Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2023-05-19 AEA Agenda and docs
813 West Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage, Alaska 99503 T 907.771.3000 Toll Free 888.300.8534 F 907.771.3044 REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG Alaska Energy Authority Board Meeting Friday, May 19, 2023 8:30 AM AGENDA Dial 1 (888) 585-9008 and enter code 212-753-619# Public comment guidelines are below. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL BOARD MEMBERS 3. AGENDA APPROVAL 4. PRIOR MINUTES – April 11, 2023 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS (2 minutes per person) see call in number above 6. NEW BUSINESS - None 7. OLD BUSINESS - None 8. DIRECTOR COMMENTS A. Responses to Board Questions from April Board Meeting B. Governor’s State Energy Security Task Force C. AEA Infrastructure Awards Tracker: i. Electric Vehicle Update ii. Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) - Sec. 40101(d) - Preventing Outages and Enhancing the Resilience of the Electric Grid Formula Grants Application iii. Industrial Decarbonization and Emissions Reduction Demonstration-to-Deployment (DE-FOA-0002936) Near-Net-Zero Facility Build Project – Trident / AEA Concept Paper D. Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) i. IRA Tax Incentive Overview E. Capital Budget – Unknown until Session ends (5/17/2023) F. Legislative Update G. Cook Inlet Gas Supply H. Community Outreach I. Articles of Interest J. Next Regularly Scheduled AEA Board Meeting Wednesday, June 21, 2023 9. BOARD COMMENTS 10. ADJOURNMENT Public Comment Guidelines Members of the public who wish to provide written comments, please email your comments to publiccomment@akenergyauthority.org by no later than 4 p.m. on the day before the meeting, so they can be shared with board members prior to the meeting. On the meeting day, callers will enter the teleconference muted. After board roll call and agenda approval, we will ask callers to press *9 on their phones if they wish to make a public comment. This will initiate the hand-raising function. Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2 We will unmute callers individually in the order the calls were received. When an individual is unmuted, you will hear, “It is now your turn to speak.” Please identify yourself and make your public comments. 813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG Alaska Energy Authority DRAFT BOARD MEETING MINUTES Tuesday, April 11, 2023 Anchorage, Alaska 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Pruhs called the meeting of the Alaska Energy Authority to order on April 11, 2023, at 8:30 am. A quorum was established. 2. ROLL CALL BOARD MEMBERS Members present: Chair Dana Pruhs (Public Member); Vice-Chair Bill Kendig (Public Member); Albert Fogle (Public Member); Adam Crum (Commissioner DOR); Julie Sande (Commissioner DCCED); Bill Vivlamore (Public Member); and Randy Eledge (Public Member). 3. AGENDA APPROVAL Chair Pruhs requested to add Item 9. Executive Session to discuss personnel. MOTION: A motion was made by Vice-Chair Kendig to amend the agenda, including Item 9. Executive Session to discuss personnel, and moving Board Comments to Item 10., and Adjournment to Item 11. Motion seconded Mr. Fogle. The motion to amend the agenda passed without objection. MOTION: A motion was made by Vice-Chair Kendig to approve the amended agenda, including Item 9. Executive Session to discuss personnel, and moving Board Comments to Item 10., and Adjournment to Item 11. Motion seconded Mr. Fogle. The motion to approve the amended agenda passed without objection. 4. PRIOR MINUTES – March 1, 2023 MOTION: A motion was made by Vice-Chair Kendig to approve the prior minutes of March 1, 2023. Motion seconded by Mr. Fogle. The motion to approve the minutes of March 1, 2023, passed without objection. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS (2 minutes per person) There were no members of the public online or in-person who requested to comment. 6. NEW BUSINESS Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 13 A. AEA Cash and Investments Curtis Thayer, Executive Director and Secretary-Treasurer, informed that this item was at the request of Chair Pruhs considering the recent banking situation and issues. Staff contacted Key Bank, who provided a letter containing information regarding the safety of AEA and AIDEA’s assets. Mr. Thayer informed that US Bank provided a letter and a presentation regarding bank strength and stability. Mr. Thayer advised that, if requested, he could provide confidential information to the members regarding AEA’s funding and rates of return. The $166 million in bonding is in a trust account with US Bank. It is invested in government securities and is protected. It is earning approximately 3% to 5% income. $61 million of AEA’s assets are at Key Bank. Mr. Thayer discussed that AEA has over $600 million in funds. Most of those funds rest with the State and are managed by the State. AEA draws upon them, as needed for PCE, grants, or other appropriations from the Legislature. Chair Pruhs asked Commissioner Crum if the Department of Revenue oversees the cash balances of the banks. Commissioner Crum agreed. Chair Pruhs asked if the State Department of Revenue uses Key Bank. Commissioner Crum discussed the State uses a multitude of different banks. He gave the example that Jefferies is utilized to administer and sell the bonds. Commissioner Crum noted that he could provide a listing of the institutions utilized. Chair Pruhs agreed. He asked if Commissioner Crum is comfortable with the current banking situation. Commissioner Crum discussed the turmoil and the self-rescue aspects internationally to ensure that the mid-size banks were sustained. The large banks have regulations that keep them upright. He believes the situation has continued to stabilize. There were no additional questions. 7. OLD BUSINESS A. SSQ Line Update Mr. Thayer requested Bryan Carey, AEA, to present the update and PowerPoint included in the Board’s packets. Mr. Thayer provided background information of AEA’s purchase of the Sterling to Quartz Creek (SSQ), the bonding for the rebuild, and the coordination with Chugach Electric Association (CEA) for engineering. Mr. Carey explained that there are two lines in the SSQ section. The existing 115 kV has a planned upgrade and is used for Bradley Lake power. The other 69 kV line is out of use and the poles and wires were removed earlier this year. The final closeout report and final inspection remains for that removal. Mr. Carey discussed that the 115 kV line will be upgraded to a 230 kV line, and will be ready to be energized with the rest of the system, allowing additional capacity. The Bradley Lake Management Committee (BPMC) selected CEA to manage the design and procurement for the project. Work is occurring on the project under CEA’s direction. The project is phased in order minimize the effects of the temporary loss of access to Bradley energy. The three phases will occur over three years, with a maximum outage of 60 days per year. Chair Pruhs asked if AEA is the direct owner of the project and is the one going out for contractors. Alaska Energy Authority Page 3 of 13 Mr. Carey explained that AEA is the owner of the SSQ Line. AEA is working with the BPMC, who selected CEA as project manager to procure the contractors for design and engineers. Chair Pruhs asked if CEA is to procure contractors for construction. Mr. Carey indicated that CEA has not yet been requested to procure construction contractors. He noted that CEA is currently upgrading their system and is experienced in upgrades. The BPMC could take the lead on procuring contractors for construction or could select CEA to proceed with construction. Chair Pruhs asked Mr. Thayer for his comments. Mr. Thayer discussed that the BPMC considered a united design for the upgrades to the line. CEA is connected to Quartz Creek north. Additionally, Homer Electric Association (HEA) owns lines from Bradley Junction north. HEA will complete their upgrade design in conjunction with the SSQ Line upgrades. Discussions will occur at the BPMC regarding utilization of a single construction contractor or multiple construction contractors for the line upgrades. Chair Pruhs asked from a public policy standpoint, if the procurement of a construction contractor will be open or if it will be limited to CEA’s and HEA’s contractor list. Mr. Thayer indicated that the construction will be competitively bid. AEA has not decided if the construction bid will be open to everybody. The focus has been on the collaboration of the design, engineering, and determining the cost of each of the sections. Chair Pruhs requested that the discussion and recommendation regarding opening the construction bid to all contractors is brought before AEA Board prior to the implementation of a decision. Mr. Thayer agreed. Mr. Carey discussed that CEA project manager has proceeded with discussions with the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge) regarding land rights, including identifying landowners, easements, and cultural resources. Chair Pruhs inquired if the existing poles will be replaced. Mr. Carey agreed. He explained that the existing poles are approximately 40 years old, and the Refuge has concerns regarding the treated poles. Consideration is that the new poles will be taller and will be made of steel. Mr. Carey indicated that the permit conditions appear to allow for the upgrade of the line without the full NEPA process. Chair Pruhs asked how many permits are needed to begin the upgrade. Mr. Carey did not have the specific information and believes at least 10 permits are necessary to begin. Mr. Fogle asked Mr. Carey for his understanding of the working relationship with the federal partners with the Refuge. Mr. Carey discussed that the working relationship is fine. He believes the Refuge is pleased that the removal of the 69 kV line occurred quickly. There was no damage to vegetation because the removal occurred when snow cover was present. CEA’s design engineer and AEA staff continues to meet with the Refuge to discuss permitting issues. It is unknown if the Refuge will take a position regarding NEPA. Mr. Fogle asked Mr. Carey if it is possible that Phase 3 could begin before Phase 2, if all the permits for Phase 2 are not approved at the time, and then return to Phase 2 after Phase 3 is completed. Mr. Carey indicated that is a possibility. Phase 3 also includes a portion of the Refuge area, and the same issues could be present. Mr. Carey discussed that Phase 3 at Cooper Landing has Alaska Energy Authority Page 4 of 13 enormous cultural issues. He noted that the current highway design work is being slowed by the 20 to 30 archaeologists onsite looking for cultural artifacts. Similarly, Phase 3 will need clearance for cultural issues, which could considerably slow the design and construction process. Mr. Carey continued the presentation and noted that work will proceed on the existing right-of- ways while further developments occur with permitting. Phase 1 pole locations have been determined, staked, and drilled for geotechnical information. Continued evaluation will occur during the next month. Mr. Carey reviewed the SSQ Project timeline. Phase 1 procurement begins in October. The poles are a considerable cost of the project. In order to reduce the overall cost of the poles, the poles will be purchased directly by CEA and provided to the contractor. Additionally, the procurement of the poles will assist in maintaining the project timeline. The poles would be purchased before a contractor is selected. Chair Pruhs inquired if the transmission line will be procured directly. Mr. Carey indicated that information has not yet been determined. Chair Pruhs asked if there is a project budget. He commented that it is odd to buy products for the project without knowing the entire cost of the project. Mr. Carey explained that CEA has been upgrading the various sections of the line during the past five years. CEA has historical cost estimates for poles and cost of contractors, not including the recent inflationary increases, which will be discussed later in the presentation. Chair Pruhs asked if the permits will be approved when the poles are purchased. Mr. Carey anticipates that the permits for Phase 1 will be obtained before the poles are purchased. Mr. Carey reviewed the timeline showing the completion of Phase 3 in 2028. It is possible the timeline could be improved if the utilities decide that outages could exceed 60 days per year. Discussions have occurred regarding outages of 90 days per year. Conversely, the timeline may be delayed if there is non-availability of equipment needed. The SSQ Project timeline does not include the substation upgrade. He noted that the lead time for the various transformers is upwards of three to four years. Mr. Carey outlined the estimated costs in the presentation that were provided by CEA’s historical data. He noted that the information will be revised as new costs are revealed from CEA’s current upgrade projects that will be completed in 2025. Mr. Carey highlighted the project risks. The construction schedule competes with other Railbelt projects, and it is necessary to coordinate the timing of the line being down. The Refuge has communicated their preferences, including the option of an underground line, which would add a considerable cost to the project. AEA is not supportive of the option due to the increased expense. The Refuge prefers steel poles. There will be access issues during construction related to wildlife and habitat. Chair Pruhs inquired as to the construction risk that should be discussed with the project risks. These include claims, change orders, and similar issues that occurred at Bradley Lake. Mr. Carey indicated there is always project risk. Ways to mitigate the risk include obtaining the materials, permitting and geotechnical information before construction begins. Most of the area is close to the highway, which improves access issues. Mr. Carey discussed his understanding that CEA’s 230 kV upgrade projects have not experienced substantial issues with construction risk. Chair Pruhs Alaska Energy Authority Page 5 of 13 asked if Mr. Carey has information regarding the budget changes CEA experienced with their upgrades. Mr. Carey does not have that information. Chair Pruhs commented on the importance of considering the recent lessons learned from the Bradley Lake project and implementing mitigations for prevention and proper practice. Mr. Thayer agreed, and indicated that the same contractor will not be utilized. Mr. Carey discussed that a fiber communication line will run alongside the cable that will be used for Bradley Lake and will connect to the utilities. There is potential of leasing the unused fiber capability to other entities. Chair Pruhs asked if AEA will own the fiber. Mr. Carey agreed the fiber on that section will be owned by AEA. Chair Pruhs asked what process would be utilized to determine who gets to use the communications fiber. He asked if the utilities would control the fiber or if AEA would control the fiber. He asked if ACS or GCI will use the fiber. Mr. Carey believes that ACS or other telecommunication firms would be interested in utilizing the fiber. After the installation process occurs, an agreement would have to be created among the owners of the sections of the line; AEA, CEA, and HEA. Chair Pruhs commented that the fiber communications line is a separate asset. He asked if the bonding funds will be used to install the fiber communication line or if a separate process will be developed. Mr. Thayer indicated that at this juncture, no final decisions have been made regarding the installation of fiber to the poles. The present goal is to install the transmission line and to review the interest and need of fiber at a later point. Mr. Carey reviewed that discussions continue with several agencies to establish a basis of design for Phases 2 and 3, and to progress permitting. Mr. Eledge asked if the 69 kV line has been completely removed. Mr. Carey agreed. He explained that the poles by the road were removed via flatbed trucks and the wire rolled up. The poles further off the road were lifted out by helicopter. All the poles and all the wire has been removed. Mr. Eledge inquired if the use of fiber will assist in locating faults on the line. Mr. Carey understands that CEA is installing fiber because the fiber can coordinate the substations more quickly. The different relays can more quickly determine the location of issues and faults on the line. Mr. Fogle expressed appreciation to Mr. Thayer and Mr. Carey for the presentation. He requested that Mr. Thayer reiterate the benefit to the rate payers of AEA owning the SSQ Line and upgrading to 230 kV transmission. Mr. Thayer explained that the SSQ Line was acquired by AEA, primarily because of the fire that occurred on the peninsula that disabled the power from Bradley Lake to the northern utilities for four months. The SSQ Line was previously owned by HEA, but it did not serve any of their customers. Mr. Thayer commented on the multiple lawsuits brought forth by the utilities regarding the ownership and rights of the SSQ Line. AEA worked with the utilities and the Board and purchased the SSQ Line for $17 million, which included the removal of the 69 kV line within five years. The removal of the 69 kV line has been completed within two-and-a-half years and within budget. Upon the purchase of the SSQ Line, all the lawsuits were extinguished. Alaska Energy Authority Page 6 of 13 Additionally, there are now multiple utilities who can reply and fix the line if there is an emergency. AEA negotiated with the Refuge to ensure that the right-of-way was large enough to complete an upgrade. Mr. Thayer discussed that the lines in Kenai are constrained and at capacity. No additional power can be moved north. Any plans for expansions to Bradley Lake, or complementary wind, solar, or tidal expansion do not currently have the infrastructure capacity to move the power north. Currently, in the summertime, there is occasional line loss as high as 40%. The SSQ Line serves the western and northern utilities, as well as the 17% of power from Bradley Lake that goes to Fairbanks. The needed upgrade affects the entire Railbelt. The line was built before Bradley Lake was constructed and the original plan was to upgrade the line after Bradley Lake was built. The upgrade never occurred. Mr. Thayer discussed that the upgrade will probably not lower the cost of energy. The upgrade will provide increased reliability, resilience, and the opportunity to move more power from the peninsula. Mr. Thayer explained that the $166 million bonding was structured in a way that did not add cost to the rate payers and did not add burden to the State treasury. Commissioner Sande expressed appreciation for the presentation and for the conversation regarding the fiber and opportunity to provide broadband throughout the state. She highlighted the importance of identifying efficiencies and savings that can be passed to Alaskans. There were no additional questions. 