”), dated August 20, 2021, and for the purpose of this
memorandum will be considered to be agreed upon by all participants. The main
agreement governing the Bradley Lake Project is the Power Sales Agreement (“PSA”).
The BPMC has encouraged the Department of Law to break up the review of the
list of requested upgrades and equipment purchases. This memorandum will be one of a
series analyzing work requested by the participating utilities. In this memorandum, we
review the upgrade of the Sterling to Quartz Creek transmission line (the line, “SQL” and
the upgrade work, “SQL Upgrade”).1
This analysis is important for State financial reasons, because if found to be
required project work as defined in the PSA (“Required Project Work”), future payments
paid by the participating utilities to the State of Alaska under the PSA could be reduced
by the costs of the work.
1 We have researched this question internally at the Department of Law, and
reviewed historical documents concerning AEA and the Bradley Lake Project. However,
we have not analyzed other aspects of this transaction, such as the political, financial, tax
or accounting aspects.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director November 10, 2021
Re: Is the SQL Upgrade “Required Project Work”? Page 2 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
1. Transmission Line Upgrade within the Bradley Lake Project
Issue: Does the SQL Upgrade meet the requirements of the PSA to be considered
Required Project Work?
Short Answer: The SQL Upgrade should be considered Required Project Work
under the PSA. Additional analysis required by the PSA should also be done by the
relevant experts with respect to how the SQL Upgrade is consistent with sound
economics and national standards in the industry.
2. Most recent DOL interpretation of Required Project Work
The Department of Law most recently reviewed work on the Bradley Lake Project
in May 2020.2 That transaction involved AEA’s purchase of the SQ Line and related
assets and rights (“SQ Acquisition”) to improve transmission of Bradley Lake power. It
was structured as a purchase by AEA for the Bradley Lake Project from Homer Electric
Association. We found that the SQ Acquisition would constitute Required Project Work.
The SQL Acquisition closed on December 17, 2020. It was financed through the
issuance of $17 million in bonds by AEA that were purchased by AIDEA in a private
placement transaction. Because this was Required Project Work, all debt service will be
deductible against payments owed to the State during the term of the bonds (19 years).
This will result in a reduction of approximately $23.9 million being paid to the State.
Our memorandum and related analysis came to the following conclusions that do
not need to be re-analyzed here.
• Required Project Work appears to be a catch-all that combines several
different types of projects, such as construction, equipment replacement or
purchase of new equipment.
• AEA has the statutory powers to carry out the transaction because the SQL
Acquisition was considered an addition or improvement of the existing
Bradley Lake Project. However, considering the potential impact to State
government finances, it is something that should be made widely known
such as by communication with the legislature.
2 The memorandum, dated May 20, 2020, reviews the PSA and historical project
work in more detail than this memorandum in analyzing the prior transaction.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director November 10, 2021
Re: Is the SQL Upgrade “Required Project Work”? Page 3 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
• No other historical projects were similar to the SQL Acquisition, and other
historical analysis did not shed much light on the interpretation that should
be used for future projects. This is reasonable because due to the original
construction bond termination, the State will help to fund Required Project
Work going forward in accordance with the PSA.
• With the approval of all Parties to the PSA, and studies or reports
supporting the economics and industry standards, the SQL Acquisition can
be seen as Required Project Work necessary to keep the Bradley Lake
Project in good and efficient operating condition.
3. Can the SQL Upgrade be considered as Required Project Work?
a. Description of SQL Upgrade
The SQL Upgrade involves the replacement and upgrade of the current
transmission line from Sterling to Quartz Creek on the Kenai Peninsula, a distance of
approximately 39.3 miles. The SQL is part of the critical transmission path from Bradley
Lake to ratepayers along the Railbelt.3
An upgrade of the line, which was built in the early 1990’s, is also important for
grid stability and improvements. It will increase the line’s capacity, which is currently
115 kV. At the current capacity, there is a restriction on Bradley Lake power that may be
transferred on the SQ Line. The Bradley Lake project is rated for 120 MW, but it rarely
runs at this power level, because the transmission grid is not suitable. When it was first
built in the early 1990’s, the electrical infrastructure in Southcentral Alaska was very
different. This current medium-capacity line also incurs high line losses, which are
estimated at 13,459 MWh per year, which can be valued at $672,950 per year.
The upgrade would cost approximately $53.3 million, or a $1.4 million per mile.
The high cost per mile is because it goes through a national wildlife refuge, is partially in
an aquatic environment and is remote and subject to harsh Alaska weather. This would
upgrade the line to 230kV, which with other upgrades to the grid would allow more
utilization of Bradley Lake power. For example, Bradley Lake could be better used as a
peaking electrical generator, displacing at times natural gas turbines and perhaps even
lowering greenhouse gas emissions and costs. Line losses are estimated to be
significantly reduced to 2,315 MWh per year, resulting in an approximate savings of
$557,000 per year.
3 The current importance of SQL to the Bradley Lake Project was outlined in the previous
DOL memorandum, dated May 20, 2020.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director November 10, 2021
Re: Is the SQL Upgrade “Required Project Work”? Page 4 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The overall time period for design and construction of a new line is expected to be
6-7 years. This breaks down to about 3-4 years in design and permitting, and 2-3 years of
construction, which must be carefully planned due to weather and seasonal requirements
of the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. This large implementation project would require
specialist staff, equipment and materials to be brought in from the lower 48. The newer
higher capacity line will run along the existing easement, and would completely replace
the existing transmission line.
These works would be overseen by the BPMC, and planning, design and
construction and other rights and obligations would be done in accordance with the
Bradley Lake agreements.
The corresponding bond issuances are estimated at approximately $53.3 million
for this project. The financing structure has not been determined yet, but could include
multiple issuances of both short- and long-term financing. It may involve multiple
tranches of AEA bonds on behalf of the Bradley Lake Project, which cost to the utilities
(and ratepayers) is defrayed by the State of Alaska as part of the PSA.
b. Statutory analysis
AEA has broad statutory authority with respect to the Bradley Lake Project and in
particular to comply with the terms of the PSA. However, AEA is no longer allowed to
construct or acquire new power projects, such as hydroelectric facilities or interties,
without legislative approval.4 AEA also has the power to “improve, equip, operate and
maintain power projects”, such as the Bradley Lake Project, which project has been
approved by the legislature.5 Additionally, AEA has the power to “enter into contracts
with any person … for the purchase, sale, exchange, transmission or use of any power
from a project, or any right to the capacity of it.6
Because this project will improve and maintain the assets of the Bradley Lake
Project, the Department of Law concludes that the SQL Upgrade is within AEA’s
statutory powers.
c. Contractual language analysis
4 SLA 1993, ch. 18, Sec. 10.
5 AS 44.83.080(5).
6 AS 44.84.080(11).
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director November 10, 2021
Re: Is the SQL Upgrade “Required Project Work”? Page 5 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
As mentioned, the Required Project Work definition in the PSA combines several
types of projects:
“Required Project Work” means repairs, maintenance, renewals, replacements,
improvements or betterments required by federal or state law, a licensing or
regulatory agency with jurisdiction over the Project, or this Agreement, or
otherwise necessary to keep the Project in good and efficient operating condition,
consistent with (1) sound economics for the Project and the Purchasers, and (2)
national standards for the industry.7
As outlined above, the SQL Upgrade can be described as a renewal, replacement,
improvement or betterment of the Bradley Lake Project. It should be considered as
Required Project Work as defined in the PSA.
The utilities are confident that the SQL Upgrade is consistent with sound
economics and will meet national standards for the industry. To that end, the utilities plan
to perform a formal economic analysis and have a consultant opine on the consistency of
the SQL Upgrade with national standards for the industry. This was also done prior to the
SQL Acquisition.
Finally, the BPMC must approve any alternative methods of carrying out and
funding Required Project Work, inherently protecting all participants’ rights. There may
be alternative methods of carrying out and funding this project, so the BPMC may also
review these specific alternatives prior to the agreement on the SQL Upgrade.
d. Comparison with previous project works
An earlier project replacing transmission equipment is most similar to the SQL
Upgrade. As part of the Bradley Lake Project in 1993, AEA installed two static VAR
compensation systems (SVCs), which control line voltages, to improve the transmission
of Bradley Lake power. They are located in substations in Soldotna and Dave’s Creek on
the Kenai Peninsula. Both substations are along the transmission path of Bradley Lake
power.
On April 21, 2016, as the original SVCs were nearing the end of their life, the
BPMC decided to replace them with a full system upgrade. The approximate cost of this
work was $7.2 million with a service life of at least 20 years. AEA determined that the
SVC replacement was Required Project Work in accordance with the PSA.
7 Section 1(hh), p.7, PSA.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director November 10, 2021
Re: Is the SQL Upgrade “Required Project Work”? Page 6 of 6
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
There are several similarities between these two upgrade projects. Besides being
related to power transmission, both are replacement and improvement projects to
equipment that was already part of the Bradley Lake Project. It is clear that the SQL is
critical for transmission of Bradley Lake power to the Railbelt. In terms of location, both
the SVCs and the SQL Project are located similarly on the transmission path of Bradley
Lake power.
In summary, the SQL Upgrade would not be a completely unique transaction for
the Bradley Lake Project, and a similar project was thought to be Required Project Work.
4. Conclusion
The SQL Upgrade should be considered Required Project Work under the PSA as
a replacement and improvement work for the Bradley Lake Project. With the approval of
all Parties to the PSA, and opinions supporting the economics and compliance with
industry standards, the SQL Upgrade can be seen as necessary to keep the Bradley Lake
Project in good and efficient operating condition.
