HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-01-20 BPMC Agenda and docsBRADLEY LAKE PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Friday January 20, 2023 Immediately Following the 9:00 am IMC Meeting
To participate dial 1-888-585-9008 and use code 212-753-619#
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL (for Committee members)
3. PUBLIC ROLL CALL (for all others present)
4. AGENDA APPROVAL
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS
6. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES – December 9, 2022
7. EXECUTIVE SESSION – (Bylaws Section 5.11.4) – To discuss confidential financial matters
regarding Required Project Work and financing, the immediate knowledge of which may have
an adverse effect on the Authority or Project.
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. FY22 BPMC Audited Financial Statements
B. FY22 BPMC Audit – Update FY22 Refund of Surplus
9. OLD BUSINESS
A. Railbelt Reliability Coordination Update Brian Hickey
i. GRIP Concept Paper 3 (Final Submitted)
ii. Special Committee on Required Project Work
10. OPERATORS REPORT HEA
11. COMMITTEE REPORTS
A. Budget to Actuals Report Budget Subcommittee
B. O&D Report Russell Thornton
12. MEMBERS COMMENTS
13. NEXT MEETING DATE – March 24, 2023
14. ADJOURNMENT
Current Liabilities per BPMC FY22 Financial Statements
Payable to Utilities ‐ O & M Refund 958,542.78$
Payable to Utilities ‐ R & C Refund 209,056.72
Total Bradley Lake Refund 1,167,599.50
Payable to Utilities ‐ O & M Refund 38,489.96
Payable to Utilities ‐ R & C Refund 169,102.27
Total Battle Creek Refund 207,592.23
Payable to Utilities ‐ O & M Refund 677,016.67
Total SSQ Line Refund 677,016.67$
Bradley Lake Refunds by Utility
Utility Percent Shared FY22 Refund
Chugach Electric 56.30% 657,358.52$
Homer Electric 12.00% 140,111.94
Matanuska Electric 13.80% 161,128.73
Golden Valley Electric 16.90% 197,324.32
City of Seward 1.00% 11,676.00
100.00% 1,167,599.51$
Battle Creek Refunds by Utility
Utility Percent Shared FY22 Refund
Chugach Electric 30.40% 63,108.04$
Homer Electric 37.90% 78,677.46
Matanuska Electric 13.80% 28,647.73
Golden Valley Electric 16.90% 35,083.09
City of Seward 1.00% 2,075.93
100.00% 207,592.25$
SSQ Line Refunds by Utility
Utility Percent Shared FY22 Refund
Chugach Electric 56.30% 381,160.39$
Homer Electric 12.00% 81,242.00
Matanuska Electric 13.80% 93,428.30
Golden Valley Electric 16.90% 114,415.82
City of Seward 1.00% 6,770.17
100.00% 677,016.68$
Total Refund Due to Each Utility
Utility FY22 Refund
Chugach Electric 1,101,626.95$
Homer Electric 300,031.40
Matanuska Electric 283,204.76
Golden Valley Electric 346,823.23
City of Seward 20,522.10
Total Payment 2,052,208.44$
Balance check 2,052,208.40
Off 0.04
Bradley Lake Project Management Committee
FY22 Refund of Surplus
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Concept Paper
Railbelt Innovation Resiliency Project (RIR)
Topic Area 3: Grid Innovation
Applicant: The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) representing the State of Alaska
Technical Point of Contact: Bryan Carey, Director of Owned Assets, AEA
Business Point of Contact: Curtis Thayer, Executive Director, AEA
The AEA and Railbelt electric utilities are partners in this project as collaborative decision
makers representing all the primary transmission owners and operators of Alaska’s largest
electrical grid (the Railbelt). The project team consists of:
1. AEA
2. Chugach Electric Association Inc. (CEA), a Central Region cooperative
3. Golden Valley Electric Association Inc. (GVEA), a Northern Region cooperative
4. Homer Electric Association Inc. (HEA), a Southern Region cooperative
5. Matanuska Electric Association Inc. (MEA), a Central Region cooperative (MEA)
6. The City of Seward, Alaska dba Seward Electric System (SES), a Southern Region municipal
utility
7. The Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) is participating as a team member in an
advisory and regulatory role, as permitted by their statutory authority
Project Location: All three regions (Northern, Central, and Southern) of the Alaska Railbelt
electrical grid and the Eastern Region1.
1 Copper Valley Electric Association (CVEA) serves the Eastern Region and is a stakeholder knowledgeable about
this application but is not a project team member.
Area served by
the Railbelt grid
Area served by
Copper Valley
Electric
Association
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
1
Project and Technical Description
Alaska and the nation are at a crossroads of the need to develop a fuel-diverse, low-carbon
economy, and a once-in-a-generation opportunity to invest in infrastructure. At this
intersection, the collective mission of the Railbelt utilities and the State of Alaska is to build a
resilient, clean, smart, and low-cost electrical grid. This grid must support a fuel-diverse energy
landscape that drives sustainable economic development in Alaska and ensures the cost-
effective delivery of energy to Railbelt consumers and beyond. The Railbelt utilities and State
share a vision: a collaborative future in the Railbelt in which our communities come together
and share resources to strengthen and build a smart, clean electrical grid that promises our
residents, our national defense infrastructure, and communities adjacent to the Railbelt access
to clean, low-cost energy from any source.
The Railbelt Innovation Resiliency project (RIR or Project), the subject of this GRIP Topic 3
Concept Paper, is one of a series of projects that constitute the Railbelt’s Grid Modernization
and Resiliency Plan (GMRP or Plan)2. The RIR effort proposed in this Topic 3 funding cycle will
construct an interregional transmission line (including a high voltage direct current (HVDC)
submarine cable) parallel to the single line that currently ties the Southern and Central regions
together. The project includes two Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS), one each in the
Central and Northern regions, to augment the existing 46 MW, 2-hour battery in the Southern
Region. The HVDC line and batteries will be operated and controlled simultaneously in real time
to maximize transfer capability between regions and minimize spinning reserve requirements,
improving resiliency and allowing the transfer of renewable energy. Discussion on how this
project fulfills the GRIP FOA eligibility requirements begins on page 10 of this document.
The team assembled for this project includes stakeholder outreach experts, engineers, project
managers, and the executive-level decision makers for the Railbelt utilities and AEA. The team
will work diligently to integrate other regional stakeholders into the process, as described in the
Community Benefits Plan section. The project team intends to apply in subsequent cycles for
funding to complete the transmission line between the Southern and Northern regions by
extending the transmission line in this funding request from the Central Region to Healy in the
Northern Region. In the final funding cycle, the project team will submit the completion of RIR
Phase 2, constructing a transmission line integrating the Copper Valley in the Eastern Region
into the Railbelt grid and providing an alternate path to feed the Ground-based Midcourse
Defense (GMD) system and Black Rapids Arctic Warfare Training Center at Fort Greely in the
Northern Region.
2 The GMRP consists of interregional transmission interconnection improvements and a coordinated energy
storage/HVDC system: More specifically these are: 1) upgrades to the Railbelt Backbone, the Railbelt’s existing
transmission system (the Railbelt Backbone Rebuild) 2) a second interregional tie between the Southern, Central,
and Northern regions, 3) battery energy storage systems (BESS) in each region operating in real-time coordination
with an HVDC system to maximize transfer capability and minimize spinning reserve requirements, and 4) an
interregional tie between the Central and Northern regions integrating the Copper River Valley (currently a stand-
alone system) into the Railbelt grid and providing a second feed into the U.S. Department of Defense GMD system
at Fort Greely.
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
2
Fort Greely is currently served by a single radial transmission line from Fairbanks. These
subsequent projects would complete the full GMRP.
Grip Topic 3 is coordinated with but distinct from the project team’s requests in GRIP Topics 1
and 2. In GRIP Topic 1 the team is seeking federal assistance for the reconstruction of the
antiquated and end of useful life transmission assets that comprise the existing transmission
system backbone. In GRIP Topic 2, the Railbelt utilities and AEA are seeking federal assistance
for design and procurement of the interregional battery-HVDC control and monitoring system,
which would provide simultaneous interregional control. In Grip Topic 3, this concept paper,
the project team is seeking assistance in constructing the actual HVDC line and BESSs. Although
the GMRP in total provides the greatest benefit to Alaska and the strongest opportunity to
advance federal policy interests, each of its components provide value in their own right. The
team will seek funding to complete the entire GMRP; however, as noted below, without
significant federal and state assistance the GMRP will take many decades to complete.
Through the GMRP, there exists an opportunity for a transformational series of transmission
infrastructure improvements estimated to cost ~$2.87 B. Successful and accelerated
implementation of the GMRP will prepare the Railbelt grid in terms of resiliency and reliability
necessary for the development of a more fuel diverse low carbon future in Alaska that can
serve as a model for the rest of the United States and the world. Given the nature of the
Railbelt and the disparate socioeconomic status and vast diversity of its communities as
described below, learnings from this undertaking will be broadly applicable to the larger grids of
the contiguous lower forty-eight states and North America.
As described in this concept paper, the Railbelt grid is an isolated3, long-distance, fully
functioning electric grid built on a relatively small scale that serves nearly three quarters of
Alaska’s population. Yet, the grid’s aging infrastructure is inadequate by traditional industry
standards. For example, although Alaska is not regulated by the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC), NERC standards would require the construction of the GMRP
projects to meet its reliability and resiliency standards. The GRIP provides an opportunity to
successfully modernize the Railbelt grid to support the state’s isolated population core and to
facilitate decarbonization of the broader Alaska economy. The AEA and the Railbelt utilities are
investigating large-scale, known-resource wind projects in the Northern Region near Fairbanks;
in the Central Region on the east and west sides of Cook Inlet; and in the Southern Region north
of Kachemak Bay and the upper Gulf of Alaska near the mouth of Cook Inlet. Additionally, AEA
and the Railbelt utilities are investigating hydroelectric resources in the Southern Region, solar
farms in the Central and Southern regions, and potential hydroelectric resources in the Eastern
Region. The economics of integrating any of these projects into the Railbelt grid will require the
participation of all five Railbelt electric utilities, the State, and in the case of the Eastern Region,
CVEA, a stand-alone, islanded electric utility.
For these utilities to participate in any of these renewable or low carbon energy projects, firm
transmission access to generation resources must be assured. Firm transmission access will
3 The Railbelt is a stand-alone grid not interconnected with any other electric system.
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
3
require completion of the GMRP. Thus, GMRP completion is the key to decarbonizing the
Railbelt grid. Due to the population diversity within the Railbelt and scale of the infrastructure,
the federal government has an opportunity to utilize the Railbelt grid as a model to
demonstrate both the objectives and vision of the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act (IIJA) and other initiatives. The lessons learned from this demonstration will have broad
applicability to the larger grids of the contiguous lower forty-eight states. The project team
looks forward to collaborating with the national labs to ensure such learnings are transferred to
national stakeholders.
As discussed more fully in the Community Benefits Plan section, the Railbelt region is home to
numerous federally recognized tribes and disadvantaged and underserved communities. There
are over 200 federally recognized tribes in Alaska, many in the Railbelt region, and based on the
2010 census Anchorage is home to the three most culturally diverse census tracts in the U.S.
(followed closely by Queens, New York)4. One hundred and ten languages are spoken in the
Anchorage School District alone.5 With this socially and economically diverse makeup, the
Railbelt is the ideal area for the federal government to demonstrate how the benefits of the IIJA
can be maximized.
The Railbelt serves five military
bases, as depicted in Figure 1,
each with a vital strategic
importance to U.S. national
security. These critical bases
contribute to the national defense
through airborne infantry, military
intelligence, mid-course missile
defense, global
telecommunications downlink
infrastructure, Long Range
Discrimination Radar (LRDR), F-16,
F-22, and F-35 high-speed
intercept capability, and Coast
Guard, among other ways. As noted in the White House’s Indo-Pacific Strategy (February 2022),
these defense capabilities are vital to our national security and prosperity. The GMRP will
support the transition of Alaska-based U.S. Department of Defense assets to a low-carbon
future and improve resiliency by building a redundant transmission line to serve the GMD
system near Ft. Greely.
The Railbelt is essential to the broader state economy. The Port of Alaska, a federally
designated Strategic Seaport in Anchorage, serves as the primary point of entry for virtually all
cargo, building material, fuel, and food for most of the state’s population. Additionally, the Ted
4 https://www.cnn.com/2015/06/12/us/most-diverse-place-in-america/index.html
5 https://www.asdk12.org/aboutasd/
Railbelt Military Bases
Figure 1: Military Bases Served by the Railbelt Grid
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
4
Stevens Anchorage International Airport is the fourth largest international airport in the world
in terms of cargo throughput (approximately 50% of the air cargo between North America and
Asia), making its decarbonization of global importance. Alaska is home to significant mining
operations including for rare earth metals critical to national security and other strategic
imperatives. These assets are vital to the economy and security of both Alaska and the nation.
The RIR will deliver broad and substantial benefits to the Railbelt and the state. Those benefits
include improved regional and interregional reliability, resiliency and transfer capacity,
increased ability to integrate renewable and other low carbon energy projects, reduction in
carbon emissions and transmission system losses, increasing geographic and technological
diversity of the Railbelt grid generation portfolio, facilitation of decarbonized beneficial
electrification, and the eventual decarbonization of the electric grid.