8. DIRECTOR COMMENTS A. IIJA Update i. Grid Resiliency and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP) Update Mr. Thayer reviewed the two submitted GRIP applications included in the packet. AEA partnered with the Railbelt utilities for Topic 1., Railbelt backbone reconstruction, and Topic 2., battery energy storage. The applications were submitted by MEA, as the lead agency, on behalf of the Railbelt utilities and AEA. Mr. Thayer explained that AEA does not qualify to solely apply for the GRIP program, but AEA can partner with the utilities as shown. Mr. Eledge noted that the paperwork within the packet indicates “Draft”. Mr. Thayer explained that the applications were in draft form at the time the packets were compiled. The applications have since been submitted by MEA. Mr. Thayer informed that a third GRIP application will be included in the documentation at the next meeting. The application is due May 19, 2023, and is for State funding of two projects. One is Railbelt specific and the other one is for microgrids in rural Alaska. Mr. Thayer reminded members of the initial process of submitting a concept paper for the project that is then either encouraged or discouraged to move forward with the full application. Mr. Thayer informed that less than half of the total concept papers submitted were encouraged to apply. Both of AEA’s concept papers were encouraged to apply. Mr. Thayer explained that both projects total approximately half a billion dollars. The total amount of funding that is competitively available for Alaska Energy Authority Page 7 of 13 applications in all 50 states is $10.5 billion. Mr. Thayer hopes the application will be successful to some degree, but he does not believe the application will be successful in the full amount. He explained that the funding has a match requirement and that the $166 million in bonding can be leveraged as a State match. The application process will take 60 to 90 days or longer before a decision is made. AEA will not request federal receipt authority by the Legislature during the application phase. Chair Pruhs inquired as to the process used for decision-making and selection. Mr. Thayer believes there is a specific selection criteria used. However, the selection criteria is not provided to applicants. ii. National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) – Presentation Mr. Thayer requested Josi Hartley, AEA, to review the NEVI presentation and update regarding the $52 million memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Department of Transportation for the electric vehicle (EV) program in the state. Ms. Hartley indicated that the presentation provides information on the Volkswagen Settlement, the NEVI Program, the Charging and Fueling Infrastructure (CFI) Program, and recent and planned community outreach. Ms. Hartley reviewed that AEA was designated as the lead administrator of the Volkswagen environmental mitigation trust funds in 2018. Since then, AEA’s EV related activities have grown exponentially. The Alaska Electric Vehicle Working Group was established and AEA developed its EV Mission Statement to lead the effort to minimize barriers to EV adoption in Alaska. The initial VW settlement work was to establish a DC fast-charging corridor between the Kenai Peninsula and Healy. Six sites are open and available for public use. Three sites remain under construction due to supply chain issues and are expected to be completed within the next three months. AEA is working to obligate the remaining VW funds of $125,000 to Southeast Alaska for a Level Two community charging project. Chair Pruhs asked Ms. Hartley for the information that shows the cost that each site is charging to utilize the station. He wants to compare the cost of an EV charging site to the cost of filling up a tank of gas at a fuel station. Mr. Thayer indicated there is an app for that information. Chair Pruhs commented that he does not have an EV and does not have the app. Mr. Fogle agreed that information is useful and wanted by the general public. Ms. Hartley explained that the cost comparison question is one that is prevalent during outreach presentations. Staff has slides related to the information. She explained that there are many variables to determining the cost. Level III fast charging is much more expensive than Level II charging, that typically occurs at the owner’s home. The location of the charging station is another factor that contributes to the cost of the charge. Mr. Thayer agreed to provide the cost comparison information to members at the next Board meeting. Mr. Eledge requested that the usage information and the number of charges per site is included with the rate comparison information. Ms. Hartley agreed. Ms. Hartley discussed the graph in the presentation showing EV ownership in Alaska. Since the Alaska Energy Authority Page 8 of 13 development of the EV plan in July of 2022, the number of registered EV vehicles has increased about 20% from 2,100 to 2,500. This increase is higher than AEA’s projected rate. Chair Pruhs asked for the number of registered cars during the same time period. Ms. Hartley believes that the state has approximately 500,000 vehicle registrations per year. The EV penetration is less than .5%. Chair Pruhs asked how Alaska’s urban trend compares with the urban trends of the Lower 48. Ms. Hartley did not have that information. Ms. Hartley showed the graph illustrating the geographic distribution of EV ownership in Alaska. Approximately half of the registered EVs are within the Anchorage area. The other area of high penetration is Southeast Alaska, due to its favorable conditions. Ms. Hartley provided background information on the NEVI Program and its establishment by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) in 2021. The intent of the national program is to install 500,000 EV fast charging stations nationwide throughout the life of the program. The program also aims to address primary barriers to EV adoption, including range anxiety. The formula-funded program is apportioned to states to deploy charging infrastructure along designated alternative fuel corridors (AFC) and to establish a coast-to-coast interconnected network to facilitate data collection, access, and reliability. The total amount of national funding is $5 billion, of which, Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) anticipates receipt of $52 million over the next five years that will be administered by AEA. The State of Alaska EV Infrastructure Implementation Plan (The Plan) was submitted and approved by the Federal Highway Administration. The Plan will be submitted for approval annually. Ms. Hartley explained that Alaska has one AFC that must be fully built out before additional infrastructure can be installed on other public roads. The requirements for the AFC buildout include that the stations must be located no more than 50 miles apart, no more than one driving mile from the AFC, and the infrastructure must be DC fast-charging with a minimum of four connector ports. Additionally, the Program is a Title 23 Program and must comply with the Justice 40 requirements. Chair Pruhs inquired as to the total amount of funding spent to-date on the EV Program plus the amount of funding the State is anticipated to spend on the Program over the next five years. Mr. Thayer indicated that the total is approximately $54 million. Chair Pruhs asked for the expected number of EVs in five years. Mr. Thayer indicated that currently, the Ford dealership has a backorder of 600 EV pickups. This expectation is that EV ownership will continue to increase as the availability of charging infrastructure is built out and the range anxiety is lessened. Chair Pruhs commented that the current capital subsidy at $54 million equates to $21,000 per EV. This amount decreases as the number of EVs increases. Mr. Thayer indicated that the subsidy including the operating costs is higher because EVs do not pay a fuel tax. Mr. Fogle asked for the mileage range for a fully charged EV. Ms. Hartley indicated that the range varies depending on the vehicle, the age of the vehicle, the battery technology, and wintertime or summertime. The top range is approximately 400 miles, and the lower range is closer to 150 miles. Mr. Fogle asked for a cost analysis that includes the range of EVs. Alaska Energy Authority Page 9 of 13 Chair Pruhs requested additional information and inquired if the private entity will maintain the infrastructure after the initial grant funding is provided. Mr. Thayer explained the program follows parameters of 80/20 match. The private sector must provide a 20% match and will own the infrastructure after five years. The grant agreement includes information regarding warranty and maintenance for those five years only. Mr. Thayer commented that he believes the current technology will be obsolete in five years due to the rapid changes in technology. Ms. Hartley reviewed the phased approach to the implementation process. Phase 1 builds out the AFC between Anchorage and Fairbanks. Phase 2 builds out the remainder of the Highway and Marine Highway Systems. It is anticipated that Phases 1 and 2 will utilize most of the NEVI funds available. As funding allows, Phases 3 and 4 install charging stations in rural hub communities and urban and destination locations. Ms. Hartley believes that Phases 3 and 4 will likely utilize funding through competitive applications of different programs, outside of the NEVI formula funding. Chair Pruhs asked if the Legislature must appropriate funding for the 80/20 match. Mr. Thayer explained that the 20% match will be provided by the private sector. The Legislature provides the federal receipt authority through the DOT budget. AEA has an MOU with DOT for the funds, less DOT’s overhead. Chair Pruhs inquired as to AEA’s overhead. Mr. Thayer indicated AEA’s overhead is low. Ms. Hartley identified the 14 potential priority site locations for the AFC areas. There is one area of 80 miles between Denali State Park and Cantwell that was granted a discretionary exception from the 50-mile requirement, due to lack of infrastructure. The eligibility for funding is open to a wide range of applicants, including public, private, non-profit, Tribal, and utilities. Eligible projects must be directly related to EV charging, publicly available, and include an experienced charging network provider. The current site host Request for Application (RFA) has been released for the available $15 million. Ms. Hartley reviewed the RFA timeline that will close on May 15th. The tentative site selection will occur on May 24th. Ms. Hartley discussed the scoring elements of the applications. There were no additional questions. Ms. Hartley discussed that separate and distinct from the NEVI Program is the CFI Program, which was also established through the BIL with federal funding of $2.5 billion. The CFI Program is held under competitive solicitations. The FY22/23 program funding amounts are up to $700 million, with $350 million in the Community Program category and $350 million in the Corridor Program category. The intent is to deploy publicly accessible infrastructure for EV charging and alternative fueling such as hydrogen, natural gas, and propane fueling infrastructure in communities and along AFCs. Applications are due on May 30th. AEA’s focus for this round is within the Community Program category. Ms. Hartley reviewed the CFI Community Grant Program parameters and focus area categories. Ms. Hartley reviewed the past events of community outreach and the planned public engagement efforts and events as listed in the presentation. Mr. Thayer commented that the EV team consists of Ms. Hartley. He noted there are a few individuals on Audrey Alstrom’s team who provide assistance, but have other primary duties. Alaska Energy Authority Page 10 of 13 Mr. Eledge expressed appreciation for the diligent work and information presented. He inquired as to the effects of the additional load on the power grid. He requested that information is gathered regarding the times the charging will occur to mitigate any issues from the additional load due to charging. Mr. Fogle thanked Ms. Hartley for the presentation. He asked if AEA is keeping AKEVWG informed regarding this program and other happenings. Ms. Hartley agreed. She noted that engagement is increasing and there is heightened interest in EVs, including the corridor buildout. There were no additional questions. B. FY24 Budget Update i. CASR Report Mr. Thayer discussed that AEA has a larger capital budget than half of the Departments in the State, with $174 million pending in Juneau, and the possibility of an additional $20 million. He discussed the $166 million in bonding, the NEVI of $52 million, and the normal budget that includes PCE of approximately $40 million. The Capital Appropriation Status Report (CASR) within the packet includes an additional $202 million in designated project funds. Each year, Mr. Thayer is required to travel to Juneau to meet with Senators, Representatives, and staff to review the CASR. The funds are restricted and can only be used for the designated purposes. Mr. Thayer reported that there is currently $27 million in UGF Unobligated funds and some of that funding may be returned to the State. He gave the example of the $1.7 million draw for the COVID relief for utilities that was returned to the State. Mr. Thayer noted that the Legislature had no questions for him when the CASR was reviewed. Chair Pruhs asked if a project is underbudget, if the remaining funds return to the general fund. Mr. Thayer explained that typically, the funds are returned to the general fund and are reappropriated by the Legislature. However, there are specific items, like the Renewable Energy Fund, that any remaining monies go back into the Renewable Energy Fund. Chair Pruhs asked for additional information on how cost overruns are handled. Mr. Thayer discussed the process and options if a project goes over budget. There have been a few projects placed on hold due to the economics of the project. There were no additional questions. C. Governor’s State Energy Security Task Force Mr. Thayer discussed Governor’s Administrative Order 345 creating the Alaska Energy Task Force. It will be headed by the Lieutenant Governor and the Vice-Chairs are Mr. Thayer and Gwen Holdmann, UAF. The date for the first meeting has not yet been established. The Task Force is to return an energy plan report to the Governor by October. Additional work will occur to develop the energy plan into the energy policy for the State. AEA will contribute significant internal resources to support the Task Force. Alaska Energy Authority Page 11 of 13 Mr. Thayer discussed that the Task Force will consolidate information to develop an energy profile on the state, including generation, transmission, distribution, and storage capabilities in the different regions. Regulations and statutes will be reviewed to determine what changes are necessary to create a successful energy plan. Mr. Thayer noted that the Governor’s overarching goal is the cost of power at $0.10 cents per kWh. Vice-Chair Kendig commented that the $0.10 cents per kWh is the cost to the consumer. He understands that the cost of generation is a focus. He asked if there is focus on determining ways to reduce the cost of transmission. Mr. Thayer agreed that will be part of the studies. Discussion occurred regarding the varying cost structure and debt structure of the utilities. Mr. Eledge requested more information on the additional workload that staff will undertake for the Task Force. Mr. Thayer explained that initially, when AEA had an $80 million request in Juneau, AEA received the ability to hire five new staff, consisting of two project managers, one grants coordinator, one procurement staff, and one accounting staff. Since then, however, the request in Juneau has doubled to more $160 million. Mr. Thayer discussed his conversations with legislators for AEA to hire the five new approved staff and then go back to the Governor’s Office to discuss what additional personnel is needed. Mr. Thayer noted that staff is carrying extra work, especially himself, Jennifer Bertolini, Ms. Alstrom, and Tim Sandstrom. There were no additional questions. A brief at-ease was taken. D. Rural Update Mr. Thayer indicated that the Rural Update from Rebecca Garrett, AEA, is included in the packet. It provides information on training, and the projects within the Rural Power System Upgrades (RPSU) and Bulk Fuel Upgrades (BFU). E. Denali Commission Update Mr. Thayer discussed the Denali Commission Update included in the packet. The total amount of funding for active awards is $39 million. The total remaining funding is $20 million and recent applications for approximately $4 million have been assigned. F. Power Project Loan (PPF) Update Mr. Thayer discussed the PPF Update included in the packet. There are 18 loans outstanding and no delinquencies. There is one application that should close soon, two pending applications, and a possible third application to review. G. Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Program Update Mr. Thayer discussed that the REF is in Round XV. AEA recommended 27 projects for approval by Alaska Energy Authority Page 12 of 13 the Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) last week. The 27 projects, totaling $25.5 million, were approved unanimously by the REFAC. Request for funding appropriation was submitted to the Legislature last Friday. Mr. Thayer indicated that Round XVI is expected to begin later this year, with a tentative submittal deadline to the Legislature by the beginning of January 2024. H. Update on Trip to Unalaska and Project Mr. Thayer discussed the trip that he and staff took to Unalaska regarding the geothermal project. Staff met with the City, the Native Corporation, and the processors. Mr. Thayer provided background information that Unalaska is not connected by an energy grid. The processors produce their own power, which is a concern. The City applied to the REF for a wind project and received partial funding last year. Mr. Thayer explained the ongoing processes the geothermal project is undertaking to review the resources and the economics of the project, including the available federal tax credits from the Infrastructure Reduction Act. Mr. Eledge asked if there are previous studies on the Makushin Geothermal Project. Mr. Thayer agreed, and discussed the historical background of the project in the 1980’s. The well was proven up in 1983, and the project sat dormant for 40 years. There were no additional questions. I. Legislative Update Mr. Thayer discussed the legislative update information. The Senate Finance Committee introduced SB 98, which would transfer the management of the PCE endowment from the Department of Revenue to the Permanent Fund. No changes will be made to the program or to the funding. The Governor introduced SB 125 and HB 154, which would create a State financing entity for renewable energy efficiency and storage projects. This was reintroduced from last year. The bill includes AEA’s role to technically review the projects and allows a fiscal note to add one staff member. Mr. Thayer has been requested to travel to Juneau to testify and meet with the Legislature regarding this bill. Alaska Housing Finance Corporation will be the lead agency on the bill and AEA will provide the technical assistance. Mr. Thayer discussed HB 62, which was the 10-year extension for the PCE program. He reported that the Senate Finance Committee decided to remove the expiration date from the PCE program. It will now be an ongoing program. Mr. Thayer noted that Senate Finance complimented AEA on the management of the program. Mr. Thayer discussed that AEA has hired a third-party to evaluate the program and the current projects. The results of that report, including the updated amount of diesel the program saves each year, should be completed at the end of the month. J. Cook Inlet Gas Supply – Included in the packet K. Community Outreach – Included in the packet L. Articles of Interest - Included in the packet Alaska Energy Authority Page 13 of 13 Mr. Thayer discussed that staff emailed the Board and invited members to participate in the Governor’s upcoming Alaska Sustainable Energy Conference. Mr. Thayer noted that he will be moderating a panel. He requested members to review the agenda and inform staff what day or days they would like to attend. Mr. Thayer commented that he provides a weekly update to members regarding AEA’s ongoing tasks. He asked if that level of information is helpful. There was agreement by the members that the level of information is helpful. M. Next Regularly Scheduled AEA Board Meeting Wednesday, May 24, 2023 Mr. Thayer indicated that the date of May 24 conflicts with the Alaska Sustainable Energy Conference, as well as other conflicts with members. He requested members discuss alternatives regarding the date or location. Chair Pruhs agreed that the members will be polled regarding the next meeting date. Currently, both the May and June AEA meetings are scheduled to occur in Anchorage. MOTION: A motion was made by Vice-Chair Kendig to enter into executive session to discuss personnel matters. Motion seconded by Mr. Fogle. The motion is in accordance with the Open Meetings Act. A roll call vote was taken and the motion to enter into Executive Session passed unanimously, with Commissioner Crum away for the moment. 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: 10:43 am. Personnel Matters The Board reconvened its regular meeting at 11:37 am. Chair Pruhs advised that the Board did not take any action on matters discussed while in Executive Session. The session was limited to discussion of matters directly protected from public disclosure by the Open Meetings Act. 10. BOARD COMMENTS Mr. Eledge expressed appreciation for the information presented in today’s meeting. Chair Pruhs thanked Mr. Thayer and staff for their diligent efforts and for their recent travels to Dutch Harbor. He noted that additional discussion will occur offline regarding timing and location of the next meeting for both AEA and AIDEA. 11. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business of the Board, the AEA meeting adjourned at 11:40 am. __________________________________________________ Curtis W. Thayer, Executive Director / Secretary 813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG TO: Curtis Thayer, Executive Director FROM: Josephine Hartley, Project Manager THROUGH: Audrey Alstrom, Director Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency DATE: May 5, 2023 SUBJECT: Electric Vehicle Program - Response to Board Questions 1. Miles per vehicle compared to ICE vehicle The average range of an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle is 300 miles. The current average range of an EV is also approximately 300 miles. However, there is significant variability in the range of an EV. The current maximum range of a top-end EV is 516 miles. Many of the newer Tesla’s possess a range of 350 miles. Battery technology is improving rapidly and EV range is expected to continue to increase. 2. Cost to charge The cost to charge an EV varies depending on the location of the charging station along the Alternative Fuel Corridor (AFC) and the level of charger. Direct Current Fast Charging, or Level Three charging, which will be installed along the AFC with NEVI funds, varies depending on the location along the railbelt. The rates for fast charging are as follows: Utility Cost of Power (RCA L3 Rate) Approximate Service Charge Cost to Charge 50 kWh EV - $/kWh $/kWh $ CEA $0.14 $0.20 $16.75 GVEA $0.15 $0.20 $17.45 HEA $0.16 $0.20 $18.20 MEA $0.32 $0.20 $25.75 It is important to recognize that most EV charging occurs at home, utilizing Level 2 charging. On average, the cost to fully charge an EV from 0% to 100% at home is $9.00. Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 5 3. Projected growth, and comparison to other states As of December 2021, there were 1,250 EVs registered in Alaska, out of approximately 500,000 total vehicle registrations. The EV adoption is trending upward and the global markets saw a significant jump in the second half of 2021 with over 300 EVs added to the registration database. Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs) and pick-up trucks account for 80% of new vehicles purchased in Alaska. Due to this preference trend, it is expected that EV market share in Alaska will increase once battery electric pick-up trucks are readily available to Alaska consumers. The future state of EVs in Alaska was evaluated to determine if the deployed capacity along the AFC related to the NEVI requirements would be satisfactory to the expected number of EVs on the road at the end of the program. To assist in the development of future EV registrations, two growth scenarios were developed. It is important to recognize that there are a variety of factors that can affect EV adoption, including access to charging infrastructure, availability of models, price points and comparability to ICE models, and willingness to make the transition. The continued growth scenario projects that EV adoptions continue the 2020 to 2021 growth throughout the five year period. The results are that the state would realize about 5,000 EV registrations in the five-year period. Alaska Energy Authority Page 3 of 5 The aggressive growth scenario increases the 2020 to 2021 growth by a factor of 1.5. This scenario addresses the expected increase in registration due to the new battery electric pick- up truck models coming to market and expanded offerings for SUVs. The results are that the state would realize 13,000 new EV registrations over the 5 year period. The above figure depicts Alaska EV registrations from July 2022 through March 2023. EV ownership in Alaska has been steadily increasing. EV registrations have increased to almost 2,500, which is on track with the aggressive growth projections from the NEVI Implementation Plan. Alaska Energy Authority Page 4 of 5 The above figure depicts nationwide EV adoption rates and sales through 2021. 4. How much (AEA) spent on EVs? AEA utilized a portion of the VW Settlement funds to construct a fast charging corridor between Healy and the Kenai Peninsula. The amount of funding that was allocated toward this program was $1.4 million. Additionally AEA utilized $76,000 of SEP funds to construct EV charging stations at several state owned facilities. The charging station locations are below: Sites Open Now: • Anchorage; Dimond Center • Anchorage; Atwood Building (Level 2) • Anchorage; Snowden Building (Level 2) • Homer; AJ’s Old Town Steakhouse & Tavern • Seward; Seward Chamber of Commerce • Soldotna; Custom Seafoods • Cantwell; Jack River Inn • Cooper Landing; Grizzly Ridge Sites Under Construction: • Chugiak; Three Bears Alaska • Healy; Three Bears Alaska • Trapper Creek; Three Bears Alaska Alaska Energy Authority Page 5 of 5 In addition to the VW and SEP charging station installation work, AEA received $1.5 million from the governor’s budget in order to pursue competitive federal funding opportunities for EV charging infrastructure over the five year IIJA program period. This funding will be used to support staff time and provide matching funds for funding opportunities, which require a 20% non-federal match. 5. Additional load on the grid? A review of the peak loads combined with the historical growth of the electrical loads on the Railbelt Utilities was performed to determine the impact of DCFC stations on the grid in the region. The future capacity projections were factored into the decommission of the Healy #2 generation plant in 2024 but did not account for any additional added capacity from renewable sources as a conservative estimate. Based on the projected loads, there is more than adequate capacity for the proposed NEVI-compliant DCFC stations along the AFC detailed in the study. Additional reviews of the grid will be completed as locations outside the AFC are identified for installations. 6. AKEVA involved? AKEVA participates in our EV Working Group and Technical Sessions. AKEVA invited AEA to present at the IBEW’s EVITP apprenticeship training program on the NEVI program. STATE OF ALASKA OFFICE OF THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR ANCHORAGE NANCY DAHLSTROM LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR www.ltgov.alaska.gov 550 West Seventh Avenue, Suite 1700 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 907.269.7460 907.269.0263 Fax lt.governor@alaska.gov Alaska Energy Security Task Force Tuesday, April 25, 2023 2:00 pm to 4:00 pm Teams Meeting: Click here to join the meeting Meeting ID: 228 703 777 695 Passcode: B7DhgY Agenda 1. Welcome and Introductions (Lt Gov) 2. Governor’s Remarks and Vision for the Task Force 3. Lieutenant Governor’s Remarks 4. Discussion/Feedback from Task Force Members (roundtable) 5. Organization of Task Force a. Task Force outcomes/products b. Meeting timeline c. Website/SharePoint d. Coordinating with existing working groups e. Resources f. Subcommittee Structure and Composition, Process for Nominating Members i. Discussion – Subcommittees we want to form immediately ii. Regionally focused (Roadbelt, coastal, remote rural) iii. Alaska energy data gateway 6. Discussion: Proposed Symposium Series 7. Roundtable – What does the committee need to be successful? Alaska Energy Security Task Force Alaska Energy Security Task Force: Kickoff Meeting April 25, 2023 Alaska Energy Security Task Force 02 Kickoff Meeting Welcome to the Alaska Energy Security Task Force Kickoff Meeting. We’re looking forward to collaborating on policies, strategies, and tactics to assist in the State of Alaska's goal of reducing energy costs. April 25, 2023 Agenda 1.Welcome and Introductions by Governor Mike Dunleavy and Lt. Governor Nancy Dahlstrom 2.Task Force Self- Introductions 3.Purpose 4.Organization 5.Timeline 6.Email and Website 7.Proposed Subcommittees: —Structure and Composition 8.Symposium Series 9.Roundtable —What does the committee need to be successful? 10.Meeting Adjourned10. Alaska Energy Security Task Force The purpose of the Alaska Energy Security Task Force is to develop a comprehensive statewide energy plan that will evaluate energy generation, distribution, transmission, and storage for the State of Alaska and its communities. Alaska Energy Security Task Force: Kickoff Meeting | April 25, 2023 03 Purpose Alaska Energy Security Task Force Member Email Address Lieutenant Governor Nancy Dahlstrom, Chair Curtis W. Thayer,Executive Director of the Alaska Energy Authority, Vice Chair cthayer@akenergyauthority.org Gwen Holdmann,University of Alaska, Vice Chair gholdmann@alaska.gov Commissioner John Boyle, Department of Natural Resources john.boyle@alaska.gov Commissioner Jason Brune, Department of Environmental Conservation jason.brune@alaska.gov Nils Andreassen, Alaska Municipal League nils@akml.org Andrew Guy, Calista Corporation aguy@calistacorp.com Karl Hanneman, International Tower Hill Mines khanneman@ithmines.com Tony Izzo, Matanuska Electric Association tony.izzo@mea.coop Clay Koplin, Cordova Electric Cooperative ckoplin@cordovaelectric.com Jenn Miller, Renewable Independent Power Producers jenn.miller@renewableipp.com Duff Mitchell, Juneau Hydropower duff.mitchell@juneauhydro.com John Simms, Enstar john.sims@enstarnaturalgas.com Isaac Vanderburg, Launch Alaska isaac@launchalaska.com Robert Venables, Southeast Conference robert@seconference.org Senator Click Bishop (Ex Officio)senator.click.bishop@akleg.gov Garrett Boyle, Denali Commission (Ex Officio)gboyle@denali.gov Commissioner Keith Kurber, Regulatory Commission of Alaska (Ex Officio)keith.kurber@alaska.gov Representative George Rauscher (Ex Officio)representative.george.rauscher@akleg.gov Erin Whitney, United States Department of Energy, Arctic Energy Office (Ex Officio)erin.whitney@hq.doe.gov *John Espindola, Policy Advisor,Office of Governor Mike Dunleavy john.espindola@alaska.gov Organization Alaska Energy Security Task Force Task Force –Meets monthly; next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, May 9, 2023, from 3 to 5 p.m. at AEA’s office. Subcommittees –Schedule to be determined Recommendations Due –Tuesday, October 31, 2023 Alaska Energy Security Task Force: Kickoff Meeting | April 25, 2023 05 Timeline Alaska Energy Security Task Force Alaska Energy Security Task Force: Kickoff Meeting | April 25, 2023 06 Email and Website Email AEA-hosted info email account created to capture correspondence related to the Task Force. info@akenergysecuritytaskforce.com Website AEA-hosted external webpage houses the Task Force’s schedule, public notices, recordings, minutes, documents, and resources as they are created. http://akenergysecuritytaskforce.com Alaska Energy Security Task Force State Energy Data Statutes and Regulations Reform Railbelt Generation Railbelt Transmission and Storage Rural Generation, Distribution, and Storage Coastal Generation, Distribution, and Storage Incentives and Subsidies (Federal & State) Renewables Alaska Energy Security Task Force: Kickoff Meeting | April 25, 2023 07 Proposed Subcommittees Alaska Energy Security Task Force The purpose of this symposium series is to “level up” members of the Energy Task Force and the interested general public to provide a common understanding of our existing energy landscape, why/how we got there, what technologies or opportunities could be applied in Alaska, and what are some of the global trends that could impact Alaska. The symposium will be organized around the following six thematic areas: Alaska Energy Security Task Force: Kickoff Meeting | April 25, 2023 08 Symposium Series 1.History (the past informing our future direction) 2.The Economics of Energy in Alaska 3.Alaska Energy Policy 4.Brief overview of Alaska organizations that work on energy (who we are and what we do) 5.The Changing Global Energy Landscape 6.Technologies (existing Alaska development and future potential) Alaska Energy Security Task Force Alaska Energy Security Task Force: Kickoff Meeting | April 25, 2023 09 Symposium Series: Six Thematic Areas 1.History (the past informing our future direction) •History of hydropower in Alaska (Four Dam Pool, Bradley Lake) •History of the Railbelt, how the Railbelt grid is managed now and in the future o Current generation assets o Future demand projections o Railbelt Reliability Council –purpose and role •Rural electrification –past and present •Cook Inlet natural gas –now and in the future 2.The Economics of Energy in Alaska •Alaska Energy Statistics –presentation •Economics of Railbelt power •How it works: Alaska’s Economy •Looking beyond the state –where is the cheapest power in the world and why? 3.Alaska Energy Policy •Existing Alaska energy policy (aspirational) •Power Cost Equalization and alternatives (postage stamp rate) •Federal landscape and funding opportunities (IIJA, IRA, etc.) 4.Brief overview of Alaska organizations that work on energy (who we are and what we do) •Alaska Energy Authority •Alaska Gasline Development Corporation •Alaska Housing Finance Corporation •Department of Energy Arctic Energy Office •Department of Natural Resources/Department of Environmental Conservation (permitting) •Railbelt Reliability Council •Regulatory Commission of Alaska •University of Alaska: Alaska Center for Energy and Power/ Institute of Social and Economic Research 5.The Changing Global Energy Landscape •Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Sequestration •Decarbonizing energy supply •Shipping and aviation industry 6.Technologies (existing Alaska development and future potential) •Energy storage –a brief synopsis (Long-duration thermal storage) •Hydropower (Susitna, Dixon Diversion, Small/distributed •Natural Gas (all about pipelines) •Transmission (GRIP, MVDC and Rural AK Build-out) •MNR/MNR nuclear •Solar •Wind Alaska Energy Security Task Force Measures of Success Communications Task Force Expectations Subcommittee Expectations Milestones Alaska Energy Security Task Force: Kickoff Meeting | April 25, 2023 10 Roundtable Discussion AEA Infrastructure Awards: Submitted, Pending, Potential Section Number TitleFOA Number / Program GuidanceApplicable Stakeholders General Scope/Objectives Funding TypeStatus / Critical Program DatesApproximate Total Federal Funding Available for All AwardsAlaska Specific FundingMatch SharePoint of Contact Notes / Federal Receipt AuthorityIIJA Sec. 11401National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Program (NEVI)Guidance* States*Provide funding to States to strategically deploy electric vehicle charging infrastructure and to establish an interconnected network to facilitate data collection, access, and reliability.Formula GrantAEA application has been submitted and Alaska's Plan was approved by FHWA September 27, 2022$5 billion for 5 year period FY 2022‐2026 $52 million20%Audrey Alstrom(aalstrom@akenergyauthority.org)*Approved for $7,758,240 FY 2023*Future years funded through DOT*AEA may need to provide match for administrative dollars used by AEA ‐ maximum match from AEA $1,040,000, match will depend on amount of AEA administrative costsIIJA Sec. 40109State Energy ProgramSEP‐IIJA ALRD*State Energy Offices*Support energy efficiency strategies.*Develop and implement energy security, resilience, and emergency preparedness plans.*Reduce energy costs and carbon emissions.*Deploy building and facility retrofit projects.*Increase investments to expand the use of clean energy resources and infrastructure, including the transmission and distribution system. *Educate and train the clean energy workforce to perform comprehensive energy audits and upgrades in state‐specific sectors.*Support state and local governments in helping underserved sectors and communities benefit from clean energy opportunities. Formula GrantAEA Application was submitted November 2022 and AEA is waiting to receive award$500,000,000 for 5 year period FY 2022‐2026 $3,661,930 NoneRebecca Garrett (Rgarrett@akenergyauthority.org)*Approved for $796k in 2023 Budget*Applied for $2,865,930 for FY 2024*AEA has receipt authority for SEP program and works in collaboration with AHFC on programIIJA Sec. 40101(d)BIL ‐ Preventing Outages and Enhancing the Resilience of the Electric Grid, Formula Grants to States and Indian TribesDE‐FOA‐0002736States and Indian Tribes with Sub Awards as Follows: *Electric grid operator*Electricity storage operator *Electricity generator*Transmission owner or operator *Distribution provider *Fuel supplier *Any other relevant entity as determined by the Secretary of the DOE*Weatherization technologies and equipment*Fire‐resistant technologies and fire prevention systems*Monitoring and control technologies*Undergrounding of electrical equipment*Utility pole management*Relocation of power lines or the reconductoring of power lines with low sag, advanced conductors*Vegetation and fuel load management*Use of construction of distributed energy resources for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events including microgrids and battery‐storage subcomponents*Adaptive protection technologies*Advanced modeling technologies*Hardening of power lines, facilities, substations, or other systems*Replacement of old, overhead conductors and underground cablesFormula GrantAEA submitted application for FY22‐FY23 on 4/18/2023 $2,300,000,000 or $459,000,000 / yearApprox. $22.2 M (Fed) total for first two years with $3.6 M State MatchAdditional funding to be applied for FY24‐FY2615%Conner Erickson(cerickson@akenergyauthority.org)Bryan Carey (bcarey@akenergyauthority.org)*Program administered by AEA per Governor's Direction*Approved $12.1M (fed) and $3.6M match in 2023 Budget.*Applied for $12,110,523 (fed) and $1,816,579 match for FY 2024*Future Requests will be Federal Receipts $36,331,569 and match $3,633,155FY 2022 VTO Program Wide FundingFiscal Year 2022 Vehicle Technologies Office (VTO) Program Wide Funding Opportunity AnnouncementDE‐FOA‐0002611*States, local governments, tribes*For Profit entities*Non‐profit entities*institutions of higher education*advance research, development, demonstration, and deployment (RDD&D) in several areas critical to achieving net‐zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2050, including: reduction of weight and cost of batteries, reduction in life cycle emissions of advanced lightweight materials, reduced costs and advanced technologies for both on‐ and off‐road vehicle charging and infrastructure, innovative public transit solutions, and training to increase deployment of these technologies among diverse communities.Competitive Grant / Cooperative AgreementAEA submitted application November 2022, awaiting award response from DOE $ 957,000,000 $1,670,000 $417,500 Audrey Alstrom(aalstrom@akenergyauthority.org)*Applied for $1,670,000 for FY 2024* Approved $1,500,000 in FY 2023 (1004 UGF) for competitive matches related to EVsPage 1 AEA Infrastructure Awards: Submitted, Pending, Potential Section Number TitleFOA Number / Program GuidanceApplicable Stakeholders General Scope/Objectives Funding TypeStatus / Critical Program DatesApproximate Total Federal Funding Available for All AwardsAlaska Specific FundingMatch SharePoint of Contact Notes / Federal Receipt AuthorityBIL Sec 41008 Topic 1: Near Net Zero Facility Build ProjectsU.S. Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations ‐ Industrial Decarbonization and Emissions Reduction Demonstration‐to‐DeploymentDE‐FOA‐0002936Topic 1: *For profit organizationsThis FOA makes available approximately $6 billion in federal funds for projects that will validate low‐GHG emitting industrial facilities capable of manufacturing products and materials with low‐carbon footprints. DOE aims to fund projects in the highest emitting, hardest‐to‐abate industries where rapidly deployed decarbonization technologies can have the greatest impact: iron, steel, steel mill products, aluminum, cement, concrete, glass, pulp, paper, industrial ceramics, chemicals, and other energy intensive industrial processes. Topic 1 is anticipated to award 2‐5 projects with federal funding from $100M to $250M per award. AEA signed on as a partner on the Trident concept paper, which includes the development of Trident's new Unalaska processing site, in conjunction with the Makushin Geothermal project.Competitive Grant / Cooperative AgreementTrident Seafoods submitted a concept paper to DOE‐OCED4/20/2023Full application submission deadline8/4/2023 $500,000,000 Total$100,000,000 ‐ $250,000,000 per award None50% of total project costsStefanie Moreland(smoreland@tridentseafoods.com) / AEA is listed a supporting partner on the concept paperAEA Federal receipt authority not needed as Trident Seafoods, if awarded, would be the prime recipient of the federal grant. Total project cost estimated in excess of $500MIIJA Sec. 40502Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Capitalization Grant ProgramALRD*State Energy Offices *Provide capitalization for an energy efficiency revolving loan fundFormula GrantAEA will submit applicationApplication Due 5/26/23$250,000,000 $4,569,780 NoneConner Erickson(cerickson@akenergyauthority.org)*Approved for $796k in 2023 Budget.*Applied for $3,773,780 for FY 2024*One time grant amount, lump sum receipt*AEA has receipt authority for program and AHFC will manage program*MOU and RSA needs to be established between AEA and AHFCIIJA Sec. 40552(b)Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant ProgramDE‐FOA‐0002883*States*Local Governments*Tribes*Assist states, local governments, and Tribes in implementing strategies to reduce energy use, to reduce fossil fuel emissions, and to improve energy efficiency.Formula GrantAEA submitted pre‐award sheet 4/14/23Pre‐Award Sheet Due 4/28/23Application Due 7/31/23$550,000,000 $1,627,450 NoneAudrey Alstrom(aalstrom@akenergyauthority.org)*Approved for $2M in 2023 Budget.