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org
REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
RGYAUTHORITY.ORG
Board Questions from April 13, 2022 AEA Board Meeting
1. AEA Provide an overview / demonstration of the Power Plant database.
TO BE PRESENTED AT THE June 29, 2022 Board Meeting
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY 2023 BUDGET (PENDING)Budget ItemFederal FundsGeneral FundsTotal 1 Operating Budget4,824,400$ 3,674,600$ 8,499,000$ PCE ‐ Operating355,000$ Sub Total Operating Budget 8,854,000$ Capital Budget2Bulk Fuel Upgrades 7,500,000$ 5,500,000$ 13,000,000$ 3Electrical Emergencies Program 200,000$ 200,000$ 4Round XIV Renewable Energy Project Grants 15,000,000$ 15,000,000$ 5Rural Power Systems Upgrades 10,000,000$ 10,000,000$ 20,000,000$ 6Strategic Plan for Railbelt Assets 2,500,000$ 2,500,000$ 7Electrical Infrastructure Plan Vehicle 1,500,000$ 1,500,000$ 8Volkswagon Settlement 400,000$ 400,000$ 9Grid Modernization, Reliability, Resiliency and Transmission Projects250,000$ 250,000$ Sub Total Capital Budget 52,850,000$ IIJA Funds10IIJA Funds ‐ Grid /Transmission 12,110,523$ 1,816,579$ 13,927,102$ 11IIJA Funds ‐ AEEE 3,655,600$ 3,655,600$ New Energy Auditor Training 63,600$ New Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund 796,000$ State Energy Program 796,000$ Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant 2,000,000$ 12IIJA Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (AEA/DOT) 7,758,240$ 7,758,240$ Sub Total IIJA Funds 25,340,942$ Endowment11Power Cost Equalization 32,000,000$ 32,000,000$ Sub Total PCE Endowment32,000,000$ 38,090,523$ 40,841,179$ 119,044,942$ TOTALTOTAL CAPITAL ‐ $ 78,190,942
12,500 46,000 33,266 5,000 200 9,950 10,500 15,000 10,000 1,000 9,975 ‐ 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,0002020 2021 2022 2023Thousands of Dollars RoundedFiscal YearAlaska Energy Authority Funding Source in the Past 3 Years (CAPITAL) and FY2023 Governor's Proposed Budget (in thousands rounded)Federal ReceiptsGeneral Fund / GF MatchAIDEA DividendRenewable Energy FundPCE EndowmentState Designated
981 781 781 781 1502120212021202847 847 847 847 124 124 124 124 3,433 2,568 2,568 2,568 996 996 996 996 150 150 150 150 100 50 50 50 737 737 737 737 2,000 1,400 1,400 1,400 ‐ 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,0002020 2021 2022 2023Thousands of Dollars Rounded Fiscal YearAlaska Energy Authority Funding Source in the Past 3 Years (OPERATING) and FY2023 Governor's Proposed Budget (in thousands rounded)AEA Receipts (Other)FED Receipts (Fed)General Fund (UGF)I/A Receipts (Other)CIP Receipts (Other)PPF (DGF)SDPR (Other)GF Program Receipts (DGF)PCERenew Energy (DGF)
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 WWW.AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director
Bryan Carey, P.E., Director of Owned Assets
May 11, 2022
Quarterly Dixon Diversion Project Update
History
Dixon Glacier is located five mile southwest of Bradley Lake. In the last five years the toe of
Dixon Glacier has receded off of state land exposing five hundred feet of outlet stream on state
land. A small diversion dam could be constructed on state land and divert water in a power
tunnel to Bradley Lake or lower Martin River.
Status
BPMC approved FY23 budget funding for Dixon Diversion Project studies for FY22.
The draft Alternative Report has estimated energy from Dixon Diversion Project of 100,000 MWh
to 200,000 MWh. The estimated construction cost of $400M to $620M depending on selected
alternatives.
AEA filed the Initial Consultation Document (ICD) April 27, 2022 with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission. The ICD kicks off studies and consultation with agencies and other
stakeholders. An agency/public meeting and an agency site tour are scheduled for June 14 &
15 in Homer.
Contractors being procured for Bradley Dixon environmental and engineering work.
Some environmental and engineering work on project will occur starting summer to better
define formal study plans and estimates.
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 Thayer, Executive Director
FROM: Bryan Carey, P.E., Dirctor of Owned Assets
DATE: May 11, 2022
SUBJECT: Quarterly Hydroelectric Program Update
Update Currently five Renwable Energy Fund (REF) hydroelectric related projects (Thayer Lake/Creek and FiveMile Creek) are active and have REF funds. An update of these Projects and a programmatic summary follows. Cordova Hydro Storage Assessment Project Project would assess multiple potential hydroelectric sites for conventional storage. Funding will be used for acquiring LiDAR of sites and preparing feasibility asessments of sites to best determine future development. Grantee waiting on snow melt to acquire imagery and LiDAR for detailed mapping. Above normal snowfall may delay collection of imagery & LiDAR until late in the summer. Funding:
• REF funding of $294,642 for feasibility assessments.
• Grantee: Cordova Electric Cooperative.
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project (REF) #7091226
Fivemile Creek Hydroelectric Project consists of permitting, final design, and construction of a
new 250-kW (approximate), run-of-river hydroelectric project located on Fivemile Creek to serve
the community of Chitina.
Sixty-five percent plans and cost estimates were completed. AEA’s permitting and design
contractor drafted permits for review and submittal. Work continued on final design, which are
expected to be completed May 2022. Request for proposals for vegetation clearing were drafted and posted. Vegetation clearing is expected to be completed spring 2022. Funding:
• REF grant $3.4 million.
• Denali Commission grant of $2.88 million.
• Grantee: Chitina Electric, Inc.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2
Nuyakuk River Hydroelectric Project Nuyakuk Hydroelectric Project is located NW of Dillingham on the Nuyakuk River. The proposed project would be a run of river 12 MW capacity project that would provide all the annual electrical energy for Dillingham and five regional communities (Aleknegik, Koliganek, New Stuyahok, Ekwok, and Levelock). The project was in abeyance and will resume the FERC licensing process and design in spring 2022. During the first quarter of 2022 AEA met with NETC to discuss project scope and budget. Grant
agreement being routed for signature and execution.
Funding:
• REF funding of $1 million for approved studies.
• Grantee: Nushagak Electric & Telephone Cooperative.
Thayer Lake (REF) #7040038 (closed) & 7050825 – End date 8/31/22.
Thayer Lake is located on Admiralty Island near Angoon, Alaska west of Juneau in southeast Alaska.
Construction will be in phases to better match with other grants and save funds by construction at the same time as Angoon Airport construction (plan 2022). Grantee has prepared and submitted all applications for permits. Investigating options to lower project costs. Funding:
• Grant period of performance ends August 2022.
• Partial funding for Phase 1 of construction (site preparation).
o Funds from Denali Commission still awaiting ADOT funds.
• Total Construction cost estimate is $25 million.
• Unobligated REF funds $4.9 million.
• Grantee: Kootznoowoo Incorporated.
Water Supply Creek Hydro Final Design Proposed Water Supply Creek Hydroelectric Project would be located near the existing Hoonah hydroelectric project Gartina Falls. The proposed project would be a run of river 300 kW capacity project. Design, Business Operating Plan, and land use agreements to be completed by December 2022. Operational and fuel savings from the project will be shared by all communities within the Inside Passage Electric Cooperative (IPEC). During the first quarter of 2022 IPEC completed a Business Plan, design being worked on by engineering contractors, and ADF&G began field work on Water Supply Creek. Funding:
• REF funding of $461,474 for final design.
• Grantee: Inside Passage Electric Cooperative.
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
DATE: May 9, 2022
TO: Curtis Thayer, Executive Director
THRU: Audrey Alstrom, AEEE Director
SUBJECT: VW State Environmental Mitigation Trust Update
Background
In 2018 Alaska became a beneficiary of $8.125 million from the Volkswagen Environmental
Mitigation Trust (Trust), established through a court settlement to fund mitigation projects that
reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions. The Authority was designated as the State’s lead agency
to administer the Trust. As required by the terms of the settlement, AEA developed a Beneficiary
Mitigation Plan (Plan) through a public process which outlines the goals for disbursing the
funds and the amount of funding allocated to specific types of diesel emission reduction
projects which result in a total lifetime reduction of NOx emissions by 10.5 short tons. The
projects that have been selected thus far will reduce NOx emissions by more than 2.5 times
Alaska’s mitigation goal. Below is a summary of Trust fund disbursements.
Projects
Diesel Engine Replacement ($1.14 million + match funds)
AEA has set aside Trust funds as a voluntary match for AEA’s Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Diesel Emission Reduction Act (DERA) program to fully leverage the federal funds
allocated to the State by the EPA. By contributing the voluntary match, the State receives 50
percent more EPA DERA funds to replace diesel engines or gensets in rural powerhouses. Using
Trust funds, engine/genset replacement projects have been completed in Chignik Lake (2), Circle
(2), Takotna (2), Tuluksak (1), and most recently in Arctic Village (3) and Chenega Bay (2).
AEA is working with the Trustee to obligate funds to replace gensets in Platinum (1), Grayling (2),
and Ruby (2), and Akiachak (2).