More significantly, over time this project and the broader GMRP will help stabilize electric rates
throughout the state. Alaskans pay some of the highest electric rates in the country6, which
disproportionately impact the disadvantaged and underserved. Stabilizing Railbelt rates will in
turn help address the even higher cost of energy in rural Alaska not served by the Railbelt, with
close to 30% of the state’s population. The state’s innovative, equity-sharing Power Cost
Equalization (PCE) program7 mitigates rural costs using a formula based in part on the price of
Railbelt electricity. This program spreads benefits realized by investment in the Railbelt to
virtually every village in Alaska, most of which are Disadvantaged Communities. The GRIP
program objectives are met and complimented by the State’s and utilities’ goal of a resilient,
clean, and low-cost electrical network that supports sustainable economic development in the
region, decarbonization, and cost-effective energy delivery.
All the Railbelt electric utilities are either electric cooperatives or, in the case of the City of
Seward Electric System (SES), municipally owned8. Thus, virtually all benefits from this grid
modernization effort flow directly to the member-owners, the residents, businesses, and
communities of the Railbelt, and indirectly to the rest of the State through PCE. The Railbelt is
effectively a proving ground where the Department of Energy (DOE) and other federal agencies
can evaluate and successfully demonstrate transmission resiliency improvements in
preparation for electric decarbonization, both technically and on a community basis. Notably,
this can be achieved at a relatively low cost in the Railbelt grid. The RIR project will have the full
support and cooperation of the State and utility project team. This team consists of
representatives of the State of Alaska and each of the five Railbelt electric utilities9, and of the
6 Energy Information Administration (EIA) form EIA-826.
7 The Community Benefits Plan section beginning on Page 13 provides additional discussion on Power Cost
Equalization.
8 The City of Seward, a municipal, public power utility at ~1% of total Railbelt electricity demand.
9 The five Railbelt Electric Utilities consist of Golden Valley Electric Association Inc. in the Northern Region,
Matanuska Electric Association Inc., and Chugach Electric Association Inc. in the Central Region, and Seward
Electric System and Homer Electric System Inc. in the Southern Region.
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
5
RCA, the state’s utility regulator10. The team members are committed to the GMRP, subject to
governance board approvals and vetting through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
process.
The State and the Railbelt utilities are committed to upgrading the regional and interregional
transmission system. On December 2, 2022, AEA closed on a bond package for $166M, 65% of
which will be dedicated to transmission line reconstruction and 35% to the three regional grid
stabilization BESSs. The Railbelt utilities will pay the debt service on this bond package. In later
funding cycles, other segments of the RIR will be constructed as study work is completed and
regional and interregional approval is obtained. State funding assistance11 to help close the gap
between utility funding and federal assistance is being pursued.
The team plans to apply for all applicable IIJA and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) federal
assistance for GMRP projects. In addition, the team is seeking State appropriations to augment
federal funds. The GMRP upgraded grid will create an unrestricted electron freeway and allow
the Railbelt to optimize the use of cost-effective, low-carbon technologies by eliminating
current technical and geographic constraints of the transmission system.
Background
The Railbelt Grid
The Railbelt electric grid is unique in North America as it is a fully functioning, long-distance
electrical grid with a
relatively small load. The
Railbelt is characterized
by three load-generation
regions. These load-
generation
concentrations are
known as the Northern
Region (Fairbanks-Delta
Junction), the Central
Region (Anchorage-
Matanuska-Susitna
Valleys, and Southern
Region (the Kenai
Peninsula). The Southern
and Central regions are
joined by a single, 140 mile long 115 kV transmission line through many avalanche areas. The
Central and Northern regions are connected by a 169-mile, 138 kV line through mountainous
10 On January 4, 2023, the RCA unanimously passed the following motion “I [Commissioner Pickett] will make a motion
that the RCA be considered as a [Alaska Railbelt GRIP] team member subject to any legal restrictions we may have and to consider
probably in the format of an I docket, uncommon or innovative regulatory structures [to incentivize transmission investment].”
11The October 26,2022 letter from Railbelt utility managers to Governor Michael Dunleavy is available for review.
Railbelt Grid
Figure 2: Alaska’s Relative Size
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
6
terrain accessible only by helicopter. The grid provides electricity to approximately 70% of the
state's population and generates 80% of the electricity in Alaska. It extends over 700 miles from
the Bradley Lake Project, located at the head of Kachemak Bay near Homer, Alaska, in the
Southern Region, to Delta Junction in the Northern Region, roughly the distance from
Washington, DC, to Atlanta, Georgia, as depicted in Figure 2. The grid traverses inhospitable,
mountainous, subarctic terrain. The region is laced with highly active seismic zones and is
subject to volcanic eruptions, forest fires, flooding, and fierce annual winter storms. The grid's
assets vary from high voltage (138 kV and 230 kV) submarine cable crossings in Cook Inlet12 to
remote helicopter/riverboat -access-only river crossings and numerous transmission structures
at high elevations in this subarctic environment.
Unlike numerous areas in the contiguous lower forty-eight states, the Railbelt has received
minimal federal investment in grid development over Alaska’s history. The Eklutna
Hydroelectric Project, initially constructed in the 1950s, was the last major federal project in
the Railbelt that included a transmission line component. A portion of this project was rebuilt
by the Bureau of Reclamation's Alaska Power Administration after the 1964 Good Friday
Earthquake and sold by the federal government to the Railbelt’s Central Region utilities in the
early 1990s.
The Railbelt’s Northern Region is loosely interconnected, primarily at 69 kV and 138 kV. The
Central Region is moderately well interconnected with multiple 230, 138, and 115 kV lines. The
Southern Region is interconnected at 115 kV but includes a radial feed to the SES system. A
tight power pool operates in the Central Region and an active economy energy market exists
between regions but is severely limited by transmission constraints and a lack of transmission
lines. A generation contingency reserve-sharing pool exists between all three regions. Because
the transmission interconnections are vulnerable to single contingencies, each region is
responsible for its own operating and off-line reserves. Due to the relatively feeble regional
interconnections, the Railbelt grid is technically characterized as "transient stability limited,"
with machines under dynamic stress swinging against other machines within the region, and
with regions swinging against each other across the light interregional interconnections. The
grid is susceptible to transient stability and large-scale, small-signal instability oscillations.
Voltage stability, which varies from marginal to good depending on the specific area, has been
improved with the addition of six static volt-amps-reactive (VAR) compensators at critical
locations. The grid operates under a subset of NERC standards modified to account for the
scale, nature, and economic limitations of the interconnection (the grid's system bias is variable
and ranges from 3-10 MW/.1 hertz). In 2024 these standards will become mandatory and
enforceable under a recently certificated electric reliability organization, the Railbelt Reliability
Council. The grid has a sophisticated under-frequency load shed scheme which sheds load to
match generation in four stages with varying time delays and includes frequency rate of change
relays. Traditional day-ahead and real-time security constrained economic dispatch are run in
12 Cook Inlet is a silt laden 180-mile inlet reaching from Knik Arm to the Gulf of Alaska. The inlet has the fourth
highest tidal range in the world at 30.3 feet and contains an endangered subspecies of the beluga whale.
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
7
each Load Balancing Area (LBA) with net interchange, and frequency monitored and managed
to Alaska Standard AK BAL-001 which incorporates NERC CPS 1 and 2. Dynamic events on the
grid occur and resolve very quickly (2-10 seconds) when compared with the much larger North
American grids (the Eastern Interconnection, the Western Interconnection, and ERCOT), which
resolve in tens of minutes. The grid's peak demand is roughly 750 MW compared to ERCOT's 13
peak demand of 85,000 MW. The grid's annual energy consumption is approximately 4,800
GWH compared to ERCOT’s at 339,000 GWH.
The Railbelt Grid Modernization and Resiliency Plan
Today, the broader energy landscape in Alaska and across the world is being reshaped by
multiple change drivers. Geopolitical shifts are dramatically altering global energy markets.
Decarbonization policies and technological
advancements shaped by increasingly
dramatic climate change are both the result
of and contributing to a shift in popular
sentiment about energy and the
environment. Regionally, uncertainty
around declining Cook Inlet natural gas 14
and broader fuel supply issues for the
utilities is a critical – and shared – challenge
looming on the near-term horizon.
In response to this shared challenge, the
State and Railbelt utilities have come
together to develop a broad-based, long-
term plan to ensure the future energy
viability of the Railbelt from a social,
economic, and technical perspective. The
technical aspect of that plan is the GMRP, of
which the RIR (the focus of this funding
request) is a component. We intend to
submit the GMRP as the Railbelt’s
contribution to Alaska’s broader State
Energy Security Plan as that document is
developed in the coming months.
Figure 3 is a graphic representation of the current Railbelt grid with the GMRP components
overlaid. The GMRP components that comprise the RIR 2022-23 funding cycle project costs are
highlighted in yellow. A more detailed geographic GMRP map with component projects and
estimated costs is available upon request.
13 ERCOT is by far the smallest of the North American interconnections.
14 Natural gas is used to generate 80% of the electricity in the Railbelt and is also the primary source of energy for
home heating in the Central and Southern regions.
Figure 3: RIR Components in Current Funding Cycle
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
8
In the 2022-23 GRIP Topic 3 funding cycle, the State and utilities are requesting $298,600,000,
representing 50% of the 2022-23 RIR project costs. The same team will seek federal assistance
for the remaining project costs in subsequent Topic 3 funding cycles.
Figure 4 is a graphic representation of the
Railbelt system with an overlay of the GMRP.
The
entire RIR project (topic of this concept
paper) is highlighted in yellow. The Railbelt
Backbone Reconstruction is highlighted in
red, and the BESS-HVDC control project (at
locations highlighted with the blue “C”)
comprise the remainder of the GMRP15.
The estimated total cost for the GMRP is
$2.87B over 15 years. Given the Railbelt’s
small population, without significant federal
and state investment the GMRP and its RIR
component would take many decades to
finance and construct. The costs are too high
for the limited number of Railbelt customers
to absorb. This delay will in turn hinder the
Railbelt’s ability to decarbonize both the grid
and the broader economy. The project team
intends to apply for federal funding for
specific GMRP components in each of the
five funding periods of the GRIP and IRA, and
also USDA Rural Utility Services (RUS) loan
programs. In addition to these federal
requests, the team is seeking state funding with the remainder of plan costs to be funded by
Railbelt utilities. The utilities have requested, and the RCA has agreed, to evaluate innovative
ratemaking strategies to promote the completion of the GMRP, e.g., accelerated application of
costs to rate base or forward funding of project costs, among others.16
15 Subjects of the project team’s Topics 1 and 2 concept papers.
16 The RCA is the statutorily authorized regulator of the Railbelt electric utilities. The RCA discussion to evaluate
innovative ratemaking strategies can be found in the minutes of the RCA’s January 4, 2023, special public meeting
at
https://rca.alaska.gov/RCAWeb/MeetingDetails/CommissionMeetingDetails.aspx?id=f44c5897-045b-4d7c-a59b-
d650bdb52a2e
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency Project Cost 2022-2023 2024-27
Southern Region to Central Region HVDC Cable and Regional Battery Energy Storage $597,100,000 $870,400,000
Figure 4: RIR, RBR and BESS-HVDC Projects Comprising
the Railbelt Grid Modernization and Resiliency Plan
(GMRP)
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
9
The priority improvements required to allow diversification of the Railbelt fuel supply and
decarbonization of the Railbelt grid must be providing frequency stability and decongesting the
transmission system. These improvements are required irrespective of the nature of fuel supply
diversity and decarbonization solutions. In 2010, the Railbelt's frequency was equal to 60 Hz.
approximately 44 % of the time. By 2021, the grid operated at 60 Hz about 17% of the time. The
primary causes of this deterioration of frequency control are the introduction of lighter, more
efficient aero-derivative turbines, efficiency-driven (as opposed to response-driven) plant
control systems, and the introduction of non-dispatchable renewables in the form of solar and
wind generators. Stabilizing frequency and decongesting the grid will require upgrading existing
transmission lines and building a new transmission interconnection from the Southern Region
to the Central Region and on to Healy in the Northern Region, and development of a regional
BESS-HVDC real-time control and optimization scheme. These steps are the core of the GMRP.
A subsequent phase will include a transmission interconnection from Wasilla in the Central
Region to Glenallen in the Eastern Region, and north to interconnect with the GVEA system at
Fort Greely and the GMD System in the Northern Region.
The following table estimates the high-level GMRP timeline and associated estimated costs. The
priority and timing of projects may vary given the outcome of funding opportunities17, NEPA
processes, the evolving nature of low carbon generation development, and Cook Inlet fuel
supply changes.
The Railbelt Innovation Resiliency Project
The subject of this concept paper is the RIR, which is:
• Construction of transmission lines and an HVDC submarine cable paralleling the existing
single transmission line between the Southern and Central regions
• Construction of two large-scale BESSs, one in the Northern Region and one in the
Central Region, which will augment the existing 46 MW, 2-hour battery in the Southern
Region
These three batteries and the HVDC line will be operated in a coordinated, simultaneous
fashion, in real-time, to maximize transfer capability and minimize spinning reserve
requirements.
The need for constructing a resilient transmission grid with multiple interregional
interconnections was established in studies beginning with the development of the Bradley
Lake Project in the late 1980s and confirmed as recently as 2017 in AEA’s Railbelt Regional
17 Full funding of requests in GRIP Topics 1, 2, and 3 may accelerate the 2023-2027 effort, pushing it above the
estimated $934,000,000.