*One time grant amount from IIJA funding of $1,627,450IIJA Sec. GRIP 3: 40103(b)BIL ‐ Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships: Grid Innovation Program*Railbelt Concept Paper DE‐FOA‐0002740* A state*Combination of two or more states*Indian tribe*Unit of local government*Public utility commission*Demonstrate innovative approaches to transmission, storage, and distribution infrastructure to harden and enhance resilience and reliability*Demonstrate new approaches to enhance regional grid resilience, implemented through States by public and rural electric cooperative entities on a cost‐shared basisCompetitive GrantAEA had 2 Concept Papers accepted and will submit applications for both$300M Federal request for Railbelt and $250M Federal Request for MicrogridsApplications Due 5/19/23$5,000,000,000$1,920,000,000 for FY 2022 ‐ 2023$0 100% (or 50% of total project cost)Bryan Carey (bcarey@akenergyauthority.org)*Funding request will depend on award being issued for competitive grant. AEA had 2 Concept Papers accepted and will submit applications for both. *Potential Request for Railbelt Concept Paper is $298.6M Federal request and $298.6M match*Second funding cycle anticipated Q1 2024Page 2 AEA Infrastructure Awards: Submitted, Pending, Potential Section Number TitleFOA Number / Program GuidanceApplicable Stakeholders General Scope/Objectives Funding TypeStatus / Critical Program DatesApproximate Total Federal Funding Available for All AwardsAlaska Specific FundingMatch SharePoint of Contact Notes / Federal Receipt AuthorityIIJA Sec. GRIP 3: 40103(b)BIL ‐ Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships: Grid Innovation Program*Microgrid Concept Paper DE‐FOA‐0002740* A state*Combination of two or more states*Indian tribe*Unit of local government*Public utility commission*Demonstrate innovative approaches to transmission, storage, and distribution infrastructure to harden and enhance resilience and reliability*Demonstrate new approaches to enhance regional grid resilience, implemented through States by public and rural electric cooperative entities on a cost‐shared basisCompetitive GrantApplications Due 5/19/23$5,000,000,000$1,920,000,000 for FY 2022 ‐ 2023$0 100% (or 50% of total project cost)Rebecca Garrett (Rgarrett@akenergyauthority.org)*Funding request will depend on award being issued for competitive grant. AEA had 2 Concept Papers accepted and will submit applications for both. *Potential Request for Microgrid Concept Paper is $250M Federal Request and $250M match*Second funding cycle anticipated Q1 2024IRA Part 2 50121 Home Efficiency Rebates ProgramProgram Info*State Energy OfficesGrants to states to provide home energy efficiency rebates. Formula GrantApplication Open for Early Administrative Funds $2.5MFull application period expected Summer 2023$4,300,000,000Alaska allocation $37,368,480$37,368,480 0%Taylor Asher / AHFCAHFC will manage program*Applied for $37,368,480 for FY 2024*AEA has receipt authority for program and AHFC will manage program*MOU and RSA needs to be established between AEA and AHFCIRA Part 2 50122 Home Electrification and Appliance Rebate ProgramProgram Info*States*TribesRebates for heat pumps, panel/service upgrades, electric stoves and clothes dryers, and insulation/air sealing measures.Formula GrantApplication Open for Early Administrative Funds $2.5MFull application period expected Summer 2023$4,500,000,000Alaska allocation $37,150,940$37,150,940 0%Taylor Asher / AHFCAHFC will manage program*Applied for $37,150,940 for FY 2024*AEA has receipt authority for program and AHFC will manage program*MOU and RSA needs to be established between AEA and AHFC IIJA Sec. 11101; 11403Carbon Reduction Program*Port ElectrificationCRP Guidance*StatesStates may use Carbon Reduction Program funds for projects that support the reduction of transportation emissions, including: the construction, planning, and design of trail facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other nonmotorized forms of transportation; public transportation projects; and congestion management technologiesFormula GrantNo application: formula funding allocated to DOT on annual basis Carbon Reduction Strategy Due 11/15/23AEA evaluating $5,000,000,000$1,920,000,000 for FY 2022 ‐ 2023$81,878,583 20% TBD*DOT responsible for requesting receipt authority for FHWA funds.* DOT / DCCED to provide matching funds, potential use of Head Tax. * AEA evaluating potential for port electrification project and would manage program. IIJA Sec. 41006(a)(2)U.S. Tidal Energy Advancement NOI‐DE‐FOA‐2847*TBDProvide the first large scale investment for the development of a tidal Research, Development and Demonstration (RD&D) site. Fund a tidal or river current site development, preferably led by a project/site developer in the U.S., and fund in‐water demonstration of at least one tidal energy system.Competitive Grant Application period was not open as of 4/18/23$45,000,000 TBD TBDAudrey Alstrom(aalstrom@akenergyauthority.org)Funding request depends on award being issued for competitive grant, FOA yet to be published.FY 2023 VTO Program Wide FundingFiscal Year 2023 Vehicle Technologies Office (VTO) Program Wide Funding Opportunity AnnouncementDE‐FOA‐0002893*TBD*advance research, development, demonstration, and deployment (RDD&D) in several areas critical to achieving net‐zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2050, including: reduction of weight and cost of batteries, reduction in life cycle emissions of advanced lightweight materials, reduced costs and advanced technologies for both on‐ and off‐road vehicle charging and infrastructure, innovative public transit solutions, and training to increase deployment of these technologies among diverse communities.Competitive Grant / Cooperative AgreementAnticipated Application Period Q3 2023TBD TBD TBDAudrey Alstrom(aalstrom@akenergyauthority.org)*Funding request depends on award being issued for competitive grant, FOA yet to be published.*Application period to open Q3 2023Page 3 AEA Infrastructure Awards: Submitted, Pending, Potential Section Number TitleFOA Number / Program GuidanceApplicable Stakeholders General Scope/Objectives Funding TypeStatus / Critical Program DatesApproximate Total Federal Funding Available for All AwardsAlaska Specific FundingMatch SharePoint of Contact Notes / Federal Receipt AuthorityIIJA Sec. 40103(c)Energy Improvements in Rural or Remote AreasDE‐FOA‐0002970* Institutes of higher education*Utilities*Tribal nations*State*Local Governments*For‐profit entities*Non‐profit entities*Demonstrate innovative and replicable approaches to improve the resilience, safety, reliability, and availability of, and reduce the adverse impacts from energy generation by rural or remote areas.*Outcomes that can be scaled and/or have accelerated market adoption.*Transition to a decarbonized energy system.Competitive GrantFirst Funding Round: Concept Papers Due 4/14/2023Application Due 6/28/23$1,000,000,000 over 5 years TBD 20‐50%Rebecca Garrett (Rgarrett@akenergyauthority.org)*AEA did not submit a concept paper in the first funding round . *Potential for future requests based on next 3 years of funding opportunities.IRA Sec. 60101Clean Heavy‐Duty VehiclesProgram Info(1) a state; (2) a municipality; (3) an Indian Tribe; (4) a nonprofit school transportation associationProgram covers up to 100 percent of costs for (1) incremental cost of replacing an existing heavy‐duty vehicle with a zero‐emission vehicle; (2) purchasing and operating associated infrastructure; (3) workforce development and training; (4) planning and technical activitiesCompetitive Grant, RebatesTBD $1,000,000,000 TBD TBDTBDWaiting for guidanceFunding request depends on award being issued for competitive grant, FOA yet to be published.IIJA Sec. 40503Energy Auditor Training Grant ProgramDE‐FOA‐0002885*States*Covers any cost associated with individuals being trained or certified to conduct energy audits by— (i) the State; or (ii) a State‐certified third‐party training program.*Pay the wages of a trainee during the period in which the trainee receives training and certification.Competitive Grant; no formula allocationApplication period was not open as of 4/18/23$40,000,000 TBD TBD AHFC to be lead*Approved for $63,600 in 2023 Budget.*Applied for $63,600 for FY 2024* Future funding requests for remaining 3 funding years needed, amount depends on guidance when issued.IRA Sec. 60102Clean Ports ProgramPort Program Info(1) a port authority; (2) a state, regional, local or tribal agency ; (3) an air pollution control agency; (4) a private entityTo purchase and install zero‐emission port equipment and technology, conduct associated planning or permitting activities for this equipment and technology, and develop climate action plans to further address air pollution at ports.Competitive Grant, RebatesTBD $3,000,000,000 TBD TBDTBDWaiting for guidanceFunding request depends on award being issued for competitive grant, FOA yet to be published.IRA Sec. 60103Greenhouse Gas Reduction FundEPA Information*For Sec. 134(a)(1) eligible applicants are States, municipalities, tribal governments and eligible recipients defined in 134(c)(1). *For Sec. 134(a)(2)&(3) eligible applicants are eligible recipients defined in 134(c)(1).*134(c)(1) provides that an eligible recipient is a nonprofit organization that (A) is designed to provide capital, leverage private capital, and provide other forms of financial assistance for the rapid deployment of low‐ and zero‐emission products, technologies, and services; (B) does not take deposits other than deposits from repayments and other revenue received from financial assistance using the grant funds; (C) is funded by public or charitable contributions; and (D) invests in or finances projects alone or in conjunction with other investors.*Sec. 134(a)(1) for competitive grants to enable low‐income and disadvantaged communities to deploy or benefit from zero‐emission technologies, including distributed technologies on residential rooftops;*Sec. 134(a)(2) for competitive grants to eligible entities to provide financial and technical assistance to projects that reduce or avoid greenhouse gas emissions; and*Sec. 134(a)(3) for competitive grants to eligible entities to provide financial and technical assistance to projects that reduce or avoid greenhouse gas emissions in low‐income and disadvantaged communities.Competitive GrantApplication estimated to open Early Summer 2023Sec. 134(a)(1) $7 billion, Sec. 134(a)(2) $12 billion, Sec. 134(a)(3) $8 billionTBD TBDTBDWaiting for guidance*HB 154 Alaska Energy Independence Fund proposed to set up a fund for future awards. *AHFC and AEA collaborating on program. *Funding request depends on award being issued for competitive grant, FOA yet to be published.MicrogridsUnderserved and Indigenous Community MicrogridsDE‐FOA‐0002933*TBDThe objective of this planned FOA would be to conduct coordinated research, development, and implementation of replicable microgrid solutions for underserved and Indigenous communities in remote and islanded regions throughout the United States.Competitive Grant / Cooperative Agreement Application period was not open as of 4/18/23TBD TBD TBDTBDWaiting for guidanceFunding request depends on award being issued for competitive grant, FOA yet to be published.Page 4 AEA Infrastructure Awards: Submitted, Pending, Potential Section Number TitleFOA Number / Program GuidanceApplicable Stakeholders General Scope/Objectives Funding TypeStatus / Critical Program DatesApproximate Total Federal Funding Available for All AwardsAlaska Specific FundingMatch SharePoint of Contact Notes / Federal Receipt AuthorityIRA Part 2 50123 State Based Energy Efficiency Contractor TrainingWebsite*StatesProvide training and education to contractors involved in the installation of home energy efficiency and electrification improvementsCompetitive GrantTBD $200,000,000 TBD TBD TBDAHFC will likely be lead. Waiting for guidance to be issued.IIJA 41008/ IRA 50161Industrial Decarbonization and Emissions Reduction DemonstrationDE‐FOA‐0002936Funding high‐impact, large‐scale, transformational projects to significantly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from high‐emitting industrial subsectors to build confidence in the technical and commercial viability of emissions reduction technologies and integrated solutions. OCED will support cross‐cutting industrial decarbonization approaches via energy efficiency; industrial electrification; low‐carbon fuels, feedstocks, and energy sources; and carbon capture and utilization for emissions that are difficult to abate through other pathways. Competitive GrantConcept Paper Submitted Applications Due 8/4/2023$6,000,000,000 TBD Trident is lead Trident is applicantIIJA Sec, 40342Clean Energy Demonstration Program on Current and Former Mine LandDE‐FOA‐0003009*Institutes of Higher Education*Indian nations*States*Local Governments*Incorporated Consortia*Unincorporated ConsortiaThe purpose of the CEML Program is to demonstrate replicable clean energy projects on current and former mine land that help resolve key barriers to clean energy development on mine land. This program will advance place‐based energy solutions that address specific community needs. These demonstration projects are expected to be replicable, providing knowledge and experience that catalyze the next generation of clean energy on mine land projects.Competitive GrantConcept Papers Due 5/11/2023Application Due 8/31/23$500,000,000 over 5 years $0 50%Audrey Alstrom(aalstrom@akenergyauthority.org)AEA is preparing a letter to the Alaska Miners Associations informing them of the opportunity.IIJA 11101 and 11401Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Grants (community charging & corridor charging)NOFO 693JJ323NF00004*States or political subdivisions*Metropolitan Planning Organization*Local Government*Special purpose district*Public authority with transportation function*Tribe*Territory*Program funds will be made available each fiscal year for Community Grants, to install electric vehicle charging and alternative fuel in locations on public roads, schools, parks, and in publicly accessible parking facilities. These grants will be prioritized for rural areas, low‐and moderate‐income neighborhoods, and communities with low ratios of private parking, or high ratios of multiunit dwellings.Competitive GrantDOT to be lead on applicationFY 22‐23 Application Due May 30th AEA, DOT, Launch Alaska, and AML working on project development for community charging$2,500,000,000 $0 20%*DOT lead*AEA Contact Josi Hartley*DOT responsible for requesting receipt authority and match.IRA Sec. 60114Climate Pollution Reduction GrantsEPA Program Info*States, Municipalities, TribesTo develop and implement plans for reducing greenhouse gasesFormula Grant for Planning and Competitive Grants for ImplementationPlanning Grant Work plan Due 4/8/23$250,000,000 for planning$4,600,000,000 for implementation$3,000,000 for planning formula grantnone for planning TBD for implementationDEC Lead*DEC responsible for requesting receipt authority.IRA Sec. 50131Assistance for Latest and Zero Building Energy Code AdoptionDE‐FOA‐0003055 (not issued yet)*State and local governments with authority to adopt building codeGrants to assist states and units of local government that have authority to adopt and implement building codes to (1) adopt codes for residential buildings that meet or exceed the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code; and/or (2) adopt a building energy code for commercial buildings that meet or exceed the ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1–2019.Competitive GrantFOA release anticipated October 2023$1,000,000,000 TBD TBDAHF will likely be lead. Waiting for guidance*AHFC will likely be lead. Waiting for guidance to be issued.IIJA Sec. 40511Building Codes Implementation for Efficiency and ResilienceDE‐FOA‐0002813*State and State Partnerships*Enable sustained, cost‐effective implementation of updated building energy codes to save customers money on their energy bills.*Create training materials.*Collect and disseminate quantitative data on construction and code implementation.*Plan and Implementation of updates in energy codes.Competitive GrantConcept Paper Due 1/31/23Application Due 3/27/23$225,000,000 $0 TBD AHFC lead*AHFC responsible for requesting receipt authority. AHFC submitted application for $2.5M.Page 5 813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Program Update 1. Events, Outreach, Schedule o NEVI Applications Due: May 15, 2023 o AKEVWG Quarterly Meeting: May 22, 2023 o NEVI Application Review Committee: May 23, 2023 o Alaska Sustainable Energy Conference: May 22-25, 2023 o NEVI Plan Workshops: Week of June 10th 2. NEVI RFA o Evaluation Committee Members 3. Post Award Selection Process o DOT&PF Process Meeting 1. STIP/TIP a. AEA to develop TIP to be incorporated into STIP b. 45 day public comment period c. STIP to be effective October 1st, project capital available at this time 2. Billing/Reimbursements, Project Agreements a. Site-specific project agreements between DOT&PF, AEA and site hosts b. Payment will be made directly from DOT&PF to site hosts c. AEA to draft project agreement, DOT&PF to review d. Project agreements to be signed by site hosts by end of September 2023 e. DOT&PF Environmental to conduct NEPA Review f. DOT&PF ICAP and AEA Indirect Match Finding 3. Federal Project Agreement, Authorization to Proceed (ATP) a. Site-specific project agreements through FHWA b. Three ATP’s per project: Preliminary Design, Final Design, Construction and Utilities c. Need more clarity from FHWA regarding ATP activities 4. Charging and Fueling Infrastructure (CFI) Discretionary Grant Program o Plan to submit joint application (ongoing), due May 30 • DOT&PF, AML, AEA, Launch Alaska, Communities • Rural/DAC Community Charging and State Fleet Electrification • DOT&PF Primary Applicant w/ DOT&PF match, AML to lead development 5. FY24 NEVI Implementation Plan o No information yet from Joint Office on FY24 Plan Requirements o Stakeholder Engagement Outcomes o Anticipated Due Date: August 1, 2023 pg. 1 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law - SECTION 40101(d) – PREVENTING OUTAGES AND ENHANCING THE RESILIENCE OF THE ELECTRIC GRID FORMULA GRANTS State of Alaska Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Submission Deadline: May 31, 2023 Program Narrative Under the authorizing statutes of Section 40101(D) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), and as authorized by the Office of Governor Michael Dunleavy of the State of Alaska, the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) has been selected as the sole eligible applicant charged with administering subaward grants to eligible entities. Accordingly, this Program Narrative is provided by the AEA, which is serving as the official designated applicant applying for funding as apportioned directly to the State of Alaska, under the U.S. Department of Energy’s IIJA Preventing Outages and Enhancing the Resilience of the Electric Grid Formula Grant Program. 1. Objectives and Metrics: AEA has established the following four objectives and supporting metrics to guide decisions involving resilience investments made in conjunction with this grant. Objective #1: Reduce the likelihood and consequences of natural hazard events (e.g., winter storms, extreme temperatures, wildfires, floods, earthquakes, landslides, etc.) causing disruption to normal grid operations and critical facilities within Alaska’s most populated and economically vital communities. Metrics (Provisional): Electric system reliability as measured by one of the four main IEEE 1366 metrics by which electric system reliability is measured: SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI, and MAIFI. Total number of incidents of power disruption caused by a natural hazard each year as compared to the average number of incidents within the past 10 years (total reduction of incidents after grant investment). Objective #2: Equip Alaska’s most populated and economically vital communities with modernized grid infrastructure. Grid improvements will enhance energy resilience, increase electrification, and address other evolving system needs over the coming decades. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 2 Metrics (Provisional): Total project expenditures on 69kVa equipment (transmission lines or substations) or higher, reported as a percentage of total resilience expenditures. Miles of transmission lines and number of substations improved with resilience measures to mitigate impacts of disruptive events. Population served by transmission line and substation resilience improvements. Average age of energy asset that has been replaced or modernized on grid infrastructure. Objective #3: Reduce the energy burden and the cost experienced by customers within disadvantaged communities or tribal lands, as well as all areas served by the resilience investment, due to inadequate electric grid infrastructure. Communities that are disadvantaged are those as identified by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Disadvantaged Communities Reporter Tool. The tool shows census tracts categorized as disadvantaged communities in blue and federally recognized tribal lands and U.S. territories in green. Federally recognized tribal lands and U.S. territories are considered disadvantaged communities in accordance with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)'s Interim Guidance for the Justice40 Initiative. Metrics (Provisional): Average retail electric rate for residential customers in disadvantaged communities and all other areas served by the resilience investment. Typical monthly electric bill for residential customers for 500 kWh in disadvantaged communities and all other areas served by the resilience investment . Typical monthly electric bill as a percentage of community (census tract) median household income in disadvantaged communities and all other areas served by the resilience investment. Objective #4: Increase the skilled workforce by assuring that any installed resilience measures can be operated and maintained by local workers and businesses, where po ssible. Metrics (Provisional): Number of new, full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs created to operate and maintain grid resilience projects. Percentage of union vs non-union FTE jobs created to operate and maintain grid resilience projects. Number of apprenticeships or vocational opportunities created for members of disadvantaged communities during implementation, construction, operations, or maintenance of energy resilience projects. Workforce residing in state vs out-of-state for construction and operations. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 3 2. Criteria: Top priority will be given to resilience projects that: Benefit the most populated and economically vital communities. Address grid infrastructure vulnerabilities to flood, severe storm, and fire hazards which comprise the majority of presidentially declared disasters in Alaska and are increasing in frequencies since 19851. Serve one or more disadvantaged communities as identified by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Disadvantaged Communities Reporter Tool. Advance the economic vitality of the state through sustaining or creating good-paying jobs. The selection of eligible entities and respective grid resilience projects will be done in accordance with AEA standardized scoring criteria, as follows: Population Impacted: 30% or up to 30 points 1. The application should include a description of the total population served by a proposed project (no description = 0 points, less than 20,000 served = 3 points, each additional 10,000 served = 3 points with a maximum of 15 points possible). 2. The application should include a description of how the proposed project will serve one or more census tracts defined as a disadvantaged community (no description = 0 points, each census tract is worth 3 points with a maximum of 15 points possible). Risk Reduction/Resilience Effectiveness: 20% or up to 20 points 1. The application should include a description of how the project will reduce the current risk of disruptive events (an event in which operations of the electric grid are disrupted, preventively shut off, or cannot operate safely due to capacity constraints, redundancy and/or an equipment failure , etc. Criterion score should be based on a qualitative assessment of whether the narrative includes details regarding how the project will reduce the current risk of disruptive events; not at all = 0 points, minimally = 4 points, partially = 8 points, mostly = 12 points, entirely = 16 points, and exceeds = 20 points. Extreme Weather Event Adaptation: 15% or up to 15 points 1. The application should include a description of the frequency and severity of extreme weather in the provider service area and how the project would mitigate the future risk of disruptive events whereby operations or the electric grid are disrupted, preventatively shut off, or cannot operate safely due to extreme weather, wildfire, or natural disaster2. Criterion score should be based on a qualitative assessment of whether the narrative includes details regarding how the project will reduce future disruptive events caused by extreme weather; not at all = 0 points, 1 https://ready.alaska.gov/Documents/Mitigation/StatePlan/Ch08-RiskAnalysis.pdf 2 42 U.S.C. 18711(a)(1) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 4 minimally = 3 points, partially = 6 points, mostly = 9 points, entirely = 12 points, and exceeds = 15 points. Data Sources: 5% or up to 5 points 1. The application should include a description of where the project is documented in a data-driven planning document and/or has been identified as a provider priority via a board priority/resolution related to system resiliency, and supporting documentation is referenced and/or the location of any supporting data or narratives is linked to the application or attached (not included = 0 points, included = 2 points). 2. The application should reference any climate change model that highlights changes to the future physical environment including impacts to the safety and reliability of providing energy to utility customers (reference excluded = 0 points, reference included = 3 points). Implementation Measures: 15% or up to 15 points 1. The application should include a detailed project schedule that includes design, permits, site control, and construction timeframe breakouts. a. The application schedule should indicate whether the project will go to construction within the desired 5-year period of performance. (construction timeframe not addressed = 0 points, construction is not proposed within the 5- year period of performance = 0 points, construction is proposed within the 5 - year period of performance = 5 points). b. The application schedule should include an appropriate level of detail and proposed timeframes should be adequate and reasonable (details and timeframes are not included = 0 points, schedule details and proposed timeframes are not adequate and reasonable = 0 points, schedule details and proposed timeframes are adequate and reasonable = 5 points). 2. The application should include a reasonably specific and/or detailed explanation of the extent to which an eligible entity plans to utilize project labor agreements, local hire agreements, and/or has or will develop a plan to attract, train, and retain a local workforce including minority/women owned businesses (explanation excluded = 0 points, specific/detailed explanation included = 5 points). Community Engagement: 5% or up to 5 points 1. The application should reference any utility public outreach plan for electronic and/or in-person stakeholder and public outreach associated with identification and development of the project (reference excluded = 0 points, reference included = 5 points). Leveraging Partnerships: 10% or up to 10 points 1. The application should include letters of support from partner organizations (letters of support excluded = 0 points, letters of support included = 2 points) 2. The application should include a description of how the applicant will provide matching funds (e.g., in-kind and/or cash contributions) that are equal to 1/3 or DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 5 more of the federal share of the project cost (non-federal matching funds equal to 1/3 of federal share = 4 points, every 5% greater than 1/3 of federal share = 1 additional point with a maximum of 8 points possible). Alaska is served by small electricity utility providers that sell less than 4,000,000 megawatt hours of electricity per year. Accordingly, AEA anticipates sub-grantee awards will be issued to eligible entities that sell not more than 4,000,000 megawatts per year. 2. Methods: AEA anticipates issuing a competitive solicitation for grant applications. The competitive solicitation period will be no less than 45 days in duration , and will be publicly advertised via AEA’s website and media advisories to industry advocacy groups. Additionally, AEA will issue email notifications to its subscriber base. AEA’s grants coordinator will be responsible for accepting applications, coordinating communications with applicants, and posting any changes or clarifications to the solicitation. AEA’s Planning Manager is responsible for coordinating the evaluation of all applications received through the competitive solicitation each year. Please refer to the 2. Criteria section for the proposed scoring evaluation criteria, which align with AEA’s stated objectives under 1. Objectives and Metrics. AEA anticipates requiring sub-grantees to submit quarterly status reports throughout the project performance period. This will be done to maintain updated data on project delivery and to collect the metrics as outlined in 1. Objectives and Metrics. Additionally, AEA anticipates completing a project audit two years after project closeout. 3. Funding Distribution: Eligible Entities to Apply The proposed competitive solicitation process will be open to the following eligible entities holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) as issued by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA): a) an electric grid operator; b) an electricity storage operator; c) an electricity generator; d) a transmission owner or operator; or a State owner of transmission or generation assets without a CPCN; e) any other relevant entity, as determined by the Secretary (of DOE). Additionally, AEA will accept joint applications comprised of one or more of the above eligible entities for a specific project. An eligible entity may submit no more than three grant applications under the competitive solicitation, inclusive of both single applications and joint applications with a group of eligible entities. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 6 Minimum Grant Amount and Performance Period AEA has established a minimum grant award amount of $2 million. Awarded projects must start construction and preferably complete construction within a 5-year performance period. The period of performance may be extended to span the amount of time necessary for sub-grantees to complete all subaward project efforts, up to a maximum of 10 years, inclusive of the initial 5-year period, at the sole discretion of AEA and subject to the approval of DOE. Non-federal Match Requirements Alaska is served by small electricity utility providers that sell not more than 4,000,000 megawatts per year. Accordingly, the cost match requirement for sub-grantees is 1/3 of the Federal share of the cost of each respective project. AEA will allow the match to be provided through cash or in-kind contributions in accordance with the grant requirements. This will be set-forth in the grant agreement between AEA and each respective sub-grantee. The match amount required for a joint application will be based on the megawatt hours of electricity sold per year for each eligible entity partnering in the joint application, not the collective megawatt hours of electricity sold as a whole. Accordingly, if the partnering eligible entities of a joint application each sell not more than 4,000,000 megawatt hours of electricity per year, the required match will be one-third of the amount of the subaward. In addition to sub-grantee match requirements, AEA will provide a 15% cost match of the Federal allocation as required by the program. Eligible Uses of Funds Sub-grantees may use grant awards to implement a wide range of resilience measures intended to mitigate the impact of disruptive events, including: Weatherization technologies and equipment; Fire-resistant technologies and fire prevention systems; Monitoring and control technologies; The undergrounding of electrical equipment; Utility pole management; The relocation of power lines or the reconductoring of power lines with low-sag, advanced conductors; Vegetation and fuel-load management; The use or construction of “distributed energy resources” (“DERs”) for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events, including: o Microgrids; and o Battery storage subcomponents Adaptive protection technologies Advanced modeling technologies; Hardening of power lines, facilities, substations, of other systems; and DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 7 Replacement of old overhead conductors and underground cables. Funding may also be used for the training, recruitment, retention, and reskilling of skilled and properly credentialed workers in order to perform the work required for the particular resilience measures listed above. Ineligible Uses of Funds Ineligible project types and uses of funds include the following: Construction of a new: electric generating facility; or large-scale battery storage facility that is not used for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events; and Cybersecurity. 4. Equity Approach: AEA is committed to sharing and maximizing project benefits across disadvantaged communities and tribal lands by selecting projects that invest in quality jobs, generate the greatest community benefit, and promote diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility. Quality Jobs: As part of its selection criteria Implementation Measures (15% weight), AEA will evaluate the extent to which an eligible entity plans to utilize project labor agreements, local hire agreements, and/or has or will develop a plan to attract, train, and retain a local workforce including minority/women owned businesses. Additionally, AEA will consider job creation estimates for each project. Projects with the greatest impact on new job creation and attracting, training, and retaining a local workforce will rank the highest under the Implementation Measu res selection criteria. Sub-grantees will also be required to adhere to all terms and conditions of the grant agreement, including those that pertain to prevailing wages, American- made products, and a free and fair choice to join or form a union. Greatest Community Benefit: As part of its selection criteria Population Impacted (30%), AEA will evaluate the number of residents, businesses, and disadvantaged communities and/or tribal lands served by a proposed project. Residents and businesses will be reported at the borough/municipal level utilizing U.S. Census Bureau (1) ACS 5-Year Estimates for population; and (2) Business and County Business Patterns & Nonemployer Statistics data for business and nonemployer establishments. AEA is proposing to utilize the U.S. Department of Energy’s Disadvantaged Communities Reporter Tool to determine if a proposed project will serve one or more census tracts defined as a disadvantaged commun ity. Projects serving one or more of the following will rank the highest under the Greatest Community Benefit selection criteria: o Serving more than 50,000 residents; and DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 8 o Serving one or more disadvantaged communities. 5. Technical Assistance and Administration: In total, AEA proposes that 5% of the annual Federal grant fund allocation be utilized for AEA project administration and technical assistance. An AEA project manager will be assigned to assist each sub-grantee whose application is selected for subaward grant funding. AEA’s project management will vary according to the project management plan developed under the grant agreement with the goal of safeguarding Federal and State investment in the project. At a minimum, the AEA project manager will clarify grant requirements, review progress reports and billing, and review and accept deliverables of the grant project. The project management plan developed under the grant agreement may have sub-grantees self- manage the awarded project or have AEA manage the project. Unless AEA is the primary project manager, sub-grantees will be required to have staff or a contractor available to perform all of the duties required to adequately manage the project. AEA’s project manager will also support technical assistance as needed, which is anticipated to include a broad range of eligible entity questions regarding the application process, potential projects, reporting metrics, and so forth. 6. Public Notice and Hearing: AEA held four public hearings and facilitated two open comment periods, as follows. All meetings were made available for both in-person and virtual attendance. Public Hearing and Comment Period #1 Notice of Meetings Published: August 31st, 2022 Public Meeting #1: September 7th, 2022 @ 1PM AKST / 5PM EST Public Meeting #2: September 13th, 2022 @ 11AM AKST / 3PM EST End of Public Comment Period: September 20th, 2022 Public Hearing and Comment Period #2 Notice of Meeting Published: December 6th, 2022 Public Meeting #3: December 13th, 2022 @ 1PM AKST / 5PM EST Notice of Meeting Published: January 6th, 2023 Public Meeting #4: January 12th, 2023 @ 10:30AM AKST / 2:30PM EST End of Public Comment Period: January 26th, 2023 Additionally, AEA created a website specifically concerning the 40101(d) - PREVENTING OUTAGES AND ENHANCING THE RESILIENCE OF THE ELECTRIC GRID FORMULA GRANTS TO STATES AND INDIAN TRIBES where members of the public can access updates and information regarding the program. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D 813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG RGYAUTHORITY.ORG Alaska Energy Authority Cost Match Information for BIL Sec. 40101(d) Application Requirements Alaska Energy Authority Cost Match: $3,633,158.00 Federal Allocation for State of Alaska (Funding Years 1 & 2): $22,174,492.00 Alaska Energy Authority Cost Match as Percentage Share of Federal Allocation: 16.3% Type of Cost Match: Cash, as appropriated by the Alaska State Legislature (see Appendix A for supporting documentation). DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2 Appendix A: Cost Match Supporting Documentation DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Enrolled HB 281 -143- Enrolled HB 281 * Sec. 32. INSURANCE CLAIMS: CAPITAL. The amounts to be received in settlement of 1 insurance claims for losses and the amounts to be received as recovery for losses are 2 appropriated from the general fund to the 3 (1) state insurance catastrophe reserve account (AS 37.05.289(a)); or 4 (2) appropriate state agency to mitigate the loss. 5 * Sec. 33. NATIONAL PETROLEUM RESERVE - ALASKA IMPACT GRANT 6 PROGRAM: CAPITAL. The amount received by the National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska 7 special revenue fund (AS 37.05.530(a)) under 42 U.S.C. 6506a(l) or former 42 U.S.C. 6508 8 by June 30, 2022, estimated to be $13,800,000, is appropriated from that fund to the 9 Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development for capital project grants 10 under the National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska impact grant program. 11 * Sec. 34. DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION: CAPITAL. The sum of $250,000 is 12 appropriated from the general fund to the Department of Administration, division of finance, 13 for the creation of a centralized website that contains unaudited and estimated statewide 14 financial information and related expenses, including the procurement of software, server 15 capacity, design expertise, and contractor assistance with design, programming, and reporting. 16 * Sec. 35. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, COMMUNITY, AND ECONOMIC 17 DEVELOPMENT: CAPITAL. (a) The amount of interest earned on funds from the 2016 18 Volkswagen Settlement environmental mitigation trust, estimated to be $400,000, is 19 appropriated to the Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development, 20 Alaska Energy Authority, for activities related to the Volkswagen Settlement. 21 (b) The sum of $100,000,000 is appropriated from the budget reserve fund 22 (AS 37.05.540(a)) to the Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development 23 for payment as a grant under AS 37.05.315 to the Municipality of Anchorage for the Port of 24 Alaska modernization project, to be distributed as follows: 25 (1) $25,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2023; and 26 (2) $75,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2024. 27 (c) The Municipality of Anchorage shall, not later than February 1, 2023, submit a 28 report on the Port of Alaska modernization project to the co-chairs of the finance committees 29 of each house of the legislature and the legislative finance division. The report must include a 30 financial plan for the Port of Alaska modernization project. 31 DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Enrolled HB 281 -144- (d) The unexpended and unobligated balance, not to exceed $3,633,158 of the 1 estimated balance of $4,395,564, of the appropriation made in sec. 78(c), ch. 1, SSSLA 2002, 2 as amended by sec. 69, ch. 29, SLA 2008, and sec. 7(b), ch. 5, SLA 2012 (Department of 3 Commerce, Community, and Economic Development, Alaska Energy Authority, upgrade and 4 extend the Anchorage to Fairbanks power transmission intertie to the Teeland substation), is 5 reappropriated to the Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development, 6 Alaska Energy Authority, for statewide grid resilience and reliability for the fiscal years 7 ending June 30, 2023, and June 30, 2024. 8 (e) The sum of $750,000 is appropriated to the Department of Commerce, 9 Community, and Economic Development, Alcohol and Marijuana Control Office, for the 10 licensing and enforcement solutions project, from the following sources: 11 (1) $375,000 from the general fund; 12 (2) $375,000 from general fund program receipts for the licensing and 13 application fees related to the regulation of alcohol. 14 * Sec. 36. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT: 15 CAPITAL. The unexpended and unobligated balance, after the appropriations made in secs. 16 41 and 52(a) of this Act, not to exceed $95,000 of the total estimated balance of $705,300, of 17 the appropriation made in sec. 1, ch. 18, SLA 2014, page 9, lines 9 - 11 (Angoon, existing 18 community sewer system and outfall line replacement - $709,500), is reappropriated to the 19 Department of Education and Early Development for Mount Edgecumbe High School 20 bleachers and swimming and water survival education equipment. 