School Bus Replacement ($4.3 million)
Since 2019, AEA funded the purchase of 33 school buses in eight school districts: Alaska
Gateway (Tok) (1), Anchorage (13), Juneau (1), Kake City (2), Kenai Peninsula Borough (7), Kodiak
Island (1), Matanuska-Susitna Borough (4), and Southeast Island (Prince of Wales Island) (4). The
new buses will result in a reduction of 24.6 short tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and 1.8 short
tons of fine particulate matter over the lifetime of the replaced school buses. The school bus in
Tok is the first all-electric school bus in the State of Alaska. It has been in operation at the Alaska
Gateway School District since fall 2020.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2
Public Transit Bus Replacement ($234,000)
AEA’s funded 20 percent of an all-electric bus purchased by the City and Borough of Juneau,
Capital Transit. The bus was ordered in 2020 and became operational in spring 2021. This is the
first all-electric public transit bus in the state.
Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure ($875,000) (see EV update as well)
With Trust funds, Department of Energy (DOE) State Energy Program (SEP) funds, and private
matching funds from site hosts, AEA is installing 15 fast chargers and eight level two electric
vehicle (EV) chargers at nine stations connecting Seward and Homer to Healy. Installation of EV
chargers began in 2021.
In fall 2021, the first station was commissioned in Homer. The remaining have been delayed due
to frozen ground conditions. We anticipate the projects to progress over Q2 and Q3 2022.
Operational Sites
• Homer: AJ's OldTown Steakhouse & Tavern, 120 W Bunnell Ave, Homer, AK 99603
Sites Under Construction
• Anchorage: Dimond Center, 800 E. Dimond Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99515
• Cantwell: Jack River Inn, Mile 209.9 Parks Hwy Cantwell, AK 99729
• Chugiak: Three Bears Alaska, 22211 Birchwood Loop, Rd Chugiak, AK, 99567
• Cooper Landing: Grizzly Ridge, 18280 Sterling Hwy, Cooper Landing, AK 99572
• Healy: Three Bears Alaska, 248.5 Parks Hwy Healy, AK 99743
• Seward: Seward Chamber of Commerce, 2001 Seward Hwy Seward, AK 99664
• Soldotna: Custom Seafoods, 35722 Kenai Spur Hwy, Soldotna, AK 99669
• Trapper Creek: Three Bears Alaska, 23471 S Parks Hwy, Trapper Creek, AK 99683
Funding: Trust Funds ($875,000), SEP funds ($90,000), Matching funds ($500,000)
A maximum of 15% of Trust funds is eligible to be used towards EV infrastructure. AEA is
working with the Trustee to obligate approximately $375,000 of remaining funds toward eligible
EV projects.
Update
AEA is in the process of working with grantees to finalize and closeout the completed bus
replacement and DERA projects noted above. Remaining funds will be returned to the Trustee
for redisbursement towards other eligible mitigation projects. In addition, the Trust has earned
nearly $400,000 in interest since inception. The Governor has included receipt authority for AEA
to receive the interest earned in the FY22 Supplemental Capital budget.
Authorized signers with the trust are being updated to reflect new program staff. Once this is
complete, AEA will submit to receive funds for the outstanding DERA replacement engines and
update the beneficiary mitigation plan to reflect using the interest for the DERA option.
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
DATE: May 9, 2022
TO: Curtis W. Thayer, Executive Director
THROUGH: Audrey Alstrom, Director Alternative Energy & Energy Efficiency
FROM: Taylor Asher, Project Manager
SUBJECT: Quarter 1, Electric Vehicle Update
Background
In 2018 Alaska became a beneficiary of the Volkswagen Environmental Mitigation Trust (Trust), established through a court settlement to fund mitigation projects that reduce nitrogen oxide
(NOx) emissions. The Authority was designated as the State’s lead agency to manage and
distribute the $8.125 million Trust funds to complete eligible mitigation projects. The Authority thus got involved in electric vehicles (EV) by utilizing $1.25 million of Trust funds to install EV supply equipment (EVSE) and charging infrastructure.
Soon after, AEA adopted a secondary mission to lead the effort to minimize barriers that inhibit EV adoption within the state. AEA has worked towards strategically installing EV chargers
through a multi-pronged approach to establish a statewide, interconnected EV fast-charging
network. Additionally, AEA conducts public outreach and education, and facilitated the
development of and manages the Alaska Electric Vehicle Working Group (AKEVWG), which
includes representatives from utilities, state and local government, researchers, EV owners,
stakeholder industries, and the public.
Volkswagen Trust With Trust funds, Department of Energy (DOE) State Energy Program (SEP) funds, and private matching funds from site hosts, AEA is installing 15 fast chargers and eight level two electric
vehicle (EV) chargers at nine stations connecting Seward and Homer to Healy. Installation of EV
chargers began in 2021.
In fall 2021, the first station was commissioned in Homer. The remaining have been delayed due to frozen ground conditions. We anticipate the projects to progress over Q2 and Q3 2022.
Operational Sites • Homer: AJ's OldTown Steakhouse & Tavern, 120 W Bunnell Ave, Homer, AK 99603 Sites Under Construction • Anchorage: Dimond Center, 800 E. Dimond Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99515 • Cantwell: Jack River Inn, Mile 209.9 Parks Hwy Cantwell, AK 99729 • Chugiak: Three Bears Alaska, 22211 Birchwood Loop, Rd Chugiak, AK, 99567 • Cooper Landing: Grizzly Ridge, 18280 Sterling Hwy, Cooper Landing, AK 99572 • Healy: Three Bears Alaska, 248.5 Parks Hwy Healy, AK 99743
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 3
• Seward: Seward Chamber of Commerce, 2001 Seward Hwy Seward, AK 99664 • Soldotna: Custom Seafoods, 35722 Kenai Spur Hwy, Soldotna, AK 99669 • Trapper Creek: Three Bears Alaska, 23471 S Parks Hwy, Trapper Creek, AK 99683 Funding: Trust Funds ($875,000), SEP funds ($90,000), Matching funds ($500,000) A maximum of 15% of Trust funds is eligible to be used towards EV infrastructure. AEA is working with the Trustee to obligate $375,000 of remaining funds toward eligible EV projects.
IIJA NEVI Program The federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Program will provide Alaska with more than $50 million over the next five years. The NEVI
formula funds will help Alaska complete the statewide EV fast-charging network and
community-based charging installations in both urban and rural areas throughout the state.
Alaska’s NEVI funds will be routed through the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (DOT&PF) and managed by the Authority.
AEA met with DOT&PF to touch base on the funding and start identifying roles. A formal
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is forthcoming.
The NEVI Program requires states to develop a comprehensive five-year Implementation Plan that addresses how states will “build out” their Alternative Fuel Corridors (AFC) and access NEVI funds. The federal Joint Office of Energy and Transportation released NEVI guidance and a Plan Template throughout the first quarter of 2022. AEA reviewed the guidance and attended virtual informational sessions regarding NEVI funds. Additionally, AEA responded to the Request for Information (RFI) issued by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), requesting flexibility and direction to meet current FHWA AFC requirements. The Implementation Plan requires extensive input from the public and stakeholders. As part of this effort, AEA is drafting a request for information and survey to gather feedback on potential site locations and other public considerations. AEA established a small working group to develop the plan, including the state DOT&PF, Federal Highway Administration, and input from the federal Joint Office of Energy and Transportation.
In addition to the funds above, the IIJA Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Program
appropriates $2.5 billion nationwide in competitive grants to fund publicly accessible EVSE or
transportation electrification. The Governor included $1.5 million in the FY23 budget for AEA to
meet IIJA funding requirements and seek out other competitive grant funding.
Funding for current work has been through SEP and Trust funds.
Other Updates AEA recently released two solicitations for EV contractors, 1) to help facilitate the EV working group and conduct public outreach and education, and 2) to assist in developing and
implementing the required IIJA EVSE plan. Both of these contracts will be funded through the
SEP program.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 3 of 3
AEA has executed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Alaska Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in order to receive EV registration data on a regular basis. This will allow AEA to track the impact of our financial investments on EV adoption. The location of registered EVs will also help inform the EVSE NEVI Implementation Plan.
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
Alaska Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Program
Request for Information from Interested Site Hosts
1. Introduction
The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) is soliciting a Request for Information (RFI) to identify parties
interested in hosting electric vehicle (EV) fast-charging site(s) as part of the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Program. The
program intends to develop EV charging infrastructure at appropriate locations throughout the
state, including state highways, the marine highway system, and rural Alaska.
2. Background/Program Overview
AEA was created by the Alaska Legislature in 1976. AEA worked throughout the 1980s to
develop the state's energy resources and diversify Alaska's economy. Additional legislation in
1993 and 1999, programmatically expanded AEA’s role as the State's energy office. AEA’s
mission is to reduce the cost of energy in Alaska.
The recently passed Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provides $5 billion nationally for EV
charging infrastructure under the NEVI Formula Program. Under this program, Alaska will receive
more than $50 million over five years beginning in the fiscal year 2023. The funding will be used
to build a statewide EV fast-charging network and community-based charging sites in rural and
urban areas across Alaska. This funding will be administered by AEA to strategically deploy
publicly accessible Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE).
AEA is working with the Alaska Department of Transportation (ADOT) to develop and submit an
implementation plan describing how the funds will be disbursed each year to meet the NEVI
program objectives. The annual Implementation Plan is a federal requirement for the State to
qualify for and receive NEVI formula funds.
In addition to the $5 billion NEVI formula funding, the IIJA appropriates $2.5 billion for
competitive grants under the Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Program. The federal cost
share for these programs is 80 percent with a 20 percent match.