Grid Modernization and Resiliency Plan (GMRP)
Decarbonization and Fuel Diversity Transmission Build-Out 2023-2027 2028-2032 2035-2037
Southern Region (Kenai Peninsula) to Central Region (Anchorage Mat-Su) + Energy Storage $934,000,000
Central Region to Northern Region (Fairbanks-Delta Junction) Phase 1 $981,000,000
Central Region to Northern Region Phase 2 and Roadbelt (Wasilla-Glenallen-Delta Junction)$958,000,000
Total Fifteen Year Transmission Spend $2,873,000,000
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
10
Integrated Resource Transmission Plan. The RIR components addressed in this concept paper
have historically received broad support within the Railbelt. This support will aid in moving the
projects more quickly to design, permitting and construction.
Project Eligibility and Area of Interest
The RIR project meets the DOE’s objectives as expressed in the Topic 3, Area of Interest 1:
Transmission System Applications18, as detailed below:
1. Investments and strategies that accelerate interconnection of clean energy generation
and/or storage: Railbelt grid frequency stabilization and transmission system decongestion
will allow development of large-scale interregional wind and solar projects by improving
their economic and technical viability. With a reinforced transmission system, the
geographical diversity of wind and solar will contribute to reduced storage requirements.
The more robust transmission system will also allow interregional planning and dispatching
stored resources, which will reduce storage resources required in individual regions. These
improvements will also enable beneficial electrification on a large-scale, e.g., electric
vehicles and space heating.
2. Interregional or cross-ISO/RTO projects that address key grid reliability, flexibility, and/or
resilience challenges: The three Railbelt regions (Southern, Central, and Northern) are
joined by single transient stability limited interconnections. The RIR project will remove
single contingency constraints and increase interregional transfer capacity.
3. Projects addressing grid access challenges for remote, stranded, or novel low-carbon
resources: The improved interregional grid (in terms of resilience and improved transfer
capability) will increase the economic viability of and thus increase utility participation in
geographically diverse wind and solar projects by enabling greater scale and driving per-
unit costs down. From a technical perspective, stabilizing grid frequency and maximizing or
eliminating transient stability limits and small-signal instability susceptibility will allow a
larger scale integration of non-dispatchable renewables. Railbelt-wide coordination of
BESS/HVDC resources will increase the amount of renewables sustainable in the Railbelt
without increasing the amount of BESS resources.
4. Planning, modeling, cost allocation, or other approaches that enable a transition to
innovative financial and/or regulatory constructs that accelerate transmission expansion:
RCA participation in the RIR and broader GMRP efforts will likely create an innovative
regulatory framework that allows the utilities to maximize their financial participation in
this project and others, e.g., early inclusion of transmission construction costs in rates or
forward funding of portions of these costs, thereby minimizing carrying costs.
5. Underground or underwater HVDC systems in challenging environments: The Nikiski to
Beluga HVDC submarine cable will cross Cook Inlet, a challenging marine environment.
18 Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number: DE-FOA-0002740 pp 31-32
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
11
Cook Inlet is laden with glacial silt corrosive to armored cables19; has some of the highest
tides in the world, peaking at 30 feet; is home to an endangered subspecies of beluga
whale; and hosts numerous subsea petroleum and natural gas pipelines.
6. Capacity enhancing approaches such as advanced conductors, dynamic line rating systems:
The geographically disparate combined BESS-HVDC system will be controlled in a real-time,
coordinated fashion that provides real-time, dynamic maximization of transfer capability
and minimization of spinning reserves.
7. Congestion management techniques including energy storage and integrated controls: See
6 above.
8. Transmission-scale reactive power devices: The BESSs are four-quadrant devices providing
both real and reactive support, controlled and tuned to operate in dynamic synchronism
with the six existing static VAR compensators.
9. Power flow controllers for AC or High voltage Direct Current (HVDC) systems: See 6 above.
Project Grid Benefits
The RIR project will simultaneously increase transfer capability and resiliency between the
three Railbelt regions. Currently, transfers are vulnerable to interruption due to the lack of
resiliency and reliability that will be resolved via the RIR by second ties between the regions.
Increased transfer capability reduces security constrained economic dispatch (SCED)
constraints, resulting in more efficient generation dispatch. More efficient SCED will reduce
overall fuel burn and reduce carbon emissions, saving money and advancing climate goals.
Further, firm transmission capability and increased transfer capability will allow geographically
diverse utilities to participate economically in renewables, by increasing economies of scale and
reducing per-unit costs of renewables. Energy resiliency will be greatly improved by allowing
energy sources in all three regions to participate in electricity restoration as opposed to limiting
resiliency measures to three individual areas.
Ultimately the RIR project, as a component of the larger GMRP, will improve resiliency,
reliability, and efficiency, and facilitate the integration of additional renewables and variable
generation whether in the Southern, Central, or Northern regions. Improving transmission
security between the three areas will extend to all regions the benefits of geographically
diverse renewables. With completion of the RIR effort contemplated under this funding cycle,
the benefits noted above will extend in full to the Southern Region and in part to the Central
Region. Completion of the broader GMRP (which requires the RIR as an initial component) will
accrue the full value of these benefits to the entire Railbelt and Copper Valley.
19 An evaluation by CEA in the mid-1990s showed that of ten 138 kV AC oil-filled undersea cables installed between
1970 and 1990, the average cable life was approximately 15 years versus an industry expectation of 50 years.
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
12
Project Risk Reduction
DOE investment in the RIR will provide valuable insights for contiguous lower forty-eight states’
grid planners and developers specifically with respect to long-distance, coordinated, real-time
control of BESS and HVDC systems from real and reactive power perspectives. Applications of
this technology will be particularly useful in isolated pockets of the larger contiguous lower
forty-eight states where transient or small-signal instability present a challenge. There are
several know project risks which we will address proactively; for example, the beluga whale
endangered species challenge will be mitigated by early engagement with stakeholders,
appropriate whale watch protocols, and bubble acoustic sound deadening construction
techniques. Early bathymetry development and engagement with pipeline owners and state
permitting will optimize circuit routing and minimize conflicts, e.g., cathodic protection. The
abrasive nature of Cook Inlet silt will be mitigated by double armoring the cable, a solution that
has proven effective on the most recently installed 138 kV submarine cable.
Project DOE Funding to Leverage Outcomes
DOE investment in the RIR will unlock state20 and local electric utility funding for this project
and subsequent GMRP components. AEA and the utilities also look forward to collaborating
with the national labs to integrate opportunities for additional innovation in the Railbelt effort.
By advancing the GMRP’s cumulative broader impact, this RIR investment will transform the
Railbelt transmission grid. This transformation will provide adequate transmission capability for
broad regional participation in renewable and low-carbon generation projects. Broad
participation will drive economies of scale and improve the cost profile of such projects,
effectively easing the rate burden of the Green Premium21 that falls disproportionately on low
income and underserved communities. Thus, the RIR and GMRP will facilitate the integration of
renewable and low-carbon generation technologies from Homer to Fairbanks through an
unrestricted electron freeway.
Project Readiness, Viability, and Expected Timing
As noted above, the RIR project can be accelerated through design, permitting, and
construction stages due to the maturity of the existing study work of the proposed RIR
segments.
20 See October 26, 2022, letter from the Railbelt electric utility managers to Alaska Governor Michael Dunleavy.
21 https://breakthroughenergy.org/our-approach/the-green-premium
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
13
Community Benefits Plan
The Railbelt Innovation Resiliency project presents a unique opportunity to increase reliability,
provide clean energy options, and reduce electricity rates for a 700-mile-long stretch of Alaska
that serves as the state’s economic backbone and is home to approximately two-thirds of the
state’s population. The same Railbelt region includes multiple disadvantaged communities
(DACs), extensive veteran, Pacific Islander, and Alaska Native populations, and some of the
most diverse neighborhoods in the nation. Importantly, the benefits of federal investment in
the Railbelt are not limited to those directly connected to the Railbelt grid. The State of Alaska’s
Power Cost Equalization (PCE) program extends the financial benefits of lower Railbelt electric
rates to positively impact hundreds of remote communities statewide; even populations not
connected to the Railbelt’s electric network benefit from reduced Railbelt rates. Most of these
remote areas are DACs with extremely high power costs; PCE reduces costs in these
communities based on a formula tied to Railbelt rates. This innovative, built-in transfer
mechanism demonstrates Alaska’s prioritization of equitable benefits sharing and provides a
time-tested means to ensure benefits from federal investment in the Railbelt extend to
compounded communities targeted by Justice40.
Having missed out on the federal government’s transformational infrastructure investments
before Alaska statehood, residents of Alaska have long borne outsized infrastructure costs
spread across relatively few homes, businesses, and industries. Alaskans have experienced a
lack of redundancy and infrastructure that would be considered unacceptable in other parts of
the U.S. Alaska residents and businesses have been underserved in comparison to the federal
investment in electrical infrastructure and energy in the contiguous lower forty-eight states.
Federal support would be a step closer to providing parity to Alaskans, including numerous
DACs, tribal entities, and rural communities.
The project team intends to identify project benefits, the anticipated recipients, and metrics to
track and measure the benefits in its Community Benefits Plan (CBP) to meet the federal
government’s four target goals (outlined below). The project team’s approach to this plan will
be stakeholder driven, involving communities and entities anticipated to become partners
through the project planning, execution, and operations stages.
CBP development will benefit from early engagement with potential partners and stakeholders
in order to define measurable project benefits, set workforce goals, and advance formal
partnerships for inclusion in the CBP. Individuals in impacted communities and local institutions
can provide invaluable insight into potential project benefits and outcomes that will inform the
project development and execution. This stakeholder participation is critical up-front to ensure
the project delivers expected benefits that reach the intended communities, while reducing
possible adverse impacts.
Defining the affected stakeholders early, establishing clear, durable communication channels,
receiving concerns, and crafting measures to address those concerns are critical to managing
project risks and ensuring desired objectives. Clear communication and collaboration during
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
14
development of the project application and the CBP will set a foundation for implementing the
CBP during project development, construction, and operations. This engagement should be a
continuous loop through the project design and execution.
Given that the project team is made up of cooperatives, a municipal utility, and the State of
Alaska, stakeholder engagement is central to the team’s regular businesses. The project team
believes this extensive experience will provide key support in CBP development and execution.
Early engagement with stakeholders is also expected to further the ability of communities,
individuals, local governments, and tribal entities to unlock additional funding opportunities
tied to the project. To that end, the project team will develop a robust CBP around the four FOA
elements as detailed below. Across all elements, the project approach is founded on the belief
that direct, early communication and meaningful exchange with other entities and communities
will inform CBP development.
Element 1: Community and labor engagement leading to negotiated agreements
The project team members have established, long-term, and mutually valued relationships with
the organized labor community in Alaska. The Railbelt utilities have used project labor
agreements in the past for projects of this scale, e.g., construction of the Alaska Intertie. Each
of the Railbelt utilities has collective bargaining agreements with the International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers, among other unions. The project approach to the CBP will be to engage
its labor partners early to initiate discussions toward labor agreements. The CBP would
establish a timeline and milestones for negotiations with organized labor, including discussions
on local and targeted hiring goals, card-check neutrality, and possible provisions advancing
programs to attract, train, and retain new workers.
As the project applicant, the Alaska Energy Authority works with the Railbelt utilities as partners
in several transmission organizations. The utilities and AEA have a successful record partnering
both as owner/partners in shared capital projects and in advancing state energy goals and
priorities. With state support affirmed in this way, the CBP would prioritize establishing and
formalizing relationships with tribal entities, local governments, and other State of Alaska
departments with a focus on workforce and related issues. Early engagement with these core
stakeholders will also help ensure the project is cognizant of and in support of local energy
plans and goals.
The project team members individually are accustomed to engaging with local governments
and tribal entities through permitting and regulatory processes for capital projects. The CBP for
this project would establish milestones urging earlier dialogue with local governments and
tribal entities. These conversations should begin sufficiently early to inform project
development in response to local communities’ needs and concerns and to guide iterations of
the CBP. Local governments and tribal entities are uniquely situated to help identify the most
effective actions the project can take toward partnerships that advance workforce issues;
diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility; and the flow of project benefits to disadvantaged
communities.
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
15
AEA and its partner utilities have extensive experience engaging with local residents and
businesses in town halls and similar formats; AEA is a state entity with obligations to the public
interest, and the electric utilities are member-owned cooperatives (one is municipal with direct
responsibilities to the city’s residents). The CBP will articulate a plan and schedule for these
engagements to ensure individuals and businesses are aware of the project, including potential
economic and clean energy opportunities the project could enable, and to receive and
incorporate concerns and input into project development plans.
Element 2: Investing in job quality and workforce continuity
Given Alaska’s relative isolation and general need for living wage jobs, the project team
members firmly support the development of workforce training institutions. The stakeholder
engagement articulated above is expected to further inform the project team of workforce
issues and opportunities, including opportunities to partner with existing programs and
institutions to ensure a skilled and inclusive local workforce. Such opportunities would be
evaluated for incorporation into the CBP.
Alaska is not a right-to-work state. The Railbelt utilities’ employees who are covered by
bargaining unit agreements are required to join unions consistent with the terms and
conditions of the various utility bargaining unit agreements. Further, the utilities maintain strict
policies fostering safe, healthy, inclusive workplaces free of discrimination and harassment. The
utilities currently support continual development of a skilled, inclusive local workforce,
specifically the IBEW-NECA Alaska Joint Electrical Apprenticeship and Training Trust, individual
utility training programs, the University of Alaska System and other technical training programs.