21 * Sec. 37. DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES: CAPITAL. (a) 22 The unexpended and unobligated balances of the following appropriations are reappropriated 23 to the Department of Family and Community Services for the purposes stated below: 24 (1) sec. 5(c), ch. 10, SLA 2007, as amended by secs. 12(b) and 30(a) - (c), ch. 25 38, SLA 2015, and sec. 21(j)(3), ch. 1, TSSLA 2017 (Department of Health and Social 26 Services, Fairbanks virology laboratory completion), for completion of the Fairbanks virology 27 laboratory; 28 (2) sec. 1, ch. 5, FSSLA 2011, page 2, lines 13 - 14, as amended by sec. 16(a), 29 ch. 1, TSSLA 2017 (Department of Health and Social Services, deferred maintenance, 30 renovation, repair, and equipment for Alaska Pioneers' Homes), for deferred maintenance, 31 DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D 10. a. Name and Address of Lobbying Registrant: 9. Award Amount, if known: $ * Street 1 * City State Zip Street 2 * Last Name Prefix * First Name Middle Name Suffix DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES Complete this form to disclose lobbying activities pursuant to 31 U.S.C.1352 OMB Number: 4040-0013 Expiration Date: 02/28/2022 1. * Type of Federal Action: a. contract b. grant c. cooperative agreement d. loan e. loan guarantee f. loan insurance 2. * Status of Federal Action: a. bid/offer/application b. initial award c. post-award 3. * Report Type: a. initial filing b. material change 4. Name and Address of Reporting Entity: Prime SubAwardee * Name Alaska Energy Authority * Street 1 813 W Northern Lights Blvd Street 2 * City Anchorage State AK: Alaska Zip 99515 Congressional District, if known: 5. If Reporting Entity in No.4 is Subawardee, Enter Name and Address of Prime: 6. * Federal Department/Agency: DOE/NETL 7. * Federal Program Name/Description: Electricity, Research, Development & Analysis CFDA Number, if applicable: 81.122 8. Federal Action Number, if known: DE-FOA-0002736 b. Individual Performing Services (including address if different from No. 10a) Prefix * First Name Middle Name * Street 1 * City State Zip Street 2 11. * Last Name Suffix Information requested through this form is authorized by title 31 U.S.C. section 1352. This disclosure of lobbying activities is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed by the tier above when the transaction was made or entered into. This disclosure is required pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1352. This information will be reported to the Congress semi-annually and will be available for public inspection. Any person who fails to file the required disclosure shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. * Signature: *Name:Prefix * First Name Curtis Middle Name * Last Name Thayer Suffix Title:Executive Director Telephone No.:907-771-3000 Date: Federal Use Only: Authorized for Local Reproduction Standard Form - LLL (Rev. 7-97) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D 4/14/2023 OMB Number: 4040-0004 Expiration Date: 11/30/2025 * 1. Type of Submission: * 2. Type of Application: * 3. Date Received: 4. Applicant Identifier: 5a. Federal Entity Identifier: 5b. Federal Award Identifier: 6. Date Received by State: 7. State Application Identifier: * a. Legal Name: * b. Employer/Taxpayer Identification Number (EIN/TIN): * c. UEI: * Street1: Street2: * City: County/Parish: * State: Province: * Country: * Zip / Postal Code: Department Name: Division Name: Prefix: * First Name: Middle Name: * Last Name: Suffix: Title: Organizational Affiliation: * Telephone Number: Fax Number: * Email: * If Revision, select appropriate letter(s): * Other (Specify): State Use Only: 8. APPLICANT INFORMATION: d. Address: e. Organizational Unit: f. Name and contact information of person to be contacted on matters involving this application: Application for Federal Assistance SF-424 Preapplication Application Changed/Corrected Application New Continuation Revision ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY 92-6001185 F3N8ZSHJXUH8 813 W NORTHERN LIGHTS BLVD ANCHORAGE AK: Alaska USA: UNITED STATES 99503-2407 Mr.Conner Erickson Director of Planning 907-771-3000 907-771-3044 cerickson@akenergyauthority.org DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D * 9. Type of Applicant 1: Select Applicant Type: Type of Applicant 2: Select Applicant Type: Type of Applicant 3: Select Applicant Type: * Other (specify): * 10. Name of Federal Agency: 11. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: CFDA Title: * 12. Funding Opportunity Number: * Title: 13. Competition Identification Number: Title: 14. Areas Affected by Project (Cities, Counties, States, etc.): * 15. Descriptive Title of Applicant's Project: Attach supporting documents as specified in agency instructions. Application for Federal Assistance SF-424 A: State Government Department of Energy 81.122 Electricity, Research, Development & Analysis DE-FOA-0002736 BIL - SECTION 40101(d) – PREVENTING OUTAGES AND ENHANCING THE RESILIENCE OF THE ELECTRIC GRID FORMULA GRANTS TO STATES AND INDIAN TRIBES BIL - SECTION 40101(d) – PREVENTING OUTAGES AND ENHANCING THE RESILIENCE OF THE ELECTRIC GRID FORMULA GRANTS TO STATE OF ALASKA View AttachmentsDelete AttachmentsAdd Attachments View AttachmentDelete AttachmentAdd Attachment DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D * a. Federal * b. Applicant * c. State * d. Local * e. Other * f. Program Income * g. TOTAL . Prefix: * First Name: Middle Name: * Last Name: Suffix: * Title: * Telephone Number: * Email: Fax Number: * Signature of Authorized Representative: * Date Signed: 18. Estimated Funding ($): 21. *By signing this application, I certify (1) to the statements contained in the list of certifications** and (2) that the statements herein are true, complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I also provide the required assurances** and agree to comply with any resulting terms if I accept an award. I am aware that any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or claims may subject me to criminal, civil, or administrative penalties. (U.S. Code, Title 18, Section 1001) ** The list of certifications and assurances, or an internet site where you may obtain this list, is contained in the announcement or agency specific instructions. Authorized Representative: Application for Federal Assistance SF-424 * a. Applicant Attach an additional list of Program/Project Congressional Districts if needed. * b. Program/Project * a. Start Date: * b. End Date: 16. Congressional Districts Of: 17. Proposed Project: AK-all AK-all Add Attachment Delete Attachment View Attachment 22,174,492.00 3,633,158.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25,807,650.00 a. This application was made available to the State under the Executive Order 12372 Process for review on b. Program is subject to E.O. 12372 but has not been selected by the State for review. c. Program is not covered by E.O. 12372. Yes No Add Attachment Delete Attachment View Attachment ** I AGREE Curtis Thayer Executive Director 907-771-3000 907-771-3044 cthayer@akenergyauthority.org * 20. Is the Applicant Delinquent On Any Federal Debt? (If "Yes," provide explanation in attachment.) * 19. Is Application Subject to Review By State Under Executive Order 12372 Process? If "Yes", provide explanation and attach DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D 4/14/2023 Last Updated March 22, 2022 PRE-AWARD INFORMATION SHEET THE USE OF THE PRE-AWARD INFORMATION SHEET TEMPLATE IS OPTIONAL, BUT ALL DATA ELEMENTS WITHIN THE PRE-AWARD INFORMATION SHEET ARE MANDATORY. A. BUSINESS ASSURANCES AND PAYMENT INFORMATION 1. DISCLOSURE OF POTENTIAL IMPROPRIETIES Below, please disclose if any of the following conditions exist. If the answer to any question (a) through (g) below is yes, provide a detailed explanation in an attachment to this document. a. Is the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals1 under investigation for or charged with a covered offense2? Yes 1 For this form, “principal” means: (1) An officer, director, owner, partner, principal investigator (PI), or other person (as defined in 2 C.F.R. 180.95) within the project team with management or supervisory responsibilities related to this project and any resulting transaction; or (2) A consultant or other person, whether or not employed by the Recipient, Subrecipient, or their principals, or paid with Federal funds, who (a) is in a position to handle Federal funds, (b) is in a position to influence or control the use of those funds, or (c) occupies a technical or professional position capable of substantially influencing the development or outcome of an activity required to perform the transaction, including but not limited to, any Co-PIs. 2 For this form, “covered offenses” include: (1) Commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public or private agreement or transaction; (2) Violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes, including those proscribing price fixing between competitors, allocation of customers between competitors, and bid rigging; (3) Commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, tax evasion, receiving stolen property, making false claims, or obstruction of justice; or (4) Commission of any other offense indicating a lack of business integrity or business honesty that seriously and directly affects the Recipient’s present responsibility. Name of Organization Street Address City and County State and Zip + 4 (matches the USPS database) Alaska Energy Authority 813 West Northern Lights Boulevard Anchorage, Alaska 99503 ALRD/FOA Number DE‐FOA‐0002736 Business Officer and contact information: Pamela Ellis, Controller 907-771-3981 pellis@akenergyauthority.org Technical Project Manager and contact information: Conner Erickson, Director of Planning 907-771-3025 cerickson@akenergyauthority.org Unique Entity Identifier F3N 8ZS HJX UH8 Organization’s Fiscal Year End Date 06/30/2023 DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 2 of 10 No b. Has the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals been convicted of a covered offense in the last five-years or had a civil judgment rendered against them for one of those offenses in that time period? Yes No c. Is the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals under investigation for potential violation of U.S. export control laws and regulations, or has the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals been convicted of any violations of U.S. export control laws and regulations? Yes No d. Is the proposed Recipient or Subrecipient(s) under investigation for potential violations of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988, or has the proposed Recipient or Subrecipient(s) been convicted of any violations of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988? Yes No e. Is the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals under investigation for research misconduct, or has the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals been convicted of research misconduct? Yes No f. Has any Federal agency recommended or initiated proceedings against the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals for suspension or debarment, or is the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals debarred, suspended, publicly banned from doing business with the Federal government, or otherwise declared ineligible from receiving Federal contracts, subcontracts or financial assistance? Yes No g. Is the proposed Recipient or Subrecipient(s) delinquent on federal debt or insolvent or at risk of insolvency or have the proposed Recipient or Subrecipient(s) filed for bankruptcy in any domestic or foreign jurisdiction? Yes No DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 3 of 10 2. POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST a. Financial Conflicts of Interest: The Recipient must disclose in writing any managed or unmanageable financial conflicts of interest involving a member of the project team (i.e. investigators) and include sufficient information to enable DOE to understand the nature and extent of the financial conflict, and to assess the appropriateness of the non-Federal entity's management plan. See Section V(b)(3) of the DOE Interim Conflict of Interest Policy. As part of this DOE funded project, does the recipient or any subrecipients have any managed or unmanageable financial conflicts of interest involving a member of the project team? No Yes. If yes, in a separate attachment, the Recipient must provide relevant disclosures/supporting documentation as required by the DOE Interim Conflict of Interest Policy Section V(b)(3). b. Organizational Conflicts of Interest3: The Recipient must disclose in writing any potential or actual organizational conflict of interest to DOE. See DOE Interim Conflict of Interest Policy Section VI and 2 CFR 200.318 for more information. As part of this DOE funded project, does the recipient or any subrecipients intend to engage in a procurement with a parent, affiliate, or subsidiary organization that is not a state, local government, or Indian tribe? No Yes. If yes, in a separate attachment, the Recipient must provide relevant disclosures/supporting documentation as required by the DOE Interim Conflict of Interest Policy Section VI. 3. PAYMENT INFORMATION AND ASSURANCES a. Has your organization received any prior DOE awards administered by NETL? If yes, please list the most recent award number: DE-OE-0000795 EETF Microgrid Technology No Questions b through d are reserved for institutions of higher education, hospitals, other non-profit organizations and state and local governments that are not considered for-profit entities. b. Is the Awardee currently enrolled with the U.S. Department of Treasury/ASAP system (Automated Standard Application for Payment System)? Yes, please enter Awardee Seven-digit ASAP ID Number: 0265466 No c. Please provide the following contact information for ASAP and/or Payments: Important: If not currently enrolled in the ASAP system, the person identified below will be contacted by the U.S. Department of Treasury with further instruction on completing the ASAP enrollment process. ASAP / Payments Contact Person: Amy Jackson Phone No.: 907-771-3902 Extension: n/a E-mail: ajackson@aidea.org 3 Organizational Conflict of Interest means a situation where because of relationships with a parent company, affiliate, or subsidiary organization, the non-Federal entity is unable or appears to be unable to be impartial in conducting a procurement action involving a related organization. 2 CFR 200.318(c)(2). DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 4 of 10 d. Indicate preferred payment method below: (NOTE: this section is reserved for universities, hospitals, other non-profit organizations and state and local governments that are authorized to receive advance payments, unless a specific need is supported). Payment by Advance is preferred. Payment by Reimbursement is preferred. e. Total Estimated Project Cost is the sum of the Federal Government share and Recipient share of the estimated project costs. The Recipient’s cost share or matching must come from non-Federal sources unless otherwise allowed by law (Please reference 2 CFR 200.1 and 2 CFR 200.306). By accepting Federal funds under this award, you agree that you are liable for your percentage share of allowable project costs, on a budget period basis, even if the project is terminated early or is not funded to its completion. Yes, the percentage share of allowable project costs (cost share) will be provided on a budget period basis. If cost share is not provided on a budget period basis, please explain. Use this block to provide a detailed explanation for not providing cost share on a budget period basis or provide an attachment. f. Indicate the name, phone number, and email address of the Designated Responsible Employee for complying with national policies prohibiting discrimination (see 10 CFR 1040.5 and the Certifications and Assurances SF-424B Assurances for Non-Construction Programs or SF-424D Assurances for Construction Programs found at: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/forms/sf-424-family.html). Name/Title Curtis Thayer, Executive Director Phone No/Email 907-771-3009 cthayer@akenergyauthority.org B. ACCOUNTING SYSTEM Your organization should have an accounting system that meets government standards for recording and collecting costs in accordance with 2 CFR 200.302(b)(1). If you have not had prior government awards or a recent accounting system review, the DOE may request the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) or an independent auditor to verify that the accounting system is acceptable. Indirect costs are an acceptable cost component of an approved budget if they are adequately supported and properly allocated. Organizations proposing indirect costs will need to demonstrate that the proposed indirect (e.g., overhead, G&A) rates were developed using a methodology acceptable for Government contracting, and in accordance with applicable Federal cost principles. If a current provisional indirect rate agreement has been issued by a Federal agency then that agreement should have been provided with the initial application. If it has not been, or a more current provisional indirect rate agreement has been executed, it needs to be provided as an attachment. In the absence of a provisional indirect rate agreement, the most current final indirect rate agreement should be provided as an attachment to this document. 1. Information for Determining Cognizant Agency/Office Cognizance related duties (i.e.; negotiating provisional/final indirect rates) are the responsibility of the Cognizant Federal Agency (CFA). The CFA is the Federal agency (e.g., Department of Defense, Department of Energy, etc.) that provided the preponderance (largest amount) of funding for your awards, across all federal agencies. Once a DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 5 of 10 Federal agency assumes cognizance for an organization, it should remain cognizant for at least 5 years to ensure continuity and ease of administration. It is extremely important to confirm that you work with the correct cognizant federal agency/office. As a rule of thumb, Department of Health & Human Services (DHHS) or the Office of Naval Research (ONR) is usually the CFA for Universities, Cities, States, and Counties. DHHS/ONR cognizance is not usually transferred. Please identify the CFA by providing the following information: Agency: Denali Commission Point-of-Contact: Janet Davis Phone No.:907-271-3036 E-mail:jdavis@denali.gov To assist our office in validating the CFA, please provide the following information for the five (5) highest dollar award values for current Federal contracts, grants or awards for which the organization receives funding (either as a prime or subcontract) directly from a Governmental agency. (State and Local Governments, Institutions of Higher Education, and Tribal organizations can skip this section if DHHS/ONR is the cognizant agency). The total federal contract/award dollars should include the full project period, not just the incremental funding. Contract/Award # Awarding Agency (e.g. DOE) Awarding Office (e.g. NETL) Agency Contact Name/Phone/E- mail Start Date End Date Total Value of Contract or Subcontract DC-1551-07 Denali Commission Denali Commission Katie Conway kconway@denali.gov 907-341-9617 5/1/2018 12/31/2025 $7,350,000 DC-1571-02 Denali Commission Denali Commission Katie Conway kconway@denali.gov 907-341-9617 8/15/2019 12/31/2023 $5,605,810 DC-1618-01 Denali Commission Denali Commission Katie Conway kconway@denali.gov 907-341-9617 9/1/2020 6/30/24 $6,396,240 DC-1731-00 Denali Commission Denali Commission Katie Conway kconway@denali.gov 907-341-9617 1/1/23 3/31/2024 $5,096,032.04 HQ00052210045 CIP2019-22-01 Department of Defense Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation Tim Robert Timothy.b.robert.civ@mail.mil 916-557-7315 9/1/2022 3/31/2027 $13,024,868 If awardee has current DOE awards, identify Cognizant DOE Office (CDO) (office providing the preponderance of DOE funding), and provide DOE office name, a point-of-contact, phone number, and e-mail (If same as above, proceed to Section F, Financial Management System-Accounting System Survey). DOE Office: Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Point-of-Contact (Contracting Officer):Julie Howe Phone No.:720-356-1628 E-mail:Julie.howe@ee.doe.gov To assist our office in validating the CDO, please provide the following information for the 5 highest dollar value awards for current DOE contracts, grants or awards for which the organization receives funding (either as a prime or subcontract) directly from a DOE office. (State and Local Governments, Institutions of Higher Education, and Tribal organizations can skip this section if DHHS/ONR is the cognizant agency). The total DOE contract/award dollars should include the full project period, not just the incremental funding. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 6 of 10 DOE Contract/Award # DOE Awarding Office DOE Contact Name/Phone/E-mail Start Date End Date Total Value of Contract or Subcontract DE-EE0008618 DOE- EERE Jason Nguyen Jason.nguyen@hq.doe.gov 970-248-6707 2/1/2019 1/31/2023 $360,000 DE-EE0009472 DOE- EERE Julie Howe Julie.howe@ee.doe.gov 720-356-1628 7/01/2021 6/30/2023 $984,956 DE-EE0010056 DOE- EERE Julie Howe Julie.howe@ee.doe.gov 720-356-1628 7/1/2022 6/30/2023 $200,000 DE-OE0000795 DOE- NETL - OE Kimberly Nuhfer Kimberly.nuhfer@netl.doe.gov 304-285-6544 1/7/2016 8/30/2023 $500,000 C. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM – ACCOUNTING SYSTEM SURVEY To qualify for a financial assistance award, compliance with 2 CFR 200 as amended by 2 CFR 910 is required. This includes assurance of an adequate accounting system for estimating, accounting and billing for governmental funding received. For additional information, please visit https://www.dcaa.mil. Under “CUSTOMERS->checklists and Tools,” click on “Pre-award Accounting System Adequacy Checklist”. Please complete the checklist below as assurance of this requirement. Yes No NA 1. Has your organization’s accounting system ever been audited by DCAA? a. If yes, please provide a copy of the audit report as an attachment to this document. b. If yes, did DCAA determine the accounting system acceptable for Federal awards? c. If yes, have there been any changes to the accounting system since the DCAA audit? If the answer is “yes”, please provide a detailed explanation of the changes. Use this block to explain the changes or provide an attachment. 2. Has your organization’s accounting system been audited by an outside Certified Public Accountant/consultant or other Cognizant Federal Agency other than DCAA? Important: Annual Financial Audits should be excluded. 3. Is the Accounting System in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles applicable to the circumstances and associated applicable Federal regulations? 4. Accounting System provides for: Yes No NA a. Segregation of direct costs from indirect costs. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 7 of 10 b. Identification and accumulation of direct costs by project. c. A logical and consistent method for the allocation of indirect costs to intermediate and final cost objectives. (Project line items are final cost objective) d. Accumulation of costs under general ledger control. e. A timekeeping system that identifies employees’ labor by intermediate and final cost objective (i.e., project level, division level). f. A labor distribution system that charges direct and indirect labor to appropriate cost objectives. g. Interim (at least monthly) determination of costs charged to a project through routine posting of books of account. h. Excluding costs charged to Government projects which are not allowable in terms of 2 CFR 200, Subpart E, or 48 CFR 31.2 (FAR Part 31), Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, or other provisions, as applicable. i. Identification of costs by project line item and by units (as if each unit or line item were a separate project) if required by the proposed award. 5. Is the Accounting System designed, and are the records maintained in such a manner that adequate, reliable data are developed for use in developing cost proposals? 6. Is the Accounting System currently in full operation? 7. Is your organization’s accounting system ready for a DCAA or independent Certified Public Accountant audit? Microsoft Dynamics NAV – Dynamics 365 Business Central D. ANNUAL AUDIT REQUIREMENTS 1. Single Audit – A non-Federal entity that expends $750,000 or more during the non-Federal entity’s fiscal year in Federal awards must have a single audit conducted in accordance with 2 CFR 200.514. a. Has your organization had an independent single audit performed? Yes No b. Has your organization undergone a financial audit within the last 3 years? Yes No If Yes to either a or b, please include a copy of the audit as an attachment to this file. If No to either a or b, complete the block below. Use this block to explain why a financial audit was not completed or performed or provide an attachment. E. REPRESENTATION/CERTIFICATION Important: Certification of the information is required by the organization’s authorized representative. I certify that I have an active System for Award Management (SAM) registration. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 8 of 10 I certify that I have registered in FedConnect.net to receive award documentation. I certify that the processes undertaken to solicit any subrecipients, subawards, subcontracts and vendors comply with our organization’s written procurement procedures as outlined in “Procurement Standards” 2 CFR 200.317 through 2 CFR 200.328 inclusive. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 9 of 10 I certify the Recipient: (1) Has in effect an up-to-date, written, and enforced administrative process to identify and manage conflicts of interest with respect to all projects for which financial assistance funding is sought or received from DOE; (2) Shall promote and enforce Investigator compliance with the DOE Interim Conflict of Interest Policy requirements including those pertaining to disclosure of significant financial interests; (3) Shall manage financial conflicts of interest and provide initial and ongoing financial conflicts of interest reports to DOE; (4) Agrees to make information available, promptly upon request, to DOE relating to any Investigator disclosure of financial interests and the Recipient’s review of, and response to, such disclosure, whether or not the disclosure resulted in the Recipient’s determination of a financial conflict of interest; and (5) Shall fully comply with the requirements of the DOE Interim Conflict of Interest Policy. (6) Has in effect an up-to-date, written, and enforced policy and process for effective internal controls over, and accountability for, all funds, property and other assets to ensure they are used solely for authorized purposes. F. SIGNATURES I, the Authorization Official named below, represent by my signature that I am authorized to certify this information on behalf of the Recipient. I certify under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this Pre- Award Information Sheet is true, accurate and complete. I understand that false, fictitious, or fraudulent information, misrepresentations, half-truths, or omissions of any material fact, may subject me to criminal, civil, or administrative penalties for fraud, false statements, false claims or others. (18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 and 287, and 31 U.S.C. 3729-.730 and 3801-.3812). I further understand and agree that (1) the statements and representations made herein are material to DOE’s funding decisions, and (2) I have a responsibility to update the disclosures during the period of performance of the award should circumstances change which impact the responses provided above. Name: Curtis Thayer Title: Executive Director Signature of Authorized Official: Date: I, the Principal Investigator named below, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that the information contained in this Pre-Award Information Sheet is true, complete, and accurate. I understand that false, fictitious, or fraudulent information, misrepresentations, half-truths, or omissions of any material fact may subject me to criminal, civil, or administrative penalties for fraud, false statements, false claims or otherwise. (18 U.S.C. 1001 §§ 1001 and 287, and 31 U.S.C. 3729-3730 and 3801-3812). I further understand and agree that (1) the statements and representations made herein are material to DOE’s funding decision, and (2) I have a responsibility to update the disclosures during the period of performance of the award should circumstances change which impact the responses provided above. Name: Conner Erickson Title: Director of Planning Signature of Principal Investigator: Date: DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D 4/14/2023 4/14/2023 Page 10 of 10 G. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION 1. Does your organization anticipate utilizing foreign nationals (FNs) in the performance of the award? Yes (If yes, please provide a list of all FNs planned to participate on the award along with basic information about each. Basic information includes FN name, country of origin/citizenship, and FN role in the project (e.g. business officer, technical project manager, etc.). Attach the list to to the Pre-Award Information Sheet. No DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Previous Editions Obsolete) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE I. INSTRUCTIONS The proposer shall prepare this Environmental Questionnaire (EQ) as accurately and completely as possible. Supporting information can be provided as attachments. The proposer must identify the location of the project and specifically describe the activities that would occur at that location. The proposer must provide specific information and quantities, regarding air emissions, wastewater discharges, solid wastes, etc., to facilitate the necessary review. In addition, the proposer must submit with this EQ a FINAL copy of the project’s statement of work (SOW) or statement of project objective (SOPO) that will be used in the contract/agreement between the proposer and the U.S Department of Energy (DOE). II. QUESTIONNAIRE A. PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Solicitation/Project Number: Proposer: 2. This Environmental Questionnaire pertains to a:Recipient or Prime Contractor Sub-recipient or Subcontractor 3. Principal Investigator: Telephone Number: 4. Project Title: 5. Expected Project Duration: 6. Location of Activities covered by this Environmental Questionnaire: (City/Township, County, State): 7. List the full scope of activities planned (only for the location that is the subject of this Environmental Questionnaire). 8. List all other locations where work would be performed by the primary contractor of the project and subcontractor(s). Each of the following must have an individual Environmental Questionnaire. Subcontractor or sub-recipient Location of activities for this project 9. Identify and select the checkbox with the predominant project work activities under Group A, B, or C Group A Routine administrative, procurement, training, and personnel actions. Contract activities/awards for management support, financial assistance, and technical services in support of agency business, programs, projects, and goals. Literature searches and information gathering, material inventories, property surveys; data analysis, computer modeling, analytical reviews, technical summary, conceptual design, feasibility studies, document preparation, data dissemination, and paper studies. Technical assistance including financial planning, assistance, classroom training, public meetings, management training, survey participation, academic contribution, technical consultation, and stakeholders surveys. Workshop and conference planning, preparation, and implementation which may involve promoting energy efficiency, renewable energy, and energy conservation. STOP!If all work activities related to this project can be classified and described within categories under Group A, proceed directly to Section III CERTIFICATION BY PROPOSER. No additional information is required. If project work activities are described in either Group(s) B or C; then continue filling out questionnaire. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 2) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE Group B Laboratory Scale Research, Bench Scale Research, Pilot Scale Research, Proof-of-Concept Scale Research, or Field Test Research. Work DOES NOT involve new building/facilities construction and site excavation/groundbreaking activities. This work typically involves routine operation of existing laboratories, commercial buildings/properties, offices and homes, project test facilities, factories/power plants, vehicles test stands and components, refueling facilities, utility systems, or other existing structures/facilities. Work will NOT involve major change in facilities missions and operations, land use planning, new/modified regulatory/operating permit requirements. Includes work specific to routine DOE Site operations and Lab research work activities, but NOT building construction and site preparation. DOE work typically involves laboratory facilities and lab equipment operations, buildings and grounds management activities; and buildings and facilities maintenance, repairs, reconfiguration, remodeling, equipment use and replacement. Group C Pilot Test Facilities Construction, Pilot Scale Research, Field Scale Demonstration, or Commercial Scale Application. Work typically involves facility construction, site preparation/excavation/groundbreaking, and/or demolition. This work would include construction, retrofit, replacement, and/or major modifications of laboratories, test facilities, energy system prototypes, and power generation infrastructure. Work may also involve construction and maintenance of utilities system right-of-ways, roads, vehicle test facilities, commercial buildings/properties, fuel refinery/mixing facilities, refueling facility, power plants, underground wells, and pipelines, and other types of energy research related facilities. This work may require new or modified regulatory permits, environmental sampling and monitoring requirements, master planning, public involvement, and environmental impact review. Includes work specific to DOE Site Operations and Lab operation activities involving building and facilities construction, replacement, decommissioning/demolition, site preparation, land use changes, or change in research facilities mission or operations. B. PROPOSED PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1. If applicable, list any project alternatives considered to achieve the project objectives. C. PROJECT LOCATION 1. Provide a brief description of the project location (physical location, surrounding area, adjacent structures). 2.Attach a project site location map of the project work area. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NEPA procedures require evaluations of possible effects (including land use, energy resource use, natural, historic and cultural resources, and pollutants) from proposed projects on the environment. 1. Land Use a. Characterize present land use where the proposed project would be located. Urban Industrial Commercial Agricultural Suburban Rural Residential Research Facilities Forest University Campus Other: b. Identify the total size of the facility, structure, or system and what portion would be used for the proposed project. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 3) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE c. Describe planned construction, installation, and/or demolition activities, i.e., roads, utilities system right-of-ways, parking lots, buildings, laboratories, storage tanks, fueling facilities, underground wells, pipelines, or other structures. No construction would be anticipated for this project. d. Describe how land use would be affected by operational activities associated with the proposed project. No land areas would be affected. e. Describe any plans to reclaim areas that would be affected by the proposed project. No land areas would be affected. f. Would the proposed project affect any unique or unusual landforms (e.g., cliffs, waterfalls, etc.)? No Yes (describe) g. Would the proposed project be located in or near local, state, or federal parks; forests; monuments; scenic waterways; wilderness; recreation facilities; or tribal lands?No Yes (describe) 2. Construction Activities and/or Operation a. Identify project structure(s), power line(s), pipeline(s), utilities system(s), right-of-way(s) or road(s) that will be constructed and clearly mark them on a project site map or topographic map as appropriate.None b. Would the proposed project require the construction of waste pits or settling ponds? No Yes (describe and identify location, and estimate surface area disturbed) c. Would the proposed project affect any existing body of water?No Yes (describe) d. Would the proposed project impact a floodplain or wetland?No Yes (describe) e. Would the proposed project potentially cause runoff/sedimentation/erosion?No Yes (describe) f. Would the proposed project include activities located on perma-frost, near fault zones, or involve fracturing, well drilling, geologic stimulation, sequestration, active seismic data collection, and/or deepwater operations? No Yes (describe) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 4) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE g. Would the proposed project involve any of the following: nanotechnology; recombinant DNA or genetic engineering; facility decommissioning or disposition of equipment/materials; or management of radioactive wastes/materials? No Yes (describe) 3. Biological Resources a. Identify any State or Federally listed endangered or threatened plant or animal species potentially affected by the proposed project. None b. Would any designated critical habitat be affected by the proposed project?No Yes (describe) c. Describe any impacts that construction would have on any other types of sensitive or unique habitats. No planned construction No habitats None Impact (describe) d. Would any foreign substances/materials be introduced into ground or surface waters, soil, or other earth/geologic resource because of project activities? How would these foreign substances/materials affect the water, soil, biota, and geologic resources?No Yes (describe) e. Would any migratory animal corridors be impacted or disrupted by the proposed project?No Yes (describe) 4. Socioeconomic and Infrastructure Conditions a. Would local socio-economic changes result from the proposed project?No Yes (describe) b. Would the proposed project generate increased traffic use of roads through local neighborhoods, urban or rural areas? No Yes (describe) c. Would the proposed project require new transportation access (roads, rail, etc.)? Describe location, impacts, costs. No Yes (describe) d. Would the proposed project create a significant increase in local energy usage?No Yes (describe) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 5) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE 5. Historical/Cultural Resources a. Describe any historical, archaeological, or cultural sites in the vicinity of the proposed project; note any sites included on the National Register of Historic Places.None b. Would construction or operational activities planned under the proposed project disturb any historical, archaeological, or cultural sites?No planned construction No historic sites Yes (describe)No Impact (discuss) c. Has the State Historic Preservation Office been contacted with regard to this project?No Yes (describe) d. Would the proposed project interfere with visual resources (e.g., eliminate scenic views) or alter the present landscape? No Yes (describe) e. Would the proposed project be located on or adjacent to tribal lands, lands considered to be sacred, or lands used for traditional purposes? Describe any known tribal sensitivities for the proposed project area. 6. Atmospheric Conditions/Air Quality a. Identify air quality conditions in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project with regard to attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). This information is available under the Green Book Non-Attainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants located at http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/astate.html Attainment Non-Attainment O3 - 1 Hour O3 - 8 Hour SOx PM - 2.5 PM - 10 CO NO2 Lead b. Would proposed project require issuance of new or modified local, state, or federal air permits to perform project related work and activities?No Yes (describe) c. Would the proposed project be in compliance with local and state air quality requirements?Yes If not, please explain. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 6) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE d. Would the proposed project be classified as either a New Source or a major modification to an existing source? No Yes (describe) e. What types of air emissions, including fugitive emissions, would be anticipated from the proposed project, and what would be the maximum annual rate of emissions for the project? Maximum per Year Total for Project SOx NOx PM - 2.5 PM - 10 CO CO2 Lead H2S Organic solvent vapors or other volatile organic compounds--List: Hazardous air pollutants -- List: Other -- List: None f. Would any types of emission control or particulate collection devices be used? No Yes (describe, including collection efficiencies) g. How would emissions be vented? 