This Request for Information (RFI) will assist AEA in developing the NEVI Statewide
Implementation Plan. This information obtained in this RFI will also help to inform the State’s
strategy for pursuing competitive funds.
2.1 Alternative Fuel Corridor Overview
The Alaska Department of Transportation designated the road system between Anchorage and
Fairbanks as a Corridor Pending, Alternative Fuel Corridor. The IIJA guidance documents indicate
that this corridor must be built out before remaining funds can be used elsewhere. AEA intends
to create the core of an EV fast-charging network along the corridor through public-private
partnerships.
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2
2.2 RFI for Potential Site Hosts
The purpose of this RFI is to identify potential fast charging Site Hosts along Alaska’s alternative
fuel corridor and other locations throughout the state, including state highways, and the marine
highway system. Response to this RFI does not guarantee that the site is eligible for the
program or that the site will be selected for a fast charging project. In addition, potential fast
charging projects will not be limited to the list of respondents to this RFI.
Direct Current Fast Charger sites must be publicly accessible 24 hours per day, seven days per
week, 365 days per year. All sites must have four (4) chargers with charging connector standards
(CCS) ports capable of simultaneously DC charging four EVs at 150 kilowatts (kW).
2.3 Schedule
Description Deadline Date
Release RFI to identify potential Site Hosts May 13, 2022
Deadline for RFI Responses, RFI Close June 13, 2022
State of Alaska NEVI Implementation Plan Due to Federal DOT/DOE August 1, 2022
DOT/DOE Joint Office Review and Approval of NEVI Implementation Plan September 30, 2022
3. Procedures For Responding
AEA has created a one-page questionnaire (Attachment A). Complete the online Interested Site
Host Questionnaire here. By submitting a questionnaire, the respondent is granting AEA
permission to share the responses with AEA-qualified EVSE Suppliers, AEA contractors, and
applicable electric utilities. An interested party can submit multiple questionnaires; one
questionnaire must be submitted per site.
RFI submittals should be sent electronically to electricvehicles@akenergyauthority.org. This RFI
is not a competitive solicitation. AEA will review the RFI submissions for completeness.
Any questions regarding this RFI should be emailed to electricvehicles@akenergyauthority.org.
AEA will review and respond within 1-3 business days.
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 4,905,432.95$ Alaska Power & Telephone 9220037 1,587.55$ Disbursed 1,587.55$ Number of Grants 41Alaska Power Company 9220008 21,664.33$ Disbursed 15,134.89$ Alaska Village Cooperative, Inc 9220038 3,159.06$ Verified‐$ Disbursed 36Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, INC. 9220018 10,689.16$ Disbursed 2,029.52$ Disbursed Amount 2,994,065.72$ Beaver Joint Utilities 9220012 3,551.14$ Denied‐$ Birch Creek Tribe 9220039 5,843.52$ Disbursed 5,469.16$ Verified 1 Chignik Lake Electric 9220041 8,606.50$ Disbursed 8,606.50$ Verified Amount 789.00$ Chugach Electric Association 9220009 1,649,384.00$ Disbursed 1,023,269.64$ City and Borough of Wrangell, AK 9220023 11,559.12$ Disbursed 3,704.27$ Withdrawn 2City of Chignik 9220021 8,110.70$ Disbursed 8,110.70$ Withdrawn Amount 41,569.58$ City of Hughes Power & Light Company 9220003 37,314.59$ Disbursed 8,775.51$ City of Nikolai 9220013 9,408.47$ Disbursed 9,408.47$ Denied 2Golden Valley Electric Association, Inc. 9220024 1,025,576.00$ Disbursed 403,574.10$ Denied Amount 27,023.80$ Golovin Power 9220016 2,616.55$ Disbursed 2,616.35$ Homer Electric Association 9220022 711,053.06$ Disbursed 594,565.17$ Total Funds Remaining 3,835,934.28$ Inside Passage Electric Cooperative 9220010 5,546.48$ Disbursed 5,315.95$ Percentage Funds Remaining 56%Kotzebue Electric Association Inc. 9220011 7,354.65$ Disbursed 5,690.85$ 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$ Naknek Electric Association 9220040 22,763.51$ Disbursed 21,572.02$ Naterkaq Light & Power 9220034 25,300.78$ Disbursed 19,091.51$ Nelson Lagoon Electrical Coop. Inc. 9220042 900.00$ Disbursed 652.00$ 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$ 4,905,432.95$ 2,994,065.72$ ELECTRIC UTILITY RELIEF PROGRAM All RoundsAS OF 5/10/22 @ 5 pm Disbursed Amount$2,994,065.72Total Funds Remaining$3,835,934.28 Disbursed AmountTotal Funds Remaining
UtilityName GrantNumber RequestedAmount Status VerifiedAmount DisbursedAmountAlaska Power & Telephone 9220037 1,587.55$ Disbursed‐$ 1,587.55$ Total Funds Remaining after Rnd1 3,873,821.51$ Alaska Village Cooperative, Inc 9220038 3,159.06$ Verified 789.00$ ‐$ Total Amount Requested 42,860.14$ Birch Creek Tribe 9220039 5,843.52$ Disbursed‐$ 5,469.16$ Number of Grants 6Chignik Lake Electric 9220041 8,606.50$ Disbursed‐$ 8,606.50$ Naknek Electric Association 9220040 22,763.51$ Disbursed‐$ 21,572.02$ Disbursed 5Nelson Lagoon Electrical Coop. Inc. 9220042 900.00$ Disbursed‐$ 652.00$ Disbursed Amount 37,887.23$ 42,860.14$ 789.00$ 37,887.23$ Verified 1Verified Amount 789.00$ Total Funds Remaining 3,835,934.28$ ELECTRIC UTILITY RELIEF PROGRAM Rnd 2AS OF 5/10/22 @ 5 pm Disbursed Amount, $37,887.23 Total Funds Remaining, $3,835,934.28 Disbursed AmountTotal Funds Remaining
UtilityName GrantNumber RequestedAmount Status DisbursedAmount
Akiachak Native Community Electric Company 9220019 6,773.42$ 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 35
Barrow Utilities and Electric Cooperative, INC. 9220018 10,689.16$ Disbursed 2,029.52$
Beaver Joint Utilities 9220012 3,551.14$ Denied -$ Disbursed 31
Chugach 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 2
City 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 2
Golovin 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 1
AS OF 3/16/22 @ 9:00 am
Disbursed Amount
$2,956,178.49
Total Funds Remaining
$3,873,821.51
Disbursed Amount
Total Funds Remaining
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
MEMORANDUM TO: Curtis Thayer, Executive Director
FROM: Khae Pasao, Assistant Project Manager
THRU: Audrey Alstrom, AEEE Director
DATE: May 9, 2022
RE: Village Energy Efficiency Program (VEEP) Board Update AEA opened a Request for Applications (RFA) for the Village Energy Efficiency Program (VEEP) on March 3, 2022, and applications were due April 26, 2022. The application period is now closed. Succesful applicants will be notified in May, and grant awards are expected to be fully executed in June 2022. Funding was from Denali Commission ($374,434.38), AEEE Fund ($150,000) and Wells Fargo ($42,805.81) under this solicitation totaling to $567,240.19. All work must be completed by December 30, 2023. AEA received a total of twenty-two (22) applications from twenty-one (21) communities; eight (8) energy regions all over Alaska. Of the twenty-two (22) applications reviewed internally, twenty (20) were recommended as eligible projects while two (2) were considered as ineligible projects. From the eligible projects, three (3) pass-through projects will be fully funded and one (1) will partially be funded due to limited funding.
Community
Requested
Amount
Local Match
Amount
Total Project
Cost Energy Region
ELIGIBLE PROJECTS WITH FUNDING
Saint George $100,000 $30,000 $130,000 Aleutians
Port Heiden $150,000 $112,716 $262,716 Bristol Bay
Galena $200,000 $70,000 $270,000 Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana
Gakona $150,000 $45,000 $195,000 Copper River/Chugach
TOTAL $600,000 $257,716 $857,716
ELIGIBLE PROJECTS WITH NO FUNDING
Nenana $192,570 $62,725 $255,295 Railbelt
Healy Lake $100,000 $40,000 $140,000 Railbelt
Kotlik $35,000 $10,500 $45,500 Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Aniak $20,900 $9,500 $30,400 Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Nome $400,000 $176,043 $576,043 Bering Straits
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2
Unalakleet $35,000 $10,500 $45,500 Bering Straits
Aleknagik $185,000 $55,500 $240,500 Bristol Bay
Quinhagak
(Tribe) $33,330 $14,333 $47,663 Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Hoonah $29,529 $12,655 $42,184 Southeast
Quinhagak (City) $18,641 $5,900 $24,541 Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim
Chenega Bay $29,435 $13,143 $42,578 Copper River/Chugach
False Pass $17,600 $5,280 $22,880 Aleutians
Klawock $69,300 $29,700 $99,000 Southeast
Gulkana $34,600 $17,440 $52,040 Copper River/Chugach
Craig $7,247 $3,903 $11,150 Southeast
Saint Paul $134,781 $47,260 $182,041 Aleutians
TOTAL $1,342,933 $514,382 $1,857,315
INELIGIBLE PROJECTS
Diomede $100,000 $470,314 $570,314 Bering Straits
Port Alexander $8,400 $3,600 $12,000 Southeast
TOTAL $108,400 $473,914 $582,314
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: T.W. Patch, Director of Planning DATE: May 11, 2022
SUBJECT: Power Cost Equalization (PCE) Communities with unfiled Utility Monthly
Reports
Summary
1. Attached is a chart prepared 10 May, 2022 which reports PCE communities seriously
delinquent in preparing and submitting Utility Monthly Reports (UMR) which are
prerequisite filings before PCE disbursements can be made.