This track record of investment in the Alaskan and American workforce will be reflected in the
CBP.
The project team members will also continue support of STEM and energy literacy programs
throughout the state as an investment in the future pipeline of critical energy-related jobs.
Element 3: Advancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility
The CBP will identify and evaluate potential actions to advance diversity, equity, inclusion, and
accessibility in relation to the project. Alaska offers significant opportunities to engage
underserved populations, including Alaska Native, Pacific Islander, and veteran residents.
Stakeholder consultation, including with organized labor, is expected to identify potential
workforce partnerships to encourage participation of these and similar communities in the
project.
Element 4: Contributing to the Justice40 Initiative goal that 40% of the overall benefits of
certain climate and clean energy investments flow to disadvantaged communities
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
16
As discussed in the beginning of this section, the team believes its project presents a unique
opportunity to extend benefits to much of Alaska, including DACs. The initial approach to this
CBP element would be identifying potential partners and establishing relationships to assist in
the plan development. Potential partners may include impacted DACs; state entities such as
Department of Environmental Conservation, Department of Commerce, and Department of
Labor and Workforce Development; academic or public policy/research institutions such as the
University of Alaska, Alaska Center for Energy and Power, and the Institute for Social and
Economic Research (ISER); and tribal and non-governmental entities, many of whom have
prioritized affordable, clean energy as strategic goals.
The project team intends to work with partners, stakeholders, and project technical teams to
identify measurable, trackable benefits and determine which benefits are most meaningful to
impacted communities. Engagement with institutional partners will help define disadvantaged
communities within and proximate to the project area, and within the projected reach of the
defined outcomes. Formulation of a stakeholder engagement plan and further consultation
with DACs and other partners could help establish mechanisms to measure and track the
investments and outcomes.
The project team believes significant benefits can be realized in energy resiliency, reduction of
energy and pollution poverty, and increased clean energy opportunities throughout the region
and state, and would coordinate with partners and stakeholders to quantify these broader
benefits within the CBP. Communities in the project region currently face potentially severe
health, safety, and economic consequences resulting from grid threats such as earthquakes,
severe cold weather events, and large-scale forest fires, often in remote areas. The project is
also anticipated to increase clean energy options throughout the region, including for DACs and
other rural communities, many of which are currently powered through coal or diesel-fired
generation.
The project is expected to reduce the potential consequences posed by these risks. The CBP
should also capture the potential benefits of increased opportunities for tying new, clean-
energy projects to the grid, especially smaller-scale projects. Project benefits are anticipated to
include improvements to air quality across the project regions, especially in the Northern
Region and other locations where particulate matter (PM2.5) pollution has risen to non-
attainment levels high enough to trigger remediation efforts through the EPA and is adversely
impacting the economy and health.
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
17
Addendum A
The Railbelt utilities and AEA have worked together for over 30 years, from constructing the
Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project (BLHP), which was commissioned in 1992 at a cost of
approximately $350M in 1990 dollars, to the most recent addition to the BLHP of the Sterling to
Quartz 115 kV line. The BLHP added the West Fork Upper Battle Creek Diversion in 2020, a
$45M diversion structure that increased the lake’s energy capacity water by approximately 10
percent. On December 1, 2022, AEA closed on a $166M bond package which will be used to
begin the RIR project by upgrading the Sterling to Quartz section of the 115 kV Southern Region
to Central Region transmission line (the Anchorage to Kenai 115kV line). Thirty-five percent of
the bond issue will be used to fund three regional grid stabilization batteries, one of which has
been constructed by HEA and is operational.
The AEA and Railbelt utilities’ stakeholder outreach, engineering, and project management
teams have many decades of stakeholder outreach, transmission, and generation engineering,
construction, and operations experience. Many of the engineers are registered professional
engineers (PE) and several are also registered project management professionals (PMP).
Combined this group has successfully constructed and commissioned billions of dollars of grid
infrastructure, as noted in their qualifications and expertise below.
Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)
AEA’s mission is to reduce the cost of energy in Alaska. As Alaska’s lead agency for statewide
energy policy and program development, AEA collaborates with utilities, private companies,
legislators, local governments, and Alaskan energy innovators to diversify the state’s energy
portfolio. On the Railbelt, AEA owns the 120-megawatt Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, the
largest in Alaska. AEA recently oversaw the West Fork Upper Battle Creek Diversion
construction, which diverts glacial water from West Fork Upper Battle Creek into Bradley Lake
increasing energy by 10%. In rural Alaska, AEA constructs bulk fuel tank farms, diesel
powerhouses, and electrical distribution grids, and provides technical/community assistance to
rural Alaskans. AEA’s dedicated team of engineers, economists, project managers, loan officers,
and planners help Alaska’s cities, boroughs, utilities, tribal entities, schools, and private
businesses move energy projects forward successfully.
Curtis Thayer, Executive Director, AEA
Since 2019, Curtis W. Thayer has served as executive director of AEA, the state's energy office
and lead agency for statewide energy policy and program development. Before joining AEA,
Thayer served as president and chief executive officer of the Alaska Chamber, the largest state
trade association.
Previously, he was the commissioner for the Department of Administration and cabinet
member for Governor Sean Parnell, responsible for 1,100 public employees and an annual
budget of $350 million. As part of his public service, he served as the deputy commissioner of
the Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development, and worked in
Washington, D.C., with Alaska’s Congressional Delegation.
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
18
Formerly, he was on the management team of ENSTAR Natural Gas Company and the Alaska
Gas Producers Pipeline Team. Thayer has served on boards at Alaska Housing Finance
Corporation, Alaska Gasline Development Corporation, Alaska Retirement Management Board,
Alaska Royalty Oil and Gas Development Advisory Board, and United States Chambers’
Committee of 100, and currently chairs Alaska’s Board of Marine Pilots.
A graduate of the United States Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Executive Energy Leadership Institute program, Thayer has gained a comprehensive
understanding of advanced energy technologies that has helped him guide his organizations in
making energy-related decisions. He is also an alumnus of the United States Chamber of
Commerce Foundation's Institute for Organization Management, which recognizes graduates as
leaders in their industries and organizations. Thayer earned his bachelor’s degree from the
University of Alaska Fairbanks with a major in political science and a minor in business.
Bryan Carey, Director of Owned Assets, AEA
Bryan Carey has worked more than 20 years on energy projects for AEA. During that time, he
has been the project manager for the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, Bradley Lake
transmission assets, project engineer for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project, Alaska
Industrial Development Export Authority’s (AIDEA) owned Snettisham Hydroelectric Project,
and substantially participated in Railbelt Integrated Resource Planning. In addition, he has been
the project manager for many rural Alaska energy projects including bulk fuel facilities, power
plants, and small hydroelectric/wind projects. Recently, he managed the studies, licensing, and
construction of the West Fork Upper Battle Creek Diversion Project ($47m) to increase energy
output of Bradley Lake by 37,000 MWh a year. Mr. Carey received a Bachelor of Science in
engineering from the University of Alaska Fairbanks and a Master of Business Administration
from University of Alaska Anchorage. He is a registered Professional Engineer in Alaska.
Railbelt Electric Utilities
Seward Electric Systems, Golden Valley Electric Association Inc., Matanuska Electric Association
Inc., and Homer Electric Association are all vertically integrated generation, transmission, and
distribution utilities with many decades of planning, design, construction, and operation of
power systems. The Railbelt is, and has been, an early adopter of technology over may decades;
for example, virtually all protective relays in the Railbelt grid were converted to
microprocessor-based technologies by the early 1990s, and currently most critical busses in the
Railbelt have real-time synchro phaser capability. In the last decade the combined utilities have
constructed nearly $1B dollars in generation22, a 46MW two-hour battery, and many miles of
transmission. The utility members of the project team are highly qualified in the execution of
projects proposed under the Grid Resiliency and Innovation Partnership funding opportunity.
Seward Electric System
22 Conversion to the new generation portfolio reduced carbon emissions by nearly 30% over the last decade.
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
19
Rob Montgomery, General Manager, Seward Electric System
Rob Montgomery is the General Manager of Seward Electric System, a municipal electric
organization serving 3,000 meters in the City of Seward and surrounding communities. In this
role, he is responsible for overall operations of the city’s electric utility. Mr. Montgomery has
over 20 years of professional experience in the electric utility industry, including 15 years with
South Carolina Electric & Gas Company (SCE&G) and six years with Tennessee Valley Authority
(TVA). At SCE&G, Mr. Montgomery was responsible for all strategic communications and media
relations. In this position, he directed efforts to create a pipeline safety communications plan to
meet compliance requirements of the 2002 Pipeline Safety Improvement Act; led public
outreach related to the construction of a $275-million, federally mandated back-up dam on
Lake Murray in Columbia, S.C.; and managed communications and conducted public workshops
when communities were impacted by new federal laws for clearing and maintaining rights of
way near high-voltage transmission lines. At TVA, he was responsible for strategic
communications and served as a primary liaison with the Tennessee Valley Public Power
Association. Mr. Montgomery is a graduate of the University of South Carolina with a degree in
journalism and holds a certificate from Duke University’s Executive Leadership Program.
Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA)
Dan Bishop, Director of Engineering Services, GVEA
Dan Bishop has been responsible for the design and construction of electric transmission lines
and substations throughout Alaska. His experience includes drafting, structural design,
electrical design, project management, quality control during construction, leading teams of
engineers and technicians, planning studies, budgeting, and executive management. He
received his Bachelor of Science and Master of Science in Electrical Engineering from the
University of Alaska Fairbanks and has been a registered professional engineer since 1993. Mr.
Bishop has been with GVEA since 1997.
Daniel Heckman, Regulatory Manager, GVEA
Daniel Heckman serves as the primary liaison between GVEA and federal and state regulatory
agencies, primarily the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA), as well as regulatory
stakeholders statewide. In addition to his regulatory and compliance oversight responsibilities,
he serves as GVEA’s primary representative on the Railbelt Reliability Council and as GVEA’s
representative on the BPMC project team described in this application. He received bachelor’s
degrees in political science and history from Southern Methodist University in 2010 and his juris
doctor from the Gonzaga University School of Law in 2013. Combined with his prior experience
at an investor-owned utility, Mr. Heckman has 10 years of experience in regulatory affairs.
Chugach Electric Association, Inc. (CEA)
Bruce Aspray, Manager of Transmission & Substation Engineering & Planning, CEA
Bruce Aspray is a professional with experience in the industrial power and electrical utility
industries. Mr. Aspray has specified, built, commissioned, and operated a combined cycle
power plant as well as open air and GIS substations. He is a degreed and licensed Professional
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
20
electrical engineer in the State of Alaska. He is experienced in project management and
construction of utility grade facilities including generation, transmission, substations,
distribution, and renewables.
Andrew Laughlin, Chief Operating Officer, CEA
Andrew Laughlin is a professional with a diverse background in the power industry, specifically,
power delivery project development, design, procurement, project management and
construction. He is a licensed Professional electrical engineer with experience that includes
construction of transmission and substation infrastructure as well as upgrading Static VAR
Compensation, boiler controls and steam turbine generation systems. Mr. Laughlin has
developed project teams for large and small complicated projects.
Dustin Highers, Vice President Corporate Programs, CEA
Dustin Highers is an electric utility professional with a background in power plant operations,
maintenance, construction, commissioning, and engineering support. Mr. Highers’ industry
experience includes 30 years in various industries including maritime, oil and gas, power plant
construction and commissioning, gas turbine field engineering, and electric utility engineering
and management. He is the leader of small and large teams in the execution of enterprise level
projects to achieve corporate goals and objectives. Mr. Highers has demonstrated skill in
complex program and project management for power generator maintenance and large
generation construction projects.
Matanuska Electric Association (MEA)
Ed Jenkin, Chief Operations Officer, MEA
Ed Jenkin is a licensed professional electrical engineer in the State of Alaska with more than 30
years of experience in the utility industry. He is presently the Chief Operations Officer for MEA.
In this role he has oversight of MEA’s system planning, engineering, operations, technical
services, and power system dispatch functions. Within the interconnected Alaska electric utility
system Mr. Jenkin has led or worked on multiple collaborative efforts, including Railbelt electric
reliability and cybersecurity standards development, joint asset management and operations,
power pool formation between MEA and CEA, electric reliability organization legislation, and
regulations on net-metering, regional planning, and standards enforcement. Mr. Jenkin
graduated with a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from the University of Alaska,
Fairbanks in 1984. He also has a Master of Arts in cross-cultural studies.
Julie Estey, Senior Director of External Affairs and Strategic Initiatives, MEA
Julie Estey is Senior Director at MEA, where she manages the cooperative’s public and member-
facing activities along with strategic plans and special projects. She serves as MEA’s
representative, past chair, and founding member of the Railbelt Reliability Council, the recently
certificated electric reliability organization for the interconnected Railbelt grid. Before joining
MEA, Ms. Estey was the Business Director for the Alaska Center for Energy and Power, an
energy research group at the University of Alaska Fairbanks focused on improving how Alaskans
generate and distribute power. She has experience managing public outreach and engagement
Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP)
U.S. Department of Energy
DE-FOA-0002740
Railbelt Innovation and Resiliency
21
for controversial transmission and generation capital projects as well as expertise bringing
diverse groups of stakeholders together to develop common solutions.