2. The listing has been provided to Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) and the agency
has been asked to inform whether any of the communities listed are pending suspension
because of a failure to file either annual reports or fuel cost reports.
3. It is noted that within this past week the RCA announced a base rate change for PCE rates
and pending before the legislature is a bill that will increase the level of KWH that are
compensable to residential customers of PCE eligible communities from 500 to 750.
4. It is appropriate to report that the PCE department has been tracking this concern for
some time and has actively engaged with the Local Government Specialist (LGS) Staff of
Division of Community and Regional Affairs (DCRA) seeking their assistance in informing
Community and governmental leadership in the listed communities about the reporting
problems of utility company management and impacts on the utility’s customers.
5. Lastly, it is relevant to an understanding of the problem of long term tardy filings that
subsequent to the confusion that arose at the end of the last legislative session when there
was a “sweep” of PCE funding and a series of unfortunate and somewhat confusing orders
the problem was exacerbated. And, while that is the case there is a slowly improving trend
towards fewer tardy filing communities mostly due to active outreach and encouragement
by PCE staff and “friends of PCE” in other organizations.
6. All PCE communities are annually reminded that PCE submittals seeking disbursements
must, by statute, be made by August 31 of a calendar year to be considered for payment
from appropriated funds. That reminder does seem to be informative and helpful to some
communities.
Plan of Action In order that as many of the currently listed “tardy filing communities” will make the effort to submit all PCE filings for FY 22 by August 31, 2022 the following efforts will be made:
1. Contacts with both Alaska Power Association (APA) and Alaska Municiple League
(AML) will be made informing of the problem. APA has a powerful voice and strong
Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2
relationships with many of the utility companies across the state and through their
media and outreach effort and an explanation of the problem can be brought to the
attention of utility and community leaders. AML likewise has access to and is oft times
a source of information to community leadership. If community leaders learn of
concerns that may exist with the utility serving their community they may inquire and
address the problem directly with their utility management.
2. Efforts to engage DCRA assistance will continue.
3. Individual telephone outreach and targeted e-mail notices to utility clerks and
managers by the AEA PCE staff will also continue on a monthly basis through August
1st 2022. These efforts will be directed to each community that has unfiled UMR’s for
FY 2022.
4. Regional organizations will also be contacted and encouraged to inform their
communities of the issues and the available resolution. ( e.g. Tanana Chiefs
Conference)
5. An RCA notice is also contemplated.
6. Communities needing individualized assistance will upon request be referred to private
contractors who are capable of preparing and submitting UMR’s on behalf of a
community.
While none of these efforts alone may be sufficient motivation for any individual PCE
eligible community to undertake the preparation and filing of a timely UMR it is hoped
that the scope of efforts will inform those who are presently tardy with filings of the
consequences of not filing and will impress upon them that help is available if they act
diligently.
PCE Community Submission Status
Date prepared: May 10, 2022
Utility
Number of
Missing
Reports
Month(s) Missing
Adak (TDX)10 July - April
Chalkyitsik 10 July - April
Koyukuk 10 July - April
Lime Village 10 July - April
Perryville, Native Village of 10 July - April
Rampart Village Council 10 July - April
Stevens Village 10 July - April
Twin Hills 10 July - April
Sand Point (TDX)9 Aug - April
Pelican Utility District 8 Aug - Jan, Mar, April
Beaver 7 Oct - April
Birch Creek 7 Oct - April
Pedro Bay 6 Nov - April
Akiak 6 Nov - April
Arctic Village 5 Dec - April
Tanalian 5 July, Jan - April
Fort Yukon (Gwitchyaa Zhee)4 Jan - April
Manley Generating (TDX)4 Jan - April
Cold Bay (G&K)3 Feb - April
Hughes 3 Feb - April
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:Rep. Kelly Merrick; Representative Neal Foster
Cc:Rep. Steve Thompson; Rep. Andy Josephson; Rep. Bryce Edgmon; Rep. Adam Wool; Rep. Bart LeBon; Rep. Ben
Carpenter; Rep. Daniel Ortiz; Rep. DeLena Johnson; Rep. Sara Rasmussen; Kookesh, Melissa M (CED); Jennifer
L. Bertolini; Tim.Grussendorf@akleg.gov; Curtis W. Thayer
Subject:AEA Response to House Finance---SB 243
Date:Wednesday, May 11, 2022 9:31:36 AM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
Copy of PCEAnalysis-LegReq-IncFrom500To750.xlsx
Co-Chair Merrick and Foster,
In response to Rep. Foster’s SB 243 related question during the House Finance Committee hearing
on 5/9/2022:
Total FY2021 PCE Eligible kWh (Col G) = 97,281,383 kWh
÷
Total Proposed PCE Max kWh (750 kWh, Col K) = 251,262,000 kWh
= 39% = Total FY2021 Eligible kWh as a percentage of the proposed increased Maximum eligible PCE
kWh for current PCE communities.
Supporting spreadsheet is attached for reference.
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
Fiscal Year 21225003Projects 331005..339999Note Date 06/30/2021State of Alaska: Alaska Energy AuthorityAnalysis Based on FY 21 PCE DataABCDEFGHKN0Proposed PCE Max kWhEstimate 2-Increased Eligible PCE kWhEstimate 2-Increased CostPJ Code Utility/CommunityLast PCE Rate AppliedPopulationReported PeriodsResidential CustomersPCE Eligible kWhResidential kwh SoldCol F X 750 X 12See Note Below: 250 kWh X 12 Mos X Col I Col N X Col C332380 Nuiqsut PCE -$ 505 12 108 476,981 982,461972,000 324,000 0.00332350 Anaktuvuk Pass PCE -$ 365 12 104 265,804 749,978936,000 312,000 0.00332360 Atqasuk PCE -$ 269 12 64 177,787 687,382576,000 192,000 0.00332370 Kaktovik PCE -$ 235 12 79 186,782 758,660711,000 237,000 0.00332390 Point Hope PCE -$ 775 12 195 613,711 1,914,5081,755,000 585,000 0.00332400 Point Lay PCE -$ 299 12 65 147,308 646,844585,000 195,000 0.00332410 Wainwright PCE -$ 553 12 150 458,246 1,379,9001,350,000 450,000 0.00331040 Akutan PCE 0.7437$ 990 12 50 174,494 205,324450,000 150,000 111,555.00332480 Pilot Point PCE 0.3937$ 81 12 42 93,850 131,413378,000 126,000 49,606.20332560 St. Paul PCE 0.2037$ 385 12 135 595,684 693,8171,215,000 405,000 82,498.50332730 Twin Hills PCE 0.2977$ 89 4 35 32,854 42,767315,000 105,000 31,258.50331980 Cold Bay PCE 0.5042$ 60 12 40 58,788 160,884360,000 120,000 60,504.00332080 Kipnuk PCE 0.4839$ 700 12 199 793,616 903,5881,791,000 597,000 288,888.30332740 Nikolski PCE 0.5437$ 17 8 14 29,441 32,863126,000 42,000 22,835.40332900 Yakutat PCE 0.1866$ 540 12 275 1,107,702 1,417,3042,475,000 825,000 153,945.00332030 Hughes PCE 0.4937$ 93 12 49 138,412 185,094441,000 147,000 72,573.90331220 Tok; Tanacross PCE 0.2091$ 1313 12 785 2,912,216 4,122,5107,065,000 2,355,000 492,430.50331100 Dot Lake; Dot Lake Villa0.2091$ 49 12 25 85,626 107,913225,000 75,000 15,682.50331200 Tetlin PCE 0.2091$ 122 12 46 144,478 185,355414,000 138,000 28,855.80331940 Egegik PCE 0.4328$ 85 12 85 147,318 178,539765,000 255,000 110,364.00331860 Chignik PCE 0.1983$ 95 12 52 128,347 155,446468,000 156,000 30,934.80332590 Port Alsworth PCE 0.3181$ 226 12 85 268,232 325,396765,000 255,000 81,115.50
332130 Kotzebue PCE 0.1298$ 3112 12 1,084 3,692,008 7,028,9759,756,000 3,252,000 422,109.60332540 Sand Point PCE 0.2824$ 897 9 239 705,996 936,9192,151,000 717,000 202,480.80331770 Arctic Village PCE 0.7540$ 193 11 89 157,342 229,905801,000 267,000 201,318.00332440 Ouzinkie PCE 0.1556$ 142 12 76 217,936 244,596684,000 228,000 35,476.80332000 Golovin PCE 0.0814$ 150 12 49 212,639 260,614441,000 147,000 11,965.80332110 Koliganek PCE 0.2512$ 195 12 77 213,145 267,859693,000 231,000 58,027.20332420 Nunam Iqua PCE 0.1528$ 213 12 47 200,873 241,343423,000 141,000 21,544.80332040 Igiugig PCE 0.6654$ 56 12 30 87,724 98,734270,000 90,000 59,886.00331440 Marshall PCE 0.2142$ 471 12 107 482,346 582,410963,000 321,000 68,758.20331460 Minto PCE 0.2221$ 170 12 75 248,167 310,768675,000 225,000 49,972.50331580 Russian Mission PCE 0.2279$ 350 12 79 359,599 414,007711,000 237,000 54,012.30331550 Pilot Station PCE 0.2314$ 606 12 131 580,803 681,2631,179,000 393,000 90,940.20331350 Holy Cross PCE 0.2409$ 158 12 72 246,061 286,745648,000 216,000 52,034.40331370 Huslia PCE 0.2421$ 293 12 100 427,288 533,238900,000 300,000 72,630.00331340 Grayling PCE 0.2404$ 190 12 66 234,635 265,442594,000 198,000 47,599.20331290 Eek PCE 0.2459$ 349 12 108 459,807 515,204972,000 324,000 79,671.60331420 Koyuk PCE 0.2442$ 348 12 83 375,318 493,256747,000 249,000 60,805.80331430 Lower Kalskag PCE 0.2487$ 288 12 81 303,267 351,351729,000 243,000 60,434.10331720 Upper Kalskag PCE 0.2487$ 220 12 67 261,919 346,211603,000 201,000 49,988.70332850 Unalakleet PCE 0.1882$ 721 12 272 999,045 1,314,0592,448,000 816,000 153,571.20331670 St. Michael PCE 0.2563$ 392 12 88 416,092 587,263792,000 264,000 67,663.20331680 Stebbins PCE 0.2563$ 618 12 138 588,687 737,2641,242,000 414,000 106,108.20331300 Elim PCE 0.2597$ 351 12 91 413,839 539,111819,000 273,000 70,898.10331520 Nulato PCE 0.2620$ 228 12 109 398,032 496,066981,000 327,000 85,674.00331620 Shageluk PCE 0.2614$ 91 12 38 107,304 121,144342,000 114,000 29,799.60331640 Shishmaref PCE 0.2617$ 577 12 155 653,797 754,8601,395,000 465,000 121,690.50331410 Kivalina PCE 0.2664$ 427 12 89 415,479 624,083801,000 267,000 71,128.80331540 Old Harbor PCE 0.2668$ 203 12 89 292,414 350,591801,000 267,000 71,235.60331685 Teller PCE 0.2651$ 235 12 73 276,855 300,412657,000 219,000 58,056.90331380 Kaltag PCE 0.2679$ 159 12 65 229,733 254,656585,000 195,000 52,240.50331270 Brevig Mission PCE 0.2686$ 451 12 87 432,953 561,216783,000 261,000 70,104.60331400 Kiana PCE 0.2672$ 409 12 116 492,932 725,0601,044,000 348,000 92,985.60332120 Kotlik PCE 0.2673$ 649 12 126 577,874 747,6961,134,000 378,000 101,039.40331690 Togiak PCE 0.2690$ 873 12 212 930,551 1,178,0201,908,000 636,000 171,084.00331330 Goodnews Bay PCE 0.2717$ 284 12 80 341,873 434,582720,000 240,000 65,208.00331610 Selawik PCE 0.2710$ 832 12 170 791,919 1,167,0671,530,000 510,000 138,210.00331600 Scammon Bay PCE 0.2754$ 593 12 123 528,918 613,5871,107,000 369,000 101,622.60331950 Ekwok PCE 0.2798$ 100 12 51 185,793 228,615459,000 153,000 42,809.40
331480 New Stuyahok PCE 0.2798$ 476 12 109 484,530 583,980981,000 327,000 91,494.60331780 Atmautluak PCE 0.3974$ 338 12 73 348,417 420,106657,000 219,000 87,030.60331510 Noorvik PCE 0.2823$ 651 12 137 636,880 860,6531,233,000 411,000 116,025.30331260 Anvik PCE 0.2931$ 77 12 36 124,716 139,394324,000 108,000 31,654.80331800 Bethel; Oscarville PCE 0.0383$ 6333 12 1,742 7,930,410 10,529,51715,678,000 5,226,000 200,155.80331730 Wales PCE 0.2966$ 150 12 38 156,224 203,926342,000 114,000 33,812.40331590 Savoonga PCE 0.2450$ 735 12 161 737,964 1,018,0331,449,000 483,000 118,335.00332630 Tenakee Springs PCE 0.2860$ 140 12 125 199,887 260,0171,125,000 375,000 107,250.00332280 Naknek;S.Naknek;Kng 0.2386$ 869 12 744 1,869,321 3,164,9286,696,000 2,232,000 532,555.20331360 Hooper Bay PCE 0.2281$ 1239 12 270 1,131,724 1,365,9882,430,000 810,000 184,761.00331450 Mekoryuk PCE 0.2545$ 206 12 90 279,569 294,638810,000 270,000 68,715.00331240 Alakanuk PCE 0.2408$ 704 12 158 680,847 817,9421,422,000 474,000 114,139.20331310 Emmonak PCE 0.2408$ 836 12 213 927,482 1,156,9901,917,000 639,000 153,871.20331390 Kasigluk PCE 0.2503$ 627 12 118 592,834 750,9691,062,000 354,000 88,606.20331530 Nunapitchuk PCE 0.2503$ 560 12 120 532,554 626,9911,080,000 360,000 90,108.00331250 Ambler PCE 0.4227$ 263 12 77 334,435 473,908693,000 231,000 97,643.70332550 St. George PCE 0.7280$ 59 12 39 96,288 141,171351,000 117,000 85,176.00331320 Gambell PCE 0.2588$ 667 12 165 671,574 840,2821,485,000 495,000 128,106.00332090 Kobuk PCE 0.5553$ 143 12 38 170,901 231,229342,000 114,000 63,304.20331650 Shungnak PCE 0.5553$ 253 12 60 281,782 380,036540,000 180,000 99,954.00331900 Circle PCE 0.5244$ 85 12 43 99,735 133,583387,000 129,000 67,647.60331490 Nightmute PCE 0.2458$ 286 12 52 238,992 280,394468,000 156,000 38,344.80331700 Toksook Bay PCE 0.2458$ 667 12 131 637,068 810,7261,179,000 393,000 96,599.40331710 Tununak PCE 0.2458$ 376 12 91 353,964 401,652819,000 273,000 67,103.40332720 Tuntutuliak PCE 0.3708$ 464 11 113 498,601 568,3791,017,000 339,000 125,701.20331500 Noatak PCE 0.6286$ 583 12 122 613,607 837,3231,098,000 366,000 230,067.60331470 Mt. Village PCE 0.2095$ 808 12 170 764,571 909,1371,530,000 510,000 106,845.00331560 Pitkas Point PCE 0.2095$ 116 12 28 130,236 152,721252,000 84,000 17,598.00331660 St. Mary's; Andreafsky 0.2095$ 555 12 179 722,033 860,7721,611,000 537,000 112,501.50332340 Nome PCE 0.0741$ 3690 12 1,755 5,594,043 8,692,27215,795,000 5,265,000 390,136.50332050 Iliamna Newhalen Nond0.3613$ 446 12 183 617,436 793,7581,647,000 549,000 198,353.70332890 White Mountain PCE 0.2659$ 201 11 68 232,125 262,384612,000 204,000 54,243.60331120 Haines; Covenant Life 0.0057$ 2579 12 1,117 3,833,397 5,798,35810,053,000 3,351,000 19,100.70331190 Skagway PCE 0.0057$ 1095 12 606 1,880,004 3,237,1165,454,000 1,818,000 10,362.60331570 Quinhagak PCE 0.2172$ 716 12 182 855,352 1,091,6591,638,000 546,000 118,591.20331280 Chevak PCE 0.2181$ 1014 12 204 859,842 1,024,8561,836,000 612,000 133,477.20331080 Coffman Cove PCE 0.0005$ 174 12 184 539,290 819,1691,656,000 552,000 276.00331150 Hydaburg PCE 0.0005$ 397 12 117 503,716 705,7281,053,000 351,000 175.50