Brian Hickey, Executive Director, Railbelt Regional Coordination
Brian Hickey is the Executive Director of Railbelt Regional Coordination, working for the CEOs of
the five Railbelt electric utilities. He has more than 40 years of experience in electric power
systems and telecommunications. His experience includes executive leadership and
management, strategic business planning, economic alternative analysis, engineering, design,
project management, and maintenance process development and implementation. Mr. Hickey
has managed numerous generation, transmission, and process development and improvement
projects in his career. He holds a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from Montana
State University, a master’s certificate in Project Management from ESI/George Washington
University, and a master’s degree in Global Finance from Alaska Pacific University. He is a
licensed Professional Electrical Engineer and PMI Certified Project Management Professional.
Homer Electric Association, Inc. (HEA)
Keriann Baker, Director of Member Relations, HEA
Keriann Baker, Director of Member Relations, oversees the utility’s customer service programs,
public relations efforts, and legislative affairs. Ms. Baker practiced law with Reeves Amodio in
Anchorage and Lewis, Longman & Walker in Palm Beach County, Florida, prior to joining HEA.
She serves as vice chair of the South Peninsula Hospital, Inc., board and previously has served
on numerous boards including several local/state chambers of commerce as well as state and
national bar associations. Ms. Baker received a Bachelor of Science from Utah Valley University
in Orem, Utah, and her juris doctorate from Loyola Chicago School of Law, in Chicago, IL.
Larry Jorgensen, Director of Power, Fuels, & Dispatch, HEA
Larry Jorgensen, Director of Power, Fuels & Dispatch, manages the operation and maintenance
of HEA’s generation facilities, and generation dispatch. His skills include project design and
management, advanced control systems, simulation and modeling, plant commissioning and
startup, personnel training and advancement, and standards development. Mr. Jorgensen
received an Associate in Applied Science in Power Plant Technology and Bachelor of Science in
Energy Management, both from Bismarck State College in Bismarck, North Dakota. He has been
with HEA since 2011.
Bradley Lake Operator Report Page 1
Bradley Lake Operator Report
BPMC
January 2023
Unit Statistics:
Generation Unit 1 (MWhrs) Unit 2 (MWhrs) Total (MWhrs) Nov. 2022 Dec. 2022 Jan. 2023* 17,862 23,914 13,843 13,685 21,065 11,819 31,547 44,979 25,662
Hydraulics Avg. Lake Level (ft.) Usage (ac ft.) Fish water (cfs) Nov. 2022 Dec. 2022 Jan. 2023* 1,168 1,159 1,148 1,517 2,741 1,412 63 44 44
Battle Creek Inflows to Bradley (ac ft.) Nov. 2022 Dec. 2022 Jan. 2023* 0 0 0 *Lake Level – 1,144.8’ As of Jan 16, 2023
Activities
• Dam – Completed the monthly safety inspections. No issue to report.
• Dam Access Road – Access to the dam is by snow machine.
• Battle Creek Diversion – Closed for winter.
• Bradley Lake new building and renovations. Bidding closed 4 December 2022. Out of the three prospective bidders we received only one bid. We are currently evaluating it.
• Needle Valve Rebuild- Voith Hydro Inc. has completed a redesign for both the seals, piston rod and needle body. The new design has successfully been used at another hydro facility with comparable contaminate loading. The DHittle report has an estimated replacement cost of five million dollars per unit.
• Fire system- RESPEC continues to submit documents for review on the project wide fire alarm system refresh.
Bradley Lake Operator Report Page 2
• Safety- There have been no lost time or reportable accidents for the months of December 2022.
o Next safety meeting is 13 Feb. 2023
• Barge trip – None scheduled.
• Annual Maintenance Outage – no change from last report
• Forced outage –None to report.
• New Equipment– Mini Excavator and the Equipment trailer have been delivered to the project.
• Contractors/ Visitors on site-
o Randall Anderson – Apt. D remodel site visit.
Bradley Lake Dam Bradley Lake Spillway
Lake Level 1153.7- 28 Dec. 2022
Bradley Lake Operator Report Page 3
Fish Water Portal
Road up to Battle Creek Diversion
Diversion Tunnel
Equipment Trailer On The Barge
Bradley Lake Operator Report Page 4
New Equipment Trailer and Mini Excivator
Alaska Energy Authority
Bradley Lake
Budget to Actual Expense Report
07/01/2022 to 12/31/2022
Page 1 of 12
FY21 FY21 FY22 FY22 FY23 FY23
BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET ACTUALS BUDGET ACTUALS
Replace/Automate Fish Water Valve Actuators 40,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Upgrade Crews Quarters and Residents Kitchen 10,000 10,375 139,000 7,318 159,000 42,674
Battle Creek Bridge Repair ‐ 141,368 80,000 112,337 ‐ ‐
UPS Replacement 37,000 34,438 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
IRIS Air Gap Monitoring System (computer) 45,000 ‐ 45,000 86,805 65,000 ‐
Replace Dump Truck and Sander 170,000 166,608 20,000 ‐ ‐ 29,493
KVM switch for Emerson 3,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Spare Trash Pump 20,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Housing Preliminary Design ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Emerson Cybersecurity Update 137,000 138,555 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Heavy Duty trailer for equipment ‐ ‐ 20,000 ‐ 20,000 ‐
ABB Replace GIS Actuators ‐ ‐ 240,000 ‐ 309,000 238,263
Replacement pickup truck ‐ ‐ 45,000 ‐ ‐ 46,299
Needle Valve rebuild ‐ ‐ 150,000 29,727 150,000 ‐
Start new servo design ‐ ‐ 100,000 ‐ 250,000 ‐
Soldotna SVC Battery Replacement ‐ ‐ 70,000 76 ‐ ‐
North Fork Improvements ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 5,000 ‐
Mini Excavator ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 100,000 ‐
Install New Bradley Microwave System ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
500,000 2,686
Total Non R&C Capital Purchases 462,000 491,344 909,000 236,264 1,558,000 359,414
BRADLEY LAKE
CAPITAL PURCHASES NOT FUNDED BY R&C FUND
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Schedule A
Expenses for the period 07/01/22 to 12/31/22
Page 2 of 12
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
BRADLEY LAKE OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
SCHEDULE B
BUDGET TO ACTUAL EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD 07/01/2022 THROUGH 12/31/2022
FY 23 FY 22
FY23 Approved
Budget
BUDGET %
07/01/2022 ‐
12/31/2022 HEA Actual CEA Actual AEA Actual Total Actual
(Over) Under
Budget to Date
FY22 Approved
Budget FY22 Actual
Summary by expense type
AIDEA Staff Professional Services (Direct) 277,000 138,500 ‐ ‐ 27,846 27,846 110,654 274,000 212,299
AIDEA Support Staff (Indirect)‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Labor & Benefits 1,315,796 657,898 413,555 17,778 252,368 683,702 (25,804) 1,307,994 1,150,586
Travel 26,450 13,225 706 ‐ 3,446 4,152 9,073 38,450 10,436
Training 49,300 24,650 1,314 ‐ ‐ 1,314 23,336 49,300 19,660
Contractual 1,986,307 993,154 204,529 ‐ 130,794 335,323 657,831 1,156,343 1,069,547
Consulting‐Administrative 249,375 124,688 ‐ ‐ 933 933 123,754 ‐ 1,636
Supplies & Materials 311,232 155,616 29,481 ‐ 6,940 36,421 119,195 429,345 213,468
Other Costs 67,318 33,659 14,278 11,904 ‐ 26,183 7,476 97,318 63,178
Equipment, Furniture and Machinery 24,000 12,000 1,230 ‐ ‐ 1,230 10,770 73,000 5,084
Administrative Costs 1,492,905 746,453 12,530 ‐ 580,113 592,644 153,809 1,884,844 1,968,101
Indirect Costs 1,486,285 743,143 523,111 ‐ ‐ 523,111 220,032 1,486,285 1,183,807
O&M 4% Allocation to Battle Creek (236,473) (118,237) ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ (118,237) (190,710) ‐
Total Bradley Lake Budget 7,049,495 3,524,748 1,200,734 29,683 1,002,441 2,232,858 1,291,889 6,606,169 5,897,803
FERC 535 ‐ Operation Supervision & Engineering
Operations Sup/Eng
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits 108,311 54,155 48,545 ‐ ‐ 48,545 5,611 107,604 92,562
Travel 10,450 5,225 536 ‐ ‐ 536 4,689 10,450 1,715
Training 9,300 4,650 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 4,650 9,300 4,087
Contractual 1,000 500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 500 11,000 ‐
Supplies & Materials 4,000 2,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,000 4,000 942
Indirect Costs 155,698 77,849 63,327 ‐ ‐ 63,327 14,522 155,698 127,416
Bradley Lake Operating Total 288,759 144,380 112,407 ‐ ‐ 112,407 31,972 298,052 226,723
FERC 535 ‐ Operation Supervision & Engineering Total 288,759 144,380 112,407 ‐ ‐ 112,407 31,972 298,052 226,723
FERC 537 ‐ Hydraulic Expenses
Hydraulic Expenses
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits 90,192 45,096 27,604 ‐ ‐ 27,604 17,492 84,192 69,712
Travel ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 8,000 73
Contractual 123,000 61,500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 61,500 73,000 5,803
Supplies & Materials 32,000 16,000 397 ‐ ‐ 397 15,603 16,000 471
Equipment, Furniture and Machinery ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 39,000 ‐
Indirect Costs 114,320 57,160 39,398 ‐ ‐ 39,398 17,762 114,320 93,656
Bradley Lake Operating Total 359,512 179,756 67,399 ‐ ‐ 67,399 112,357 334,512 169,715
FERC 537 ‐ Hydraulic Expenses Total 359,512 179,756 67,399 ‐ ‐ 67,399 112,357 334,512 169,715
FERC 538 ‐ Electric Expenses
Electric Expenses
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits 218,044 109,022 79,859 ‐ ‐ 79,859 29,163 218,044 218,221
Travel 7,000 3,500 171 ‐ ‐ 171 3,329 7,000 4,381
Training 25,000 12,500 305 ‐ ‐ 305 12,195 25,000 10,743
Contractual 2,000 1,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,000 5,000 ‐
Supplies & Materials 9,732 4,866 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 4,866 42,732 255
Equipment, Furniture and Machinery ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 11,000 ‐
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 37,738
Indirect Costs 262,004 131,002 95,403 ‐ ‐ 95,403 35,599 262,004 216,110
Bradley Lake Operating Total 523,780 261,890 175,737 ‐ ‐ 175,737 86,153 570,780 487,448
BRADLEY CIRCUITS/RADIO TO BERNICE LK
BRADLEY CIRCUITS/RADIO TO BERNICE LK Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
FERC 538 ‐ Electric Expenses Total 523,780 261,890 175,737 ‐ ‐ 175,737 86,153 570,780 487,448
FERC 539 ‐ Misc. Hydraulic Power Generation Expenses
Misc Hydro Power Exp
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits 105,742 52,871 34,691 ‐ ‐ 34,691 18,180 104,788 68,784
Training 15,000 7,500 1,009 ‐ ‐ 1,009 6,491 15,000 4,831
Contractual 315,867 157,934 109,914 ‐ ‐ 109,914 48,019 287,525 228,838
Supplies & Materials 17,900 8,950 6,607 ‐ ‐ 6,607 2,343 17,900 29,833
Other Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ (714)
Indirect Costs 114,320 57,160 45,144 ‐ ‐ 45,144 12,016 114,320 95,365
Bradley Lake Operating Total 568,829 284,415 197,365 ‐ ‐ 197,365 87,050 539,533 426,937
BRADLEY CIRCUITS/RADIO TO BERNICE LK
Other Costs 35,695 17,848 14,278 ‐ ‐ 14,278 3,569 35,695 34,920
BRADLEY CIRCUITS/RADIO TO BERNICE LK Total 35,695 17,848 14,278 ‐ ‐ 14,278 3,569 35,695 34,920
BRADLEY CIRCUITS BERNICE LK TO ANCH
Other Costs 29,773 14,887 ‐ 11,904 ‐ 11,904 2,982 29,773 28,734
BRADLEY CIRCUITS BERNICE LK TO ANCH Total 29,773 14,887 ‐ 11,904 ‐ 11,904 2,982 29,773 28,734
FERC 539 ‐ Misc. Hydraulic Power Generation Expenses Total 634,297 317,149 211,643 11,904 ‐ 223,547 93,601 605,001 490,592
FERC 541 ‐ Maintenance Supervision & Engineering
Maint Supervision/Eng
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits 116,171 58,085 45,415 ‐ ‐ 45,415 12,670 114,758 100,394
Indirect Costs 155,698 77,849 63,327 ‐ ‐ 63,327 14,522 155,698 128,372
Bradley Lake Operating Total 271,869 135,935 108,742 ‐ ‐ 108,742 27,192 270,456 228,766
FERC 541 ‐ Maintenance Supervision & Engineering Total 271,869 135,935 108,742 ‐ ‐ 108,742 27,192 270,456 228,766