331230 Whale Pass PCE 0.0005$ 57 12 83 207,707 313,231747,000 249,000 124.50331155 Klawock PCE 0.0005$ 761 12 389 1,558,375 2,376,6383,501,000 1,167,000 583.50331090 Craig PCE 0.0005$ 1074 12 655 2,477,452 3,596,9995,895,000 1,965,000 982.50331140 Hollis PCE 0.0005$ 132 12 131 428,140 736,3261,179,000 393,000 196.50331170 Naukati PCE 0.0005$ 137 12 89 301,622 467,842801,000 267,000 133.50331210 Thorne Bay; Kasaan PC0.0005$ 647 12 324 1,041,612 1,608,1412,916,000 972,000 486.00332680 Kake PCE 0.3236$ 570 12 237 809,657 952,4542,133,000 711,000 230,079.60332670 Hoonah PCE 0.3236$ 782 12 410 1,438,885 1,911,4283,690,000 1,230,000 398,028.00332660 Chilkat Valley PCE 0.3236$ 585 12 218 592,612 713,0901,962,000 654,000 211,634.40332650 Angoon PCE 0.3236$ 404 12 200 613,324 790,3881,800,000 600,000 194,160.00332700 Klukwan PCE 0.3236$ 95 12 50 176,215 211,613450,000 150,000 48,540.00331630 Shaktoolik PCE 0.2141$ 272 12 63 321,993 449,118567,000 189,000 40,464.90332020 Fort Yukon PCE 0.3418$ 525 12 268 825,236 957,8922,412,000 804,000 274,807.20332200 Manley Hot Springs PC 0.7206$ 104 12 83 147,468 164,551747,000 249,000 179,429.40331920 Cordova PCE 0.0626$ 2477 12 975 3,244,640 5,132,0988,775,000 2,925,000 183,105.00331030 Akiak PCE 0.2263$ 420 7 99 221,095 260,953891,000 297,000 67,211.10332500 Port Heiden PCE 0.3456$ 105 12 53 154,364 179,246477,000 159,000 54,950.40331740 Karluk PCE 0.3912$ 27 12 13 45,583 60,582117,000 39,000 15,256.80332860 Unalaska PCE 0.1008$ 4592 12 780 1,962,090 4,027,2527,020,000 2,340,000 235,872.00331195 Slana PCE 0.1924$ 134 12 72 220,782 267,196648,000 216,000 41,558.40332160 Kwigillingok PCE 0.3503$ 374 12 101 440,802 570,623909,000 303,000 106,140.90332430 Dillingham; Aleknagik P0.1334$ 2570 12 1,003 3,859,144 5,153,2049,027,000 3,009,000 401,400.60331760 Aniak PCE 0.3811$ 477 12 173 717,948 915,5881,557,000 519,000 197,790.90331960 Elfin Cove PCE 0.3362$ 16 12 49 50,504 101,598441,000 147,000 49,421.40332150 Kwethluk PCE 0.1947$ 814 12 188 752,804 969,0221,692,000 564,000 109,810.80331870 Chignik Lagoon PCE 0.2446$ 81 12 69 135,395 245,108621,000 207,000 50,632.20332230 Chuathbaluk PCE 0.7540$ 100 12 33 85,109 89,464297,000 99,000 74,646.00332240 Crooked Creek PCE 0.7540$ 80 12 33 83,710 96,848297,000 99,000 74,646.00332250 Red Devil PCE 0.7540$ 16 12 11 30,464 35,76499,000 33,000 24,882.00332260 Sleetmute PCE 0.7540$ 95 12 33 87,007 98,418297,000 99,000 74,646.00332270 Stony River PCE 0.7540$ 39 12 16 34,330 40,917144,000 48,000 36,192.00331970 False Pass PCE 0.2674$ 42 12 26 72,397 135,305234,000 78,000 20,857.20331820 Buckland PCE 0.1191$ 509 12 107 515,780 757,817963,000 321,000 38,231.10331110 Eagle; Eagle Village PC0.2586$ 139 12 139 275,401 315,2131,251,000 417,000 107,836.20331160 Mentasta PCE 0.2614$ 122 12 49 144,689 157,634441,000 147,000 38,425.80331070 Chistochina PCE 0.2614$ 83 12 50 149,646 192,326450,000 150,000 39,210.00331790 Beaver PCE 0.5434$ 69 12 33 82,249 89,658297,000 99,000 53,796.60331180 Northway; Northway Vil 0.3054$ 144 12 90 295,221 355,617810,000 270,000 82,458.00
332510 Kongiganak PCE 0.2888$ 544 12 162 482,180 696,1171,458,000 486,000 140,356.80331130 Healy Lake PCE 0.3844$ 27 12 9 23,185 23,69981,000 27,000 10,378.80331060 Bettles; Evansville PCE 0.3929$ 15 12 31 78,262 92,426279,000 93,000 36,539.70331050 Allakaket; Alatna PCE 0.4785$ 179 12 66 210,569 223,926594,000 198,000 94,743.00331880 Chignik Lake PCE 0.3279$ 57 12 42 79,335 105,221378,000 126,000 41,315.40332310 Chefornak PCE 0.1773$ 457 12 98 465,341 568,732882,000 294,000 52,126.20332010 Gustavus PCE 0.1111$ 537 12 484 1,063,008 1,345,5284,356,000 1,452,000 161,317.20332180 Levelock PCE 0.4664$ 70 12 40 84,157 95,150360,000 120,000 55,968.00332210 Manokotak PCE 0.2141$ 483 8 136 353,896 410,4001,224,000 408,000 87,352.80332600 Tanana PCE 0.2328$ 216 12 106 279,686 301,925954,000 318,000 74,030.40332060 Deering PCE 0.2830$ 166 12 51 213,492 270,262459,000 153,000 43,299.00332530 Ruby PCE 0.3579$ 149 12 115 237,926 265,4621,035,000 345,000 123,475.50331830 Central PCE 0.3223$ 87 12 115 206,405 242,0671,035,000 345,000 111,193.50331810 Birch Creek PCE 0.7540$ 28 12 17 26,789 27,665153,000 51,000 38,454.00331020 Akiachak PCE 0.2317$ 724 12 183 666,649 763,0971,647,000 549,000 127,203.30331890 Chitina PCE 0.2997$ 85 12 46 85,179 94,589414,000 138,000 41,358.60331990 Galena PCE 0.1881$ 445 12 186 670,942 870,2461,674,000 558,000 104,959.80331910 Clark's Point PCE 0.3916$ 69 12 20 110,404 134,763180,000 60,000 23,496.00331750 Atka PCE 0.2162$ 50 11 31 79,508 94,106279,000 93,000 20,106.60332170 Larsen Bay PCE 0.0001$ 73 1 41 8,052 10,879369,000 123,000 12.30332100 Kokhanok PCE 0.4889$ 157 12 56 187,120 195,479504,000 168,000 82,135.20331005 Adak PCE 0.7540$ 298 12 80 158,726 184,689720,000 240,000 180,960.00332220 McGrath PCE 0.3672$ 321 12 192 449,186 528,3291,728,000 576,000 211,507.20332320 Nelson Lagoon PCE 0.4256$ 30 12 30 100,654 123,079270,000 90,000 38,304.00332610 Tatitlek PCE 0.5037$ 98 12 39 114,843 131,533351,000 117,000 58,932.90332520 Rampart PCE 0.3970$ 97 6 35 37,633 45,027315,000 105,000 41,685.00332330 Nikolai PCE 0.4721$ 87 9 40 101,759 154,409360,000 120,000 56,652.00332290 Napakiak PCE 0.3308$ 351 12 104 357,868 383,500936,000 312,000 103,209.60331010 Akhiok PCE 0.3593$ 69 12 27 66,986 85,474243,000 81,000 29,103.30331840 Chalkyitsik PCE 0.5025$ 79 8 45 43,660 46,178405,000 135,000 67,837.50331930 Diomede PCE 0.1419$ 97 12 34 97,109 109,257306,000 102,000 14,473.80331850 Chenega Bay PCE 0.3017$ 61 12 26 67,716 78,078234,000 78,000 23,532.60332580 Takotna PCE 0.4998$ 80 7 33 41,646 49,631297,000 99,000 49,480.20332450 Pedro Bay PCE 0.2958$ 36 12 19 34,363 62,181171,000 57,000 16,860.60332300 Napaskiak PCE 0.1469$ 440 12 111 396,549 410,304999,000 333,000 48,917.70332880 Venetie PCE 0.3143$ 164 5 101 73,594 113,213909,000 303,000 95,232.90332140 Koyukuk PCE 0.3410$ 95 8 58 55,859 59,649522,000 174,000 59,334.00332870 Newtok PCE 0.1189$ 339 6 83 90,288 129,192747,000 249,000 29,606.10
332470 Perryville PCE 0.2120$ 97 4 47 37,875 39,092423,000 141,000 29,892.00332190 Lime Village PCE 0.7540$ 15 2 12 541 642108,000 36,000 27,144.00GRAND TOTAL 81,160 27,918 97,281,383 138,495,181 251,262,000 15,694,772.7039%FY2021 Eligible PCE kWh as % of proposed total maximum kWCol L Note: Estimate 1 of increase in kWH assumes % of PCE Eligible kWh to current maximum will be same for increased maximumCol M Note: Estimate 2 of increase in kWH assumes all customers will have 250 increase in eligible PCE kWh
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:senator.pete.micciche@akleg.gov; Rep. Louise Stutes
Cc:Senator Click Bishop; Senator Bert S Stedman; Rep. Kelly Merrick; Representative Neal Foster; Steininger, Neil A
(GOV); Curtis W. Thayer; Jennifer L. Bertolini; Gialopsos, Vasilios (GOV); Micaela Fowler; Kathryn Fritz; Hannah
Lager; TW Patch; Gallagher, Tyson C (GOV); Dona B. Keppers; Amy Adler
Subject:Alaska Energy Authority Round 14 named projects
Date:Monday, April 25, 2022 2:32:05 PM
Attachments:2022.04.25 AEA Round 14 Transmittal Letter.pdf
Governors FY23 Capital REF.pdf
FY23 Governors Operating REF Fund Transfer.pdf
Dept of Revenue Endowment Letter 2021 for FY2023.pdf
image001.png
image002.png
Dear Senator Micciche and Speaker Stutes,
Pursuant to Alaska Statute AS 42.45.045(d)(3), the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) is
pleased to provide its Round 14 Renewable Energy Fund (REF) recommendations to the 32nd
Legislature for their consideration of project funding. The Governor’s budget includes
funding, however, the review process recently completed includes named recipients and are
attached. For additional background, the information can be found in ABS.
Curtis
Best Regards,
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
Curtis W. Thayer
Executive Director
813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503
(907) 771-3009 (office)
(907) 744-4704 (cell)
cthayer@akenergyauthority.org
From: Evan Anderson <Evan.Anderson@akleg.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 5:07 PM
To: Curtis W. Thayer <cthayer@akenergyauthority.org>
Cc: Kookesh, Melissa M (CED) <melissa.kookesh@alaska.gov>
Subject: REF Finalists
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.
Good Afternoon Curtis,
Thank you to AEA for sharing the list of finalists for the Renewable Energy Fund. It’s great to see so
many communities with projects on the list.