FERC 542 ‐ Maintenance of Structures
Maintenance of Structures
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits 86,639 43,319 25,127 ‐ ‐ 25,127 18,192 77,639 62,589
Contractual 56,000 28,000 27,208 ‐ ‐ 27,208 792 89,000 62,009
Supplies & Materials 94,000 47,000 2,557 ‐ ‐ 2,557 44,443 243,713 34,868
Equipment, Furniture and Machinery 19,000 9,500 45 ‐ ‐ 45 9,455 23,000 5,084
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 6,741
Page 3 of 12
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
BRADLEY LAKE OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
SCHEDULE B
BUDGET TO ACTUAL EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD 07/01/2022 THROUGH 12/31/2022
FY 23 FY 22
FY23 Approved
Budget
BUDGET %
07/01/2022 ‐
12/31/2022 HEA Actual CEA Actual AEA Actual Total Actual
(Over) Under
Budget to Date
FY22 Approved
Budget FY22 Actual
Indirect Costs 105,421 52,711 35,934 ‐ ‐ 35,934 16,777 105,421 80,072
Bradley Lake Operating Total 361,060 180,530 90,871 ‐ ‐ 90,871 89,659 538,773 251,363
FERC 542 ‐ Maintenance of Structures Total 361,060 180,530 90,871 ‐ ‐ 90,871 89,659 538,773 251,363
FERC 543 ‐ Maintenance of Reservoirs, Dams & Waterways
Maint Res, Dams, WWays
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits 53,744 26,872 625 ‐ ‐ 625 26,247 40,744 431
Travel 1,000 500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 500 5,000 ‐
Contractual 22,500 11,250 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 11,250 6,500 ‐
Supplies & Materials 20,000 10,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 10,000 15,000 ‐
Indirect Costs 56,689 28,344 287 ‐ ‐ 287 28,057 56,689 501
Bradley Lake Operating Total 153,933 76,967 912 ‐ ‐ 912 76,054 123,933 932
BRADLEY POWER TUNNEL MAINT (Dam)
Contractual ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 15,000 ‐
BRADLEY POWER TUNNEL MAINT (Dam) Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 15,000 ‐
FERC 543 ‐ Maintenance of Reservoirs, Dams & Waterways Total 153,933 76,967 912 ‐ ‐ 912 76,054 138,933 932
FERC 544 ‐ Maintenance of Electric Plant
Maintenance of Elec Plant
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits 309,110 154,555 100,075 ‐ ‐ 100,075 54,480 309,110 258,335
Travel 4,500 2,250 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,250 4,500 376
Contractual 58,000 29,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 29,000 49,000 104,828
Supplies & Materials 43,000 21,500 4,865 ‐ ‐ 4,865 16,635 30,000 20,620
Indirect Costs 423,178 211,589 143,061 ‐ ‐ 143,061 68,527 423,178 354,987
Bradley Lake Operating Total 837,788 418,894 248,002 ‐ ‐ 248,002 170,892 815,788 739,147
FERC 544 ‐ Maintenance of Electric Plant Total 837,788 418,894 248,002 ‐ ‐ 248,002 170,892 815,788 739,147
FERC 545 ‐ Maintenance of Misc. Hydraulic Plant
Maint of Misc Hydr Plant
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits 69,297 34,649 26,637 ‐ ‐ 26,637 8,012 69,297 63,333
Contractual 3,900 1,950 3,912 ‐ ‐ 3,912 (1,962) 3,900 ‐
Supplies & Materials 29,000 14,500 8,716 ‐ ‐ 8,716 5,784 34,000 70,114
Equipment, Furniture and Machinery 5,000 2,500 1,184 ‐ ‐ 1,184 1,316 ‐ ‐
Indirect Costs 98,957 49,478 37,230 ‐ ‐ 37,230 12,249 98,957 87,328
Bradley Lake Operating Total 206,154 103,077 77,679 ‐ ‐ 77,679 25,398 206,154 220,775
FERC 545 ‐ Maintenance of Misc. Hydraulic Plant Total 206,154 103,077 77,679 ‐ ‐ 77,679 25,398 206,154 220,775
FERC 556 ‐ System Control & Load Dispatching
System Cntl & Load Disp
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits 20,174 10,087 11,559 ‐ ‐ 11,559 (1,472) 19,708 17,143
Contractual 85,500 42,750 47,019 ‐ ‐ 47,019 (4,269) 53,000 88,680
Supplies & Materials 12,000 6,000 3,828 ‐ ‐ 3,828 2,172 6,000 6,442
Bradley Lake Operating Total 117,674 58,837 62,406 ‐ ‐ 62,406 (3,569) 78,708 112,264
Snow Measurement
Bradley Lake Operating
Contractual 10,000 5,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 5,000 10,000 9,507
Bradley Lake Operating Total 10,000 5,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 5,000 10,000 9,507
Seismic Service
Bradley Lake Operating
Contractual 62,000 31,000 ‐ ‐ 27,116 27,116 3,884 62,000 66,095
Bradley Lake Operating Total 62,000 31,000 ‐ ‐ 27,116 27,116 3,884 62,000 66,095
Streamguaging Serv
Bradley Lake Operating
Contractual 218,000 109,000 ‐ ‐ 48,296 48,296 60,704 218,000 189,594
Bradley Lake Operating Total 218,000 109,000 ‐ ‐ 48,296 48,296 60,704 218,000 189,594
Permits
Bradley Lake Operating
Other Costs 350 175 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 175 350 238
Bradley Lake Operating Total 350 175 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 175 350 238
FERC 556 ‐ System Control & Load Dispatching Total 408,024 204,012 62,406 ‐ 75,412 137,818 66,194 369,058 377,698
FERC 562 ‐ Station Expenses
Station Expenses
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits 98,418 49,209 11,515 17,778 ‐ 29,294 19,915 134,147 186,098
Travel 3,500 1,750 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,750 3,500 241
Contractual 87,960 43,980 13,468 ‐ ‐ 13,468 30,512 61,600 209,009
Supplies & Materials 44,600 22,300 2,510 ‐ ‐ 2,510 19,790 15,000 49,923
Other Costs 1,500 750 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 750 31,500 ‐
Bradley Lake Operating Total 235,978 117,989 27,493 17,778 ‐ 45,272 72,717 245,747 445,271
FERC 562 ‐ Station Expenses Total 235,978 117,989 27,493 17,778 ‐ 45,272 72,717 245,747 445,271
FERC 571 ‐ Maintenance of Overhead Lines
Maint of OH Lines
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits 39,954 19,977 1,904 ‐ ‐ 1,904 18,073 27,963 12,984
Contractual 150,000 75,000 3,008 ‐ ‐ 3,008 71,992 100,000 20,523
Supplies & Materials 5,000 2,500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,500 5,000 ‐
Bradley Lake Operating Total 194,954 97,477 4,913 ‐ ‐ 4,913 92,564 132,963 33,507
FERC 571 ‐ Maintenance of Overhead Lines Total 194,954 97,477 4,913 ‐ ‐ 4,913 92,564 132,963 33,507
FERC 920 & 930 ‐ Administrative Expense
AEA Bradley Fixed Admin Fees
Bradley Lake Operating
AIDEA Staff Professional Services (Direct) 277,000 138,500 ‐ ‐ 26,524 26,524 111,976 274,000 212,299
Travel ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 3,650
Consulting‐Administrative ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 933 933 (933) ‐ 1,636
Administrative Costs 2,500 1,250 ‐ ‐ 39,502 39,502 (38,252) 2,500 59,087
Page 4 of 12
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
BRADLEY LAKE OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
SCHEDULE B
BUDGET TO ACTUAL EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD 07/01/2022 THROUGH 12/31/2022
FY 23 FY 22
FY23 Approved
Budget
BUDGET %
07/01/2022 ‐
12/31/2022 HEA Actual CEA Actual AEA Actual Total Actual
(Over) Under
Budget to Date
FY22 Approved
Budget FY22 Actual
Bradley Lake Operating Total 279,500 139,750 ‐ ‐ 66,960 66,960 72,790 276,500 276,672
Bradley Lake Bond Financing
AIDEA Staff Professional Services (Direct)‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,322 1,322 (1,322) ‐ ‐
Bradley Lake Bond Financing Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,322 1,322 (1,322) ‐ ‐
Bradley Battle Creek Diversion
Bradley Battle Creek Diversion Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Shared ‐ 100% AEA Bradley Lake
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 69,726
Shared ‐ 100% AEA Bradley Lake Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 69,726
Operating Committee Exp‐Audit
Bradley Lake Operating
Administrative Costs 19,900 9,950 ‐ ‐ 288 288 9,662 19,900 22,494
Bradley Lake Operating Total 19,900 9,950 ‐ ‐ 288 288 9,662 19,900 22,494
Operating Committee Exp‐Legal
Bradley Lake Operating
Administrative Costs 70,000 35,000 ‐ ‐ 72,925 72,925 (37,925) 70,000 231,567
Bradley Lake Operating Total 70,000 35,000 ‐ ‐ 72,925 72,925 (37,925) 70,000 231,567
Operat Committee Exp‐Arbitrage
Bradley Lake Operating
Administrative Costs 5,000 2,500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,500 5,000 33
Bradley Lake Operating Total 5,000 2,500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,500 5,000 33
Trust & Account Fees
Bradley Lake Operating
Administrative Costs 13,000 6,500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 6,500 13,000 ‐
Bradley Lake Operating Total 13,000 6,500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 6,500 13,000 ‐
Misc Admin
Bradley Lake Operating
Administrative Costs 12,000 6,000 ‐ ‐ 12,976 12,976 (6,976) 12,000 12,976
Bradley Lake Operating Total 12,000 6,000 ‐ ‐ 12,976 12,976 (6,976) 12,000 12,976
Professional Consultants
Bradley Lake Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 252,368 252,368 (252,368) ‐ ‐
Travel ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 3,446 3,446 (3,446) ‐ ‐
Contractual 790,580 395,290 ‐ ‐ 55,382 55,382 339,908 111,818 84,662
Supplies & Materials ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 6,940 6,940 (6,940) ‐ ‐
Bradley Lake Operating Total 790,580 395,290 ‐ ‐ 318,136 318,136 77,154 111,818 84,662
FERC 920 & 930 ‐ Administrative Expense Total 1,189,980 594,990 ‐ ‐ 472,607 472,607 122,383 508,218 698,129
FERC 924 & 925 ‐ Insurance Premiums
Insurance Premiums
Bradley Lake Operating
Administrative Costs 1,015,505 507,753 12,530 ‐ 464,659 477,190 30,563 1,382,444 1,187,246
Bradley Lake Operating Total 1,015,505 507,753 12,530 ‐ 464,659 477,190 30,563 1,382,444 1,187,246
Risk Management
Bradley Lake Operating
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 25,000 ‐
Bradley Lake Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 25,000 ‐
FERC 924 & 925 ‐ Insurance Premiums Total 1,015,505 507,753 12,530 ‐ 464,659 477,190 30,563 1,407,444 1,187,246
FERC 923 ‐ Outside Services Employed
Outside Services Employed
Bradley Lake Operating
Consulting‐Administrative 249,375 124,688 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 124,688 ‐ ‐
Bradley Lake Operating Total 249,375 124,688 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 124,688 ‐ ‐
FERC 923 ‐ Outside Services Employed Total 249,375 124,688 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 124,688 ‐ ‐
FERC 928 ‐ Regulatory Commission Expenses
FERC Admin Fees
Bradley Lake Operating
Administrative Costs 150,000 75,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 75,000 150,000 172,565
Bradley Lake Operating Total 150,000 75,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 75,000 150,000 172,565
FERC Related Prof Services
BRADLEY FERC PART 12 INSPECTION
Administrative Costs 25,000 12,500 ‐ ‐ (10,237) (10,237) 22,737 25,000 57,905
BRADLEY FERC PART 12 INSPECTION Total 25,000 12,500 ‐ ‐ (10,237) (10,237) 22,737 25,000 57,905
BRADLEY CONTRACTUAL ENGINEER‐FERC LICENSE ISSUES
Administrative Costs 180,000 90,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 90,000 180,000 110,022
BRADLEY CONTRACTUAL ENGINEER‐FERC LICENSE ISSUES Total 180,000 90,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 90,000 180,000 110,022
FERC 928 ‐ Regulatory Commission Expenses Total 355,000 177,500 ‐ ‐ (10,237) (10,237) 187,737 355,000 340,493
O&M 4% Allocation to Battle Creek (236,473) (118,237) ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ (118,237) (190,710) ‐
Total Bradley Lake Budget 7,049,495 3,524,748 1,200,734 29,683 1,002,441 2,232,858 1,291,889 6,606,169 5,897,803
Page 5 of 12
Actual Projected Actual Projected Actual Projected
@ 6/30/21 TO REPAY Budget @ 6/30/22 TO REPAY Budget @ 6/30/23 TO REPAY Budget
Description Expense @6/30/21 FY21 Expense @6/30/22 FY22 Expense @6/30/23 FY23
R&C FUND PROJECTS
Governor 0.00 4,052,070.14 0.00 4,052,070.14 0.00 0.00 4,052,070.14 0.00
Replace RFLS 0.00 251,092.69 0.00 251,092.69 0.00 0.00 251,092.69 0.00
Replace Runners 0.00 1,946,732.79 0.00 1,946,732.79 0.00 0.00 1,946,732.79 0.00
Replace cable from dam to power house 0.00 2,321,922.94 0.00 2,321,922.94 0.00 0.00 2,321,922.94 0.00
Replace power system stabilizer 0.00 619,205.10 0.00 619,205.10 0.00 0.00 619,205.10 0.00
Replace two RTUs 0.00 86,905.27 0.00 86,905.27 0.00 0.00 86,905.27 0.00
Culvert Repairs 0.00 675,966.79 0.00 675,966.79 0.00 0.00 675,966.79 0.00
Tower Repair for Jack Frost Heaves 0.00 887,596.62 0.00 887,596.62 0.00 0.00 887,596.62 0.00
Replace Plant and SCADA Controls 0.00 1,344,683.05 0.00 1,344,683.05 0.00 0.00 1,344,683.05 0.00
Vibration Monitoring System 0.00 490.00 0.00 490.00 0.00 0.00 490.00 0.00
Fire Alarm System Replacement 64,452.15 105,631.24 150,000.00 28,593.37 134,224.61 150,000.00 2,392.50 136,617.11 1,500,000.00
Battle Creek Diversion 0.00 1,170,000.00 0.00 1,170,000.00 0.00 0.00 1,170,000.00 0.00
Bradley Replace Electro‐Mechanical Relays 0.00 1,277,197.06 0.00 1,277,197.06 0.00 0.00 1,277,197.06 0.00
Fishwater Screen Debris Removal 0.00 312,236.43 0.00 312,236.43 0.00 0.00 312,236.43 0.00
Turbine Nozzel Repair 0.00 1,428,861.07 0.00 1,428,861.07 0.00 0.00 1,428,861.07 0.00
Spillway Raise 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
SVC replacement Daves Creek | Soldotna 0.00 8,517,991.11 0.00 8,517,991.11 0.00 0.00 8,517,991.11 0.00
Equipment Storage Shed 0.00 510,550.13 0.00 510,550.13 0.00 0.00 510,550.13 0.00
Emerson Operating System Upgrade 0.00 622,665.00 0.00 622,665.00 0.00 0.00 622,665.00 0.00
Generator #2 Replacement 0.00 953,212.71 0.00 953,212.71 0.00 0.00 953,212.71 0.00
Road Grader 0.00 0.00 370,000.00 342,330.00 342,330.00 0.00 0.00 342,330.00 0.00
Battle Creek Construction 3,739,590.93 3,739,590.93 3,666,000.00 0.00 3,739,590.93 0.00 0.00 3,739,590.93 0.00
Battle Creek Cash Call‐Expended 750,000.00 750,000.00 750,000.00 0.00 750,000.00 0.00 0.00 750,000.00 0.00
Battle Creek Cash Call‐Paid by Utilities (750,000.00) (750,000.00) (750,000.00) 0.00 (750,000.00) 0.00 0.00 (750,000.00) 0.00
Needle Repairs 1,482,791.23 1,482,791.23 1,500,000.00 0.00 1,482,791.23 0.00 0.00 1,482,791.23 0.00
Construct Additional Residence 0.00 0.00 69,593.86 69,593.86 980,000.00 38,749.58 108,343.44 0.00
Spillway Raise & Expansion Project 0.00 0.00 547,699.29 547,699.29 800,000.00 392,102.47 939,801.76 1,500,000.00
5,286,834.31 32,307,392.30 5,686,000.00 988,216.52 33,295,608.82 1,930,000.00 433,244.55 33,728,853.37 3,000,000.00
Current Year R&C Repayment (2,209,060.11) (2,435,902.00) (2,757,013.00)
Adjust balance to $5 million 0.00 0.00 0.00
Interest in Fund Applied to Repayment (269,487.40) (42,921.43) (6,421.82)
Net Transfer from Revenue Fund (2,478,547.51) (2,478,823.43) (2,763,434.82)
Cumulative Prior Years R&C Repayments (25,518,390.50) (27,707,352.30) (29,808,016.74)
Due to (from) Utilities 289,585.71 378,158.99 983,348.44
Adjust Due to R&C Actual 0.00 0.00 0.00
(25,228,804.79) (27,329,193.31) (28,824,668.30)
NET DUE TO R&C FUND 4,600,040.00 3,487,592.08 2,140,750.25
R&C FUND CASH FLOW PROJECTION
Beginning Investment Balance 3,922,231.19 1,069,522.90 2,363,807.74
Disbursements‐current year ‐Accrual (4,906,857.12) (514,975.69) 0.00
Disbursements‐prior year accrued (406,104.23) (379,977.19) (473,240.83)
Utilities' R&C Refund (18,294.45) (289,585.71) (378,158.99)
Net other cash inflow(outflow)0.00 0.00 0.00
Current year interest earnings 269,487.40 42,921.43 6,421.82
Participants Contributions to R&C Fund 2,209,060.11 2,435,902.00 2,757,013.00
Ending Investment Balance 1,069,522.90 2,363,807.74 4,275,842.74
Accrued Due to (from) Utilities (289,585.71) (378,158.99) (983,348.44)
R&C payable back to the revenue fund 0.00 0.00 0.00
Accrued R&C vendor Payable at Year End (379,977.19) (473,240.83) (433,244.55)
PROJECTED NET DUE + ENDING INVESTMENT BALANCE 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00
REPAYMENT AMOUNT
$1,649,677 X 25%
$4,139,810 X 25%
$238,606.15 X 25%
$954,181.79 x 25%
$756,665.11 x 25% all 4 years
$1,455,830.05 x 25% all 4 years
$1,401,948.53 x 25% all 4 years
$1,834,499.92 x 25% yr 1 | 25% yr 2 | 50% yr 3
$3,330,802.80 x 25% yr 1 | 32% yr 2 | 25% yr 3 |18% yr4
$5,644,193.08 x 25% all 4 years
$1,341,405.96 x 25% all 4 years (FY18) 4th 335,351.49
$1,715,556.80 x 25% all 4 years (FY19) 3rd 428,889.20 4th 428,889.20
$412,050.13 x 25% all 4 years (FY20) 2nd 103,012.53 3rd 103,012.53 4th 103,012.53
$5,286,834.31 x 25% all 4 years (FY21) 1st 1,321,708.58 2nd 1,321,708.58 3rd 1,321,708.58
FY22 ACTUALS 1st 247,054.13 2nd 247,054.13
1st 108,311.14
2,188,961.80 2,100,664.44 1,780,086.38
BRADLEY LAKE
R&C FUND DISBURSEMENTS AND REPAYMENTS
SCHEDULE D
Expenses for the period 07/01/22 to 12/31/22
Page 6 of 12
FY21 FY21 FY22 FY22 FY23 FY23
Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual
Battle Creek Diversion 320,000 7,913 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Battle Creek Associated Costs ‐ ‐ 15,000 22,196 15,000 7,482
Vent Enlargment ‐ ‐ 50,000 13,077 50,000 32,182
Pressure Sensor w SCADA ‐ ‐ 25,000 2,807 25,000 168
Power feed to LBC Bridge ‐ ‐ 25,000 19,548 ‐ ‐
Total Non R&C Capital Purchases 320,000 7,913 115,000 57,628 90,000 39,832
BATTLE CREEK
CAPITAL PURCHASES NOT FUNDED BY R&C FUND
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Battle Creek Capital Purchases
Schedule E
Expenses for the period 07/01/22 to 12/31/22
Page 7 of 12
BATTLE CREEK OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
SCHEDULE F
BUDGET TO ACTUAL EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD 07/01/2022 THROUGH 12/31/2022
FY 23 FY 22
FY23 Approved
Budget
BUDGET %
07/01/2022 ‐
12/31/2022 HEA Actual CEA Actual AEA Actual Total Actual
(Over) Under
Budget to Date
FY22 Approved
Budget FY22 Actual
Summary by expense type
Direct Purchases/Travel ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
AIDEA Staff Professional Services (Direct)‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,279 1,279 (1,279) 71,000 26,505
AIDEA Support Staff (Indirect)‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 17,231 741 10,515 28,488 (28,488) ‐ 48,457
Travel ‐ ‐ 29 ‐ 144 173 (173) ‐ 358
Training ‐ ‐ 55 ‐ ‐ 55 (55) ‐ 682
Contractual 126,000 63,000 8,522 ‐ 19,700 28,222 34,778 126,000 149,484
Consulting‐Administrative ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 39 39 (39) ‐ 60
Supplies & Materials ‐ ‐ 1,228 ‐ 289 1,518 (1,518) ‐ 9,628
Other Costs ‐ ‐ 595 496 ‐ 1,091 (1,091) ‐ 2,376
Equipment, Furniture and Machinery ‐ ‐ 51 ‐ ‐ 51 (51) ‐ 239
Administrative Costs 54,900 27,450 522 ‐ 24,419 24,941 2,509 11,900 131,166
Indirect Costs ‐ ‐ 21,796 ‐ ‐ 21,796 (21,796) ‐ 50,826
O&M 4% Allocation to Battle Creek 236,473 118,237 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 118,237 190,710 ‐
Total Battle Creek Budget 417,373 208,687 50,031 1,237 56,385 107,652 101,034 399,610 419,780
FERC 535 ‐ Operation Supervision & Engineering
Operations Sup/Eng
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 2,023 ‐ ‐ 2,023 (2,023) ‐ 3,989
Travel ‐ ‐ 22 ‐ ‐ 22 (22) ‐ 77
Training ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 192
Supplies & Materials ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 44
Indirect Costs ‐ ‐ 2,639 ‐ ‐ 2,639 (2,639) ‐ 5,485
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ 4,684 ‐ ‐ 4,684 (4,684) ‐ 9,788
FERC 535 ‐ Operation Supervision & Engineering Total ‐ ‐ 4,684 ‐ ‐ 4,684 (4,684) ‐ 9,788
FERC 537 ‐ Hydraulic Expenses
Hydraulic Expenses
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 1,150 ‐ ‐ 1,150 (1,150) ‐ 3,019
Travel ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 3
Contractual 81,000 40,500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 40,500 81,000 66,287
Supplies & Materials ‐ ‐ 17 ‐ ‐ 17 (17) ‐ 22
Indirect Costs ‐ ‐ 1,642 ‐ ‐ 1,642 (1,642) ‐ 4,014
Battle Creek Operating Total 81,000 40,500 2,808 ‐ ‐ 2,808 37,692 81,000 73,345
FERC 537 ‐ Hydraulic Expenses Total 81,000 40,500 2,808 ‐ ‐ 2,808 37,692 81,000 73,345
FERC 538 ‐ Electric Expenses
Electric Expenses
BRADLEY CIRCUITS/RADIO TO BERNICE LK
BRADLEY CIRCUITS/RADIO TO BERNICE LK Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 3,327 ‐ ‐ 3,327 (3,327) ‐ 9,566
Travel ‐ ‐ 7 ‐ ‐ 7 (7) ‐ 206
Training ‐ ‐ 13 ‐ ‐ 13 (13) ‐ 461
Supplies & Materials ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,776
Indirect Costs ‐ ‐ 3,975 ‐ ‐ 3,975 (3,975) ‐ 9,271
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ 7,322 ‐ ‐ 7,322 (7,322) ‐ 21,282
FERC 538 ‐ Electric Expenses Total ‐ ‐ 7,322 ‐ ‐ 7,322 (7,322) ‐ 21,282
FERC 539 ‐ Misc. Hydraulic Power Generation Expenses
Misc Hydro Power Exp
BRADLEY CIRCUITS/RADIO TO BERNICE LK
Other Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 538
BRADLEY CIRCUITS/RADIO TO BERNICE LK Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 538
BRADLEY CIRCUITS BERNICE LK TO ANCH
Other Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 84
BRADLEY CIRCUITS BERNICE LK TO ANCH Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 84
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 1,445 ‐ ‐ 1,445 (1,445) ‐ 2,952
Training ‐ ‐ 42 ‐ ‐ 42 (42) ‐ 28
Contractual ‐ ‐ 4,580 ‐ ‐ 4,580 (4,580) ‐ 9,860
Supplies & Materials ‐ ‐ 275 ‐ ‐ 275 (275) ‐ 1,288
Other Costs ‐ ‐ 595 496 ‐ 1,091 (1,091) ‐ 1,742
Indirect Costs ‐ ‐ 1,881 ‐ ‐ 1,881 (1,881) ‐ 4,044
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ 8,818 496 ‐ 9,314 (9,314) ‐ 19,915
FERC 539 ‐ Misc. Hydraulic Power Generation Expenses Total ‐ ‐ 8,818 496 ‐ 9,314 (9,314) ‐ 20,537
FERC 541 ‐ Maintenance Supervision & Engineering
Maint Supervision/Eng
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 1,892 ‐ ‐ 1,892 (1,892) ‐ 4,358
Indirect Costs ‐ ‐ 2,639 ‐ ‐ 2,639 (2,639) ‐ 5,530
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ 4,531 ‐ ‐ 4,531 (4,531) ‐ 9,888
FERC 541 ‐ Maintenance Supervision & Engineering Total ‐ ‐ 4,531 ‐ ‐ 4,531 (4,531) ‐ 9,888
FERC 542 ‐ Maintenance of Structures
Maintenance of Structures
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 1,047 ‐ ‐ 1,047 (1,047) ‐ 2,721
Contractual ‐ ‐ 1,134 ‐ ‐ 1,134 (1,134) ‐ 2,715
Supplies & Materials ‐ ‐ 107 ‐ ‐ 107 (107) ‐ 1,604
Equipment, Furniture and Machinery ‐ ‐ 2 ‐ ‐ 2 (2) ‐ 239
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 317
Indirect Costs ‐ ‐ 1,497 ‐ ‐ 1,497 (1,497) ‐ 3,419
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ 3,786 ‐ ‐ 3,786 (3,786) ‐ 11,015
FERC 542 ‐ Maintenance of Structures Total ‐ ‐ 3,786 ‐ ‐ 3,786 (3,786) ‐ 11,015
FERC 543 ‐ Maintenance of Reservoirs, Dams & Waterways
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
Page 8 of 12
BATTLE CREEK OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
SCHEDULE F
BUDGET TO ACTUAL EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD 07/01/2022 THROUGH 12/31/2022
FY 23 FY 22
FY23 Approved
Budget
BUDGET %
07/01/2022 ‐
12/31/2022 HEA Actual CEA Actual AEA Actual Total Actual
(Over) Under
Budget to Date
FY22 Approved
Budget FY22 Actual
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
Maint Res, Dams, WWays
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 26 ‐ ‐ 26 (26) ‐ 20
Indirect Costs ‐ ‐ 12 ‐ ‐ 12 (12) ‐ 24
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ 38 ‐ ‐ 38 (38) ‐ 44
FERC 543 ‐ Maintenance of Reservoirs, Dams & Waterways Total ‐ ‐ 38 ‐ ‐ 38 (38) ‐ 44
FERC 544 ‐ Maintenance of Electric Plant
Maintenance of Elec Plant
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 4,170 ‐ ‐ 4,170 (4,170) ‐ 11,246
Travel ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 18
Contractual ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 4,839
Supplies & Materials ‐ ‐ 203 ‐ ‐ 203 (203) ‐ 906
Indirect Costs ‐ ‐ 5,961 ‐ ‐ 5,961 (5,961) ‐ 15,296
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ 10,333 ‐ ‐ 10,333 (10,333) ‐ 32,304
FERC 544 ‐ Maintenance of Electric Plant Total ‐ ‐ 10,333 ‐ ‐ 10,333 (10,333) ‐ 32,304
FERC 545 ‐ Maintenance of Misc. Hydraulic Plant
Maint of Misc Hydr Plant
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 1,110 ‐ ‐ 1,110 (1,110) ‐ 2,736
Contractual ‐ ‐ 163 ‐ ‐ 163 (163) ‐ ‐
Supplies & Materials ‐ ‐ 363 ‐ ‐ 363 (363) ‐ 3,188
Equipment, Furniture and Machinery ‐ ‐ 49 ‐ ‐ 49 (49) ‐ ‐
Indirect Costs ‐ ‐ 1,551 ‐ ‐ 1,551 (1,551) ‐ 3,744