Rep. Fields asked for more info on the Jenny Creek hydro project in Keex’ Kwaan proposed by IPEC.
Do you have any documentation from the utility about the scale and impacted areas under their
proposal?
Regards,
Evan Anderson
Office of Rep. Zack Fields
From:Curtis W. Thayer
To:Evan Anderson
Cc:Kookesh, Melissa M (CED); Jennifer L. Bertolini; Curtis W. Thayer
Subject:Jenny Creek Hydro REF Finalists (Rep Fields)
Date:Wednesday, April 27, 2022 11:56:29 AM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
Jenny Creek Hydro.pdf
Evan,
The Jenny Creek hydro project was an application submitted by the Inside Passage Electrical
Cooperative (IPEC) for a reconnaissance phase project to assess the potential for a run-of-river
hydroelectric facility on Jenny Creek, approximately 0.75 miles from the community of Kake.
At this time, owing to the nascent nature of the project, little is known regarding the potential
energy output or size of the project. If constructed, it will supply hydropower to the community of
Kake, supplementing the recently-completed Gunnuk creek hydro facility.
As IPEC states in their application…
”Inside 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.
The scope of work includes the Jenny Creek site reconnaissance (i.e., data collection and review, and
field reconnaissance), and the preparation of a reconnaissance report. The reconnaissance report
will include a conceptual project layout, evaluation of the hydrology of the creek, an estimate of the
power output, and an estimate of the construction cost. Please see HDR's Jenny Creek Hydroelectric
Project Reconnaissance Study proposal included with this application for detail of each of these
steps.
The potential public benefits would be realized beyond the confines of the community of Kake,
owing to IPEC’s postage-stamp rate structure. Currently, IPEC serves the communities of Hoonah,
Kake, Chilkat Valley, Angoon, and Klukwan.
Curtis
Best Regards,
DATE DESCRIPTION AUDIENCE LOCATION TEAM MEMBERMay 11, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Finance Committee - House Bill 170 Energy Independence Program & Fund: AIDEAPhone Curtis W. ThayerMay 10, 2022 Media Interview Dixon Diversion for KDLL Phone Curtis W. ThayerMay 6, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Finance Committee - House Bill 283 Approp: Cap; Reapprop; SuppPhone Curtis W. ThayerMay 6, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Labor & Commerce Committee - House Bill 301: Utilities: Renewable Portfolio StandardPhone Curtis W. ThayerMay 4, 2022 AEA EV Program Update Presentation FAST Planning Technical Committee Virtual Audrey AlstromMay 3, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Finance Committee - House Bill 358: Renewable Energy Grant FundPhone Curtis W. ThayerMay 3, 2022 Brief RemarksAlaska Sustainable Energy Conference: Pre-Event Virtual Workshop Series - Electrify EVERYTHING!?Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMay 2, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Labor and Commerce Committee - HB 301: Utilities: Renewable Portfolio StandardPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 28, 2022 Attendee BPMC Special Meeting In Person Curtis W. ThayerApril 28, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Energy Committee - HB 301: Utilities: Renewable Portfolio StandardPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 28, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Finance Committee - House Bill 170: Energy Independence Program & Fund: AIDEAPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 27, 2022 Attendee State Energy Office Teams Meeting Alaska /Washington State Phone Curtis W. ThayerApril 27, 2022 Legislative HearingSenate Finance Committee - Senate Bill 243: Pwr Cost EQ: Raise, Endow Fund InvestmentPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 26, 2022 Exhibitor Matanuska Electric Association’s Annual Meeting In Person/VirtualBrandy Dixon Dan JohnstonApril 26, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse State Affairs - House Bill 271: AIDEA: Membership; ResponsibilitiesPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 26, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Finance Committee - House Bill 170: Energy Independence Program & Fund: AIDEAPhone Curtis W. ThayerAEA COMMUNITY OUTREACH ENGAGEMENTUpdated on May 11, 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 • Website: akenergyauthority.org
DATE DESCRIPTION AUDIENCE LOCATION TEAM MEMBERApril 26, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Energy Committee - House Bill 301: Utilities: Renewable Portfolio StandardPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 26, 2022 Media Interview Rewable Energy Fund Round 14 for KSRM Radio Phone Curtis W. ThayerApril 22, 2022 Media Interview Rewable Energy Fund Round 14 for KDLL 91.9 Radio Station Phone Curtis W. ThayerApril 22, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Finance Committee - House Bill 170: Energy Independence Program & Fund: AIDEAPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 20, 2022 Atendee Alaska Electric Vehicle Working Group In Person/Virtual Curtis W. ThayerApril 20, 2022 AEA EV Program Update Presentation Alaska Electric Vehicle Working Group In Person/Virtual Audrey AlstromApril 20, 2022 AtendeeStatewide CEDS Strategy Committee Meeting #2 - Goals, Objectives, & StrategiesPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 20, 2022 Legislative HearingSenate Finance Committee - An Act Relating to Power Cost EqualizationPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 19, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse Finance Committee - House Bill 414 Approp: Supplemental: CapitalPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 19, 2022 Legislative HearingSenate Finance Committee - Senate Bill 241 Approp: Supplemental: CapitalPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 15, 2022 Attendee Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee In Person Curtis W. ThayerApril 14, 2022 Legislative HearingHouse State Affairs - House Bill 412: Perm Fund Corp & AIDEA BD ConfirmationPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 13, 2022 Legislative HearingSenate Finance Committee - Senate Bill 241: Approp: Supplumental; CapitalPhone Curtis W. ThayerApril 11, 2022 Attendees/Exhibitor Infrastructure Grant Symposium Hosted by Senator Lisa Murkowski In Person AEA TeamMarch 25, 2022 AEA Dixon Overview Bradley Lake Project Management Committee In Person Bryan CareyMarch 9, 2022 AEA EV Update Presentation to Alaska Municipal League VirtualCurtis W. ThayerAudrey AlstromMarch 8, 2022 House Bill 301 Overview Presentation House Energy Committee Virtual T.W. PatchMarch 7, 2022 Capital Budget Presentation Senate and House Finance Committee Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 25. 2022 AEA EV Partnership Presentation Department of Transporation In Person Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 23. 2022 Legislative Hearing Senate Bill 179 Presentation Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 22, 2022 Legislative Hearing Senate Finance Budget Subcommittee Virtual Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 21, 2022 Legislative HearingSenate Labor and Commerce Committee - Renewable Portfolio Standards BillVirtual Curtis W. ThayerAEA Community Outreach EngagementPage 2 of 4
DATE DESCRIPTION AUDIENCE LOCATION TEAM MEMBERFebruary 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 Outreach EngagementPage 3 of 4
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 for Anchorage Daily News Email Curtis W. ThayerAEA Community Outreach EngagementPage 4 of 4
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 9, 2022
For more information, contact:
Lindsay Hobson
ENSTAR Natural Gas Company
Lindsay.Hobson@enstarnaturalgas.com
907-250-1270
Julie Hasquet
Chugach Electric Association
Julie_Hasquet@chugachelectric.com
907-717-9619
Elena Sudduth
Interior Gas Utility
esudduth@interiorgas.com
907-452-7111
Keriann Baker
Homer Electric Association
kbaker@homerelectric.com
907-235-3302
Julie Estey
Matanuska Electric Association
Julie.Estey@mea.coop
907-355-4447
Meadow Bailey
Golden Valley Electric Association
mpbailey@gvea.com
907-451-5676
Lorraine Henry
Department of Natural Resources
Lorraine.Henry@alaska.gov
907-378-4926
Brandy Dixon
Alaska Energy Authority
bdixon@akenergyauthority.org
907-771-3078
Alaska Railbelt Utilities and State of Alaska Join Forces
to Address In-State Energy Security
Today, six Alaska utilities announced the formation of a working group to assess future gas
supply needs and energy security in Cook Inlet. The group was formed in recognition of the
expected decline of aging Cook Inlet assets; and in conjunction with recent discussions with
Hilcorp Alaska, LLC, as well as the potential impacts of recently-introduced clean energy
legislation.
The utilities include: Chugach Electric Association, Interior Gas Utility, Matanuska Electric
Association, Homer Electric Association, Golden Valley Electric Association, and ENSTAR
Natural Gas Company. The utilities are joined by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources,
and the Alaska Energy Authority as they collectively explore long term gas supply solutions to
meet utility and customer demand.
The working group issued the following statement:
“Communities from Homer to Fairbanks directly or indirectly depend on natural gas to generate
electricity and heat homes and businesses. Natural gas is a cost-effective and efficient fuel that is
critical to our utilities and the Alaskans we serve. In our individual capacities, we have
researched enhanced energy security options, including infrastructure, renewables, and
legislative support for further development in Cook Inlet.
Today, we add another tool to our toolbelt by joining forces to address potential future
challenges regarding natural gas supply in Cook Inlet. We understand the uncertainty inherent in
relying on a single source to meet a significant portion of our demand.
Our goal is to work together for long-term solutions. This requires a better understanding of each
utility’s constraints and needs based on existing contracts and forecasting our collective demand
growth into the next decade as well as considering additional options to meet the unique energy
needs of our region.
We recognize the need to be proactive and concerted in our planning. In 2010, our collective
efforts resulted in the development of the first public in-ground natural gas storage facility and
supported legislation that welcomed Hilcorp’s expanded operations into Cook Inlet.
This group will work collaboratively as utilities and in partnership with the State of Alaska to
ensure our ability to reliably and efficiently meet the energy needs of Alaskans in the Railbelt
region over the long term.”
###
Tuesday