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ 3,237 ‐ ‐ 3,237 (3,237) ‐ 9,668
FERC 545 ‐ Maintenance of Misc. Hydraulic Plant Total ‐ ‐ 3,237 ‐ ‐ 3,237 (3,237) ‐ 9,668
FERC 556 ‐ System Control & Load Dispatching
System Cntl & Load Disp
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 482 ‐ ‐ 482 (482) ‐ 542
Contractual ‐ ‐ 1,959 ‐ ‐ 1,959 (1,959) ‐ 4,166
Supplies & Materials ‐ ‐ 160 ‐ ‐ 160 (160) ‐ 303
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ 2,600 ‐ ‐ 2,600 (2,600) ‐ 5,011
Snow Measurement
Battle Creek Operating
Contractual ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 493
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 493
Seismic Service
Battle Creek Operating
Contractual ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,130 1,130 (1,130) ‐ 2,147
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,130 1,130 (1,130) ‐ 2,147
Streamguaging Serv
Battle Creek Operating
Contractual 45,000 22,500 ‐ ‐ 16,262 16,262 6,238 45,000 52,793
Battle Creek Operating Total 45,000 22,500 ‐ ‐ 16,262 16,262 6,238 45,000 52,793
Permits
Battle Creek Operating
Other Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 12
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 12
FERC 556 ‐ System Control & Load Dispatching Total 45,000 22,500 2,600 ‐ 17,392 19,992 2,508 45,000 60,457
FERC 562 ‐ Station Expenses
Station Expenses
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 480 741 ‐ 1,221 (1,221) ‐ 7,242
Travel ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 11
Contractual ‐ ‐ 561 ‐ ‐ 561 (561) ‐ 5,338
Supplies & Materials ‐ ‐ 105 ‐ ‐ 105 (105) ‐ 2,271
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ 1,146 741 ‐ 1,886 (1,886) ‐ 14,862
FERC 562 ‐ Station Expenses Total ‐ ‐ 1,146 741 ‐ 1,886 (1,886) ‐ 14,862
FERC 571 ‐ Maintenance of Overhead Lines
Maint of OH Lines
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ 79 ‐ ‐ 79 (79) ‐ 67
Contractual ‐ ‐ 125 ‐ ‐ 125 (125) ‐ 106
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ 205 ‐ ‐ 205 (205) ‐ 174
FERC 571 ‐ Maintenance of Overhead Lines Total ‐ ‐ 205 ‐ ‐ 205 (205) ‐ 174
FERC 920 & 930 ‐ Administrative Expense
AEA Bradley Fixed Admin Fees
Bradley Lake Operating
Bradley Lake Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Battle Creek Operating
AIDEA Staff Professional Services (Direct)‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,279 1,279 (1,279) 71,000 26,505
Travel ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 42
Consulting‐Administrative ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 39 39 (39) ‐ 60
Administrative Costs 43,000 21,500 ‐ ‐ 1,894 1,894 19,606 ‐ 30,409
Battle Creek Operating Total 43,000 21,500 ‐ ‐ 3,212 3,212 18,288 71,000 57,016
Shared ‐ 100% AEA Bradley Lake
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 681
Shared ‐ 100% AEA Bradley Lake Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 681
Shared ‐ 100% AEA Battle Creek
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 9,533
Shared ‐ 100% AEA Battle Creek Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 9,533
Operating Committee Exp‐Audit
Battle Creek Operating
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 12 12 (12) ‐ 1,166
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 12 12 (12) ‐ 1,166
Page 9 of 12
BATTLE CREEK OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
SCHEDULE F
BUDGET TO ACTUAL EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD 07/01/2022 THROUGH 12/31/2022
FY 23 FY 22
FY23 Approved
Budget
BUDGET %
07/01/2022 ‐
12/31/2022 HEA Actual CEA Actual AEA Actual Total Actual
(Over) Under
Budget to Date
FY22 Approved
Budget FY22 Actual
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
Operating Committee Exp‐Legal
Bradley Battle Creek Diversion
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 133
Bradley Battle Creek Diversion Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 133
Battle Creek Operating
Administrative Costs 5,000 2,500 ‐ ‐ 3,039 3,039 (539) 5,000 17,373
Battle Creek Operating Total 5,000 2,500 ‐ ‐ 3,039 3,039 (539) 5,000 17,373
Operat Committee Exp‐Arbitrage
Battle Creek Operating
Administrative Costs 2,000 1,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,000 2,000 1,692
Battle Creek Operating Total 2,000 1,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,000 2,000 1,692
Trust & Account Fees
Bradley Battle Creek Diversion
Bradley Battle Creek Diversion Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Battle Creek Operating
Administrative Costs 4,800 2,400 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,400 4,800 4,058
Battle Creek Operating Total 4,800 2,400 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,400 4,800 4,058
Misc Admin
Battle Creek Operating
Administrative Costs 100 50 ‐ ‐ 541 541 (491) 100 654
Battle Creek Operating Total 100 50 ‐ ‐ 541 541 (491) 100 654
Professional Consultants
Bradley Lake Operating
Bradley Lake Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Battle Creek Operating
Labor & Benefits ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 10,515 10,515 (10,515) ‐ ‐
Travel ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 144 144 (144) ‐ ‐
Contractual ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,308 2,308 (2,308) ‐ 739
Supplies & Materials ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 289 289 (289) ‐ ‐
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 13,256 13,256 (13,256) ‐ 739
FERC 920 & 930 ‐ Administrative Expense Total 54,900 27,450 ‐ ‐ 20,059 20,059 7,391 82,900 93,044
FERC 924 & 925 ‐ Insurance Premiums
Insurance Premiums
Battle Creek Operating
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ 522 ‐ 19,361 19,883 (19,883) ‐ 56,628
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ 522 ‐ 19,361 19,883 (19,883) ‐ 56,628
FERC 924 & 925 ‐ Insurance Premiums Total ‐ ‐ 522 ‐ 19,361 19,883 (19,883) ‐ 56,628
FERC 928 ‐ Regulatory Commission Expenses
FERC Admin Fees
Battle Creek Operating
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,685
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,685
FERC Related Prof Services
BRADLEY FERC PART 12 INSPECTION
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 566
BRADLEY FERC PART 12 INSPECTION Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 566
BRADLEY CONTRACTUAL ENGINEER‐FERC LICENSE ISSUES
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,075
BRADLEY CONTRACTUAL ENGINEER‐FERC LICENSE ISSUES Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,075
Battle Creek Operating
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ (427) (427) 427 ‐ 3,419
Battle Creek Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ (427) (427) 427 ‐ 3,419
FERC 928 ‐ Regulatory Commission Expenses Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ (427) (427) 427 ‐ 6,745
O&M Allocation to Battle Creek 236,473 118,237 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 118,237 190,710 ‐
Total Battle Creek Budget 417,373 208,687 50,031 1,237 56,385 107,652 101,034 399,610 419,780
Page 10 of 12
FY21 FY21 FY22 FY22 FY23 FY23
Amended Amended Amended
Budget Actuals Budget Actuals Budget Actuals
SSQ Line Access Documentation 150,000 3,127 ‐ 144,482 ‐ 23,555
SSQ Line Acquisition Costs 40,000 46,029 ‐ 2,026 ‐ ‐
SSQ Soldotna‐Qtz Ck 230kV Construction ‐ ‐ 750,000 91,051 ‐ 94,285
SSQ Line Due Diligence Inspect/Repair O/S Fire ZNE ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,350 ‐ ‐
SSQ Line ‐ 69kV Remediation ‐ ‐ ‐ 10,581 ‐ 1,657
Total Non R&C Capital Purchases 190,000 49,156 750,000 250,489 ‐ 119,497
SSQ LINE CAPITAL PURCHASES NOT FUNDED BY R&C FUND
Expenses for the period 07/01/22 to 12/31/22
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
SSQ Line Capital Purchases
Schedule H
Page 11 of 12
ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY
SSQ LINE OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
SCHEDULE I
BUDGET TO ACTUAL EXPENSES
FOR THE PERIOD 07/01/2022 THROUGH 12/31/2022
FY 23 FY 22
FY23 Approved
Budget
BUDGET %
07/01/2022 ‐
12/31/2022 HEA Actual CEA Actual AEA Actual Total Actual
(Over) Under
Budget to Date
FY22 Approved
Budget FY22 Actual
Summary by expense type
AIDEA Staff Professional Services (Direct)‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 42,000 8,473
AIDEA Support Staff (Indirect)‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Labor & Benefits 56,999 28,500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 28,500 85,820 5,158
Travel ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 404
Contractual 200,000 100,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 100,000 250,000 182,178
Permitting ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,848
Supplies & Materials 25,000 12,500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 12,500 56,992 1,561
Other Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 7,711 1,250
Administrative Costs 55,000 27,500 ‐ ‐ 628 628 26,872 2,000 66,128
Total SSQ Line Budget 336,999 168,500 ‐ ‐ 628 628 167,872 444,523 268,001
FERC 540 ‐ Rents
FERC Land Use Fee
SSQ Line Operating
Other Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,250
SSQ Line Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,250
FERC 540 ‐ Rents Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,250
FERC 556 ‐ System Control & Load Dispatching
Permits
SSQ Line Operating
Permitting ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,848
SSQ Line Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,848
FERC 556 ‐ System Control & Load Dispatching Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,848
FERC 571 ‐ Maintenance of Overhead Lines
Maint of OH Lines
SSQ Line Operating
Labor & Benefits 56,999 28,500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 28,500 85,820 5,158
Travel ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 404
Contractual 200,000 100,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 100,000 250,000 182,178
Supplies & Materials 25,000 12,500 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 12,500 56,992 1,561
Other Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 7,711 ‐
SSQ Line Operating Total 281,999 141,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 141,000 400,523 189,301
FERC 571 ‐ Maintenance of Overhead Lines Total 281,999 141,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 141,000 400,523 189,301
FERC 920 & 930 ‐ Administrative Expense
AEA Bradley Fixed Admin Fees
SSQ Capital Acquisition
SSQ Capital Acquisition Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
SSQ Line Operating
AIDEA Staff Professional Services (Direct)‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 42,000 8,473
Administrative Costs 53,000 26,500 ‐ ‐ 628 628 25,872 ‐ 39,776
SSQ Line Operating Total 53,000 26,500 ‐ ‐ 628 628 25,872 42,000 48,250
Shared ‐ 100% AEA SQ Line
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,310
Shared ‐ 100% AEA SQ Line Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2,310
Shared ‐ 100% AEA Audit
Shared ‐ 100% AEA Audit Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Operating Committee Exp‐Legal
SSQ Line Operating
Administrative Costs ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 22,042
SSQ Line Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 22,042
Trust & Account Fees
SSQ Line Operating
Administrative Costs 2,000 1,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,000 2,000 2,000
SSQ Line Operating Total 2,000 1,000 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1,000 2,000 2,000
FERC 920 & 930 ‐ Administrative Expense Total 55,000 27,500 ‐ ‐ 628 628 26,872 44,000 74,602
FERC 928 ‐ Regulatory Commission Expenses
FERC Admin Fees
SSQ Line Operating
SSQ Line Operating Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
FERC 928 ‐ Regulatory Commission Expenses Total ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
Total SSQ Line Budget 336,999 168,500 ‐ ‐ 628 628 167,872 444,523 268,001
Page 12 of 12
12 of 12
1/13/2023