7. Hydrologic Conditions/Water Quality a. What nearby water bodies may be affected by the proposed project? Provide distance(s) from the project site. b. What sources would supply potable and process water for the proposed project? DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 7) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE c. Quantify the wastewater that would be generated by the proposed project. Gallons/day Gallons/year Non-contact cooling water Process water Sanitary Other -- describe: None d. What would be the major components of each type of wastewater (e.g., coal fines)?No wastewater produced e. Identify the local treatment facility that would receive wastewater from the proposed project. No discharges to local treatment facility f. Describe how wastewater would be collected and treated.No wastewater produced g. Would any run-off or leachates be produced from storage piles or waste disposal sites?No Yes (describe source) h. Would project require issuance of new or modified water permits to perform project work or site development activities? No Yes (describe) i. Where would wastewater effluents from the proposed project be discharged?No wastewater produced j. Would the proposed project be permitted to discharge effluents into an existing body of water? No Yes (describe water use and effluent impact) k. Would a new or modified National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit be required? No Yes (describe) l. Would the proposed project adversely affect the quality or movement of groundwater?No Yes (describe) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 8) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE m. Would the proposed project require issuance of an Underground Injection Control (UIC)permit? No Yes (describe) n. Would the proposed project be located in or near a wellhead protection area, drinking water protection area, or above a sole source aquifer or underground source of drinking water (USDW)? No Yes (describe) 8. Solid and Hazardous Wastes a. Identify and estimate wastes that would be generated from the project. Solid wastes are defined as any solid, liquid, semi- solid, or contained gaseous material that is discarded, has served its intended purpose, or is a manufacturing or mining by- product (See EPA Municipal Solid Waste and Municipal Solid by State). Annual Quantity Municipal solid waste (e.g., paper, plastic, etc.) Coal or coal by-products Other -- Identify: Hazardous waste – Identify: None b. Would project require issuance of new or modified solid waste and/or hazardous waste related permits to perform project work activities?No Yes (explain) c. How and where would solid waste disposal be accomplished? None generated On-site (identify and describe location) Off-site (identify location and describe facility and treatment) d. How would wastes for disposal be transported? e. Describe hazardous wastes that would be generated, treated, handled, or stored under this project. Hazardous waste information can be found at EPA Hazardous Waste website.None f. How would hazardous or toxic waste be collected and stored?None used or produced DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 9) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE g. If hazardous wastes would require off-site disposal, have arrangements been made with a certified TSD (Treatment, Storage, and Disposal) facility? Not required Arrangements not yet made Arrangements made with a certified TSD facility (identify) 9. Health/Safety Factors a. Identify hazardous or toxic materials that would be used in the proposed project. None Hazardous or toxic materials that would be used (identify): b. Describe the potential impacts of this project’s hazardous materials on human health and the environment. None c. Would there be any special physical hazards or health risks associated with the project?No Yes (describe) d. Does a worker safety program exist at the location of the proposed project?No Yes (describe) e. Would additional safety training be necessary for any new laboratory, equipment, or processes involved with the project? No Yes (describe) f. Describe any increases in ambient noise levels to the public from construction and operational activities. None Increase in ambient noise level (describe) g. Would project construction result in the removal of natural or other barriers that act as noise screens? No construction planned No Yes (describe) h. Would hearing protection be required for workers?No Yes (describe) 10. Environmental Restoration and/or Waste Management a. Would the proposed project include CERCLA removals or similar actions under RCRA or other authorities? No Yes (describe) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 10) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE b. Would the proposed project include siting, construction, and operation of temporary pilot-scale waste collection and treatment facilities or pilot-scale waste stabilization and containment facilities?No Yes (describe) c. Would the proposed project involve operations of environmental monitoring and control systems? No Yes (describe) d. Would the proposed project involve siting, construction, operation, or decommissioning of a facility for storing packaged hazardous waste for 90 days or less?No Yes (describe) E. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE 1. For the following laws, describe any existing permits, new or modified permits, manifests, responsible authorities or agencies, contacts, etc., that would be required for the proposed project a. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: b. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA): None New Required Modification Required Describe: c. Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: d. Clean Water Act (CWA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: e. Underground Storage Tank Control Program (UST):None New Required Modification Required Describe: f. Underground Injection Control Program (UIC):None New Required Modification Required Describe: g. Clean Air Act (CAA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 11) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE h. Endangered Species Act (ESA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: i.Floodplains and Wetlands Regulations:None New Required Modification Required Describe: j. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: k. National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: l. Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: 2. Identify any other environmental laws and regulations (Federal, state, and local) for which compliance would be necessary for this project, and describe the permits, manifests, and contacts that would be required. F. DESCRIBE ANY ISSUES THAT WOULD GENERATE PUBLIC CONTROVERSY REGARDING THE PROPOSED PROJECT.None G. WOULD THE PROPOSED PROJECT PRODUCE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT, OR ARE OTHER MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS PLANNED OR UNDERWAY, IN THE PROJECT AREA? No Yes (describe) H. SUMMARIZE THE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT WOULD RESULT FROM THE PROPOSED PROJECT. None (provide supporting detail)Significant impacts (describe) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 12) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE I. PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE PROJECT WOULD BE DECOMMISSIONED, INCLUDING THE DISPOSITION OF EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS. III. CERTIFICATION BY PROPOSER I hereby certify that the information provided herein is current, accurate, and complete as of the date shown immediately below. Signature: Date (mm/dd/yyyy): Typed Name: Title: Organization: IV. REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY DOE I hereby certify that I have reviewed the information provided in this questionnaire, have determined that all questions have been appropriately answered, and judge the responses to be consistent with the efforts proposed. DOE Project Manager Signature: Date (mm/dd/yyyy): Typed Name: DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D 4/14/2023 Certificate Of Completion Envelope Id: E32DF9BFD0B3496A89D0D1ECA5FE378D Status: Completed Subject: Complete with DocuSign: Alaska Energy Authority Program Narrative.pdf, Alaska Energy Authority ... Source Envelope: Document Pages: 40 Signatures: 5 Envelope Originator: Certificate Pages: 2 Initials: 0 Grants AutoNav: Enabled EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled Time Zone: (UTC-09:00) Alaska 813 W Northern Lights Blvd Anchorage, AK 99503-2407 grants@aidea.org IP Address: 206.174.41.28 Record Tracking Status: Original 4/14/2023 10:17:54 AM Holder: Grants grants@aidea.org Location: DocuSign Signer Events Signature Timestamp Conner Erickson cerickson@akenergyauthority.org Economist AEA Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Signature Adoption: Uploaded Signature Image Using IP Address: 206.174.41.28 Sent: 4/14/2023 10:46:53 AM Viewed: 4/14/2023 10:50:07 AM Signed: 4/14/2023 10:51:23 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Curtis Thayer cthayer@akenergyauthority.org AEA Executive Director AEA Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Signature Adoption: Uploaded Signature Image Using IP Address: 139.60.224.233 Signed using mobile Sent: 4/14/2023 10:51:24 AM Viewed: 4/14/2023 10:53:44 AM Signed: 4/14/2023 10:59:11 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign In Person Signer Events Signature Timestamp Editor Delivery Events Status Timestamp Agent Delivery Events Status Timestamp Intermediary Delivery Events Status Timestamp Certified Delivery Events Status Timestamp Carbon Copy Events Status Timestamp Witness Events Signature Timestamp Notary Events Signature Timestamp Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps Envelope Sent Hashed/Encrypted 4/14/2023 10:46:53 AM Certified Delivered Security Checked 4/14/2023 10:53:44 AM Signing Complete Security Checked 4/14/2023 10:59:11 AM Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps Completed Security Checked 4/14/2023 10:59:11 AM Payment Events Status Timestamps pg. 1 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law - SECTION 40101(d) – PREVENTING OUTAGES AND ENHANCING THE RESILIENCE OF THE ELECTRIC GRID FORMULA GRANTS State of Alaska Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Submission Deadline: May 31, 2023 Program Narrative Under the authorizing statutes of Section 40101(D) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), and as authorized by the Office of Governor Michael Dunleavy of the State of Alaska, the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) has been selected as the sole eligible applicant charged with administering subaward grants to eligible entities. Accordingly, this Program Narrative is provided by the AEA, which is serving as the official designated applicant applying for funding as apportioned directly to the State of Alaska, under the U.S. Department of Energy’s IIJA Preventing Outages and Enhancing the Resilience of the Electric Grid Formula Grant Program. 1. Objectives and Metrics: AEA has established the following four objectives and supporting metrics to guide decisions involving resilience investments made in conjunction with this grant. Objective #1: Reduce the likelihood and consequences of natural hazard events (e.g., winter storms, extreme temperatures, wildfires, floods, earthquakes, landslides, etc.) causing disruption to normal grid operations and critical facilities within Alaska’s most populated and economically vital communities. Metrics (Provisional): Electric system reliability as measured by one of the four main IEEE 1366 metrics by which electric system reliability is measured: SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI, and MAIFI. Total number of incidents of power disruption caused by a natural hazard each year as compared to the average number of incidents within the past 10 years (total reduction of incidents after grant investment). Objective #2: Equip Alaska’s most populated and economically vital communities with modernized grid infrastructure. Grid improvements will enhance energy resilience, increase electrification, and address other evolving system needs over the coming decades. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 2 Metrics (Provisional): Total project expenditures on 69kVa equipment (transmission lines or substations) or higher, reported as a percentage of total resilience expenditures. Miles of transmission lines and number of substations improved with resilience measures to mitigate impacts of disruptive events. Population served by transmission line and substation resilience improvements. Average age of energy asset that has been replaced or modernized on grid infrastructure. Objective #3: Reduce the energy burden and the cost experienced by customers within disadvantaged communities or tribal lands, as well as all areas served by the resilience investment, due to inadequate electric grid infrastructure. Communities that are disadvantaged are those as identified by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Disadvantaged Communities Reporter Tool. The tool shows census tracts categorized as disadvantaged communities in blue and federally recognized tribal lands and U.S. territories in green. Federally recognized tribal lands and U.S. territories are considered disadvantaged communities in accordance with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)'s Interim Guidance for the Justice40 Initiative. Metrics (Provisional): Average retail electric rate for residential customers in disadvantaged communities and all other areas served by the resilience investment. Typical monthly electric bill for residential customers for 500 kWh in disadvantaged communities and all other areas served by the resilience investment . Typical monthly electric bill as a percentage of community (census tract) median household income in disadvantaged communities and all other areas served by the resilience investment. Objective #4: Increase the skilled workforce by assuring that any installed resilience measures can be operated and maintained by local workers and businesses, where po ssible. Metrics (Provisional): Number of new, full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs created to operate and maintain grid resilience projects. Percentage of union vs non-union FTE jobs created to operate and maintain grid resilience projects. Number of apprenticeships or vocational opportunities created for members of disadvantaged communities during implementation, construction, operations, or maintenance of energy resilience projects. Workforce residing in state vs out-of-state for construction and operations. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 3 2. Criteria: Top priority will be given to resilience projects that: Benefit the most populated and economically vital communities. Address grid infrastructure vulnerabilities to flood, severe storm, and fire hazards which comprise the majority of presidentially declared disasters in Alaska and are increasing in frequencies since 19851. Serve one or more disadvantaged communities as identified by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Disadvantaged Communities Reporter Tool. Advance the economic vitality of the state through sustaining or creating good-paying jobs. The selection of eligible entities and respective grid resilience projects will be done in accordance with AEA standardized scoring criteria, as follows: Population Impacted: 30% or up to 30 points 1. The application should include a description of the total population served by a proposed project (no description = 0 points, less than 20,000 served = 3 points, each additional 10,000 served = 3 points with a maximum of 15 points possible). 2. The application should include a description of how the proposed project will serve one or more census tracts defined as a disadvantaged community (no description = 0 points, each census tract is worth 3 points with a maximum of 15 points possible). Risk Reduction/Resilience Effectiveness: 20% or up to 20 points 1. The application should include a description of how the project will reduce the current risk of disruptive events (an event in which operations of the electric grid are disrupted, preventively shut off, or cannot operate safely due to capacity constraints, redundancy and/or an equipment failure , etc. Criterion score should be based on a qualitative assessment of whether the narrative includes details regarding how the project will reduce the current risk of disruptive events; not at all = 0 points, minimally = 4 points, partially = 8 points, mostly = 12 points, entirely = 16 points, and exceeds = 20 points. Extreme Weather Event Adaptation: 15% or up to 15 points 1. The application should include a description of the frequency and severity of extreme weather in the provider service area and how the project would mitigate the future risk of disruptive events whereby operations or the electric grid are disrupted, preventatively shut off, or cannot operate safely due to extreme weather, wildfire, or natural disaster2. Criterion score should be based on a qualitative assessment of whether the narrative includes details regarding how the project will reduce future disruptive events caused by extreme weather; not at all = 0 points, 1 https://ready.alaska.gov/Documents/Mitigation/StatePlan/Ch08-RiskAnalysis.pdf 2 42 U.S.C. 18711(a)(1) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 4 minimally = 3 points, partially = 6 points, mostly = 9 points, entirely = 12 points, and exceeds = 15 points. Data Sources: 5% or up to 5 points 1. The application should include a description of where the project is documented in a data-driven planning document and/or has been identified as a provider priority via a board priority/resolution related to system resiliency, and supporting documentation is referenced and/or the location of any supporting data or narratives is linked to the application or attached (not included = 0 points, included = 2 points). 2. The application should reference any climate change model that highlights changes to the future physical environment including impacts to the safety and reliability of providing energy to utility customers (reference excluded = 0 points, reference included = 3 points). Implementation Measures: 15% or up to 15 points 1. The application should include a detailed project schedule that includes design, permits, site control, and construction timeframe breakouts. a. The application schedule should indicate whether the project will go to construction within the desired 5-year period of performance. (construction timeframe not addressed = 0 points, construction is not proposed within the 5- year period of performance = 0 points, construction is proposed within the 5 - year period of performance = 5 points). b. The application schedule should include an appropriate level of detail and proposed timeframes should be adequate and reasonable (details and timeframes are not included = 0 points, schedule details and proposed timeframes are not adequate and reasonable = 0 points, schedule details and proposed timeframes are adequate and reasonable = 5 points). 2. The application should include a reasonably specific and/or detailed explanation of the extent to which an eligible entity plans to utilize project labor agreements, local hire agreements, and/or has or will develop a plan to attract, train, and retain a local workforce including minority/women owned businesses (explanation excluded = 0 points, specific/detailed explanation included = 5 points). Community Engagement: 5% or up to 5 points 1. The application should reference any utility public outreach plan for electronic and/or in-person stakeholder and public outreach associated with identification and development of the project (reference excluded = 0 points, reference included = 5 points). Leveraging Partnerships: 10% or up to 10 points 1. The application should include letters of support from partner organizations (letters of support excluded = 0 points, letters of support included = 2 points) 2. The application should include a description of how the applicant will provide matching funds (e.g., in-kind and/or cash contributions) that are equal to 1/3 or DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 5 more of the federal share of the project cost (non-federal matching funds equal to 1/3 of federal share = 4 points, every 5% greater than 1/3 of federal share = 1 additional point with a maximum of 8 points possible). Alaska is served by small electricity utility providers that sell less than 4,000,000 megawatt hours of electricity per year. Accordingly, AEA anticipates sub-grantee awards will be issued to eligible entities that sell not more than 4,000,000 megawatts per year. 2. Methods: AEA anticipates issuing a competitive solicitation for grant applications. The competitive solicitation period will be no less than 45 days in duration , and will be publicly advertised via AEA’s website and media advisories to industry advocacy groups. Additionally, AEA will issue email notifications to its subscriber base. AEA’s grants coordinator will be responsible for accepting applications, coordinating communications with applicants, and posting any changes or clarifications to the solicitation. AEA’s Planning Manager is responsible for coordinating the evaluation of all applications received through the competitive solicitation each year. Please refer to the 2. Criteria section for the proposed scoring evaluation criteria, which align with AEA’s stated objectives under 1. Objectives and Metrics. AEA anticipates requiring sub-grantees to submit quarterly status reports throughout the project performance period. This will be done to maintain updated data on project delivery and to collect the metrics as outlined in 1. Objectives and Metrics. Additionally, AEA anticipates completing a project audit two years after project closeout. 3. Funding Distribution: Eligible Entities to Apply The proposed competitive solicitation process will be open to the following eligible entities holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) as issued by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA): a) an electric grid operator; b) an electricity storage operator; c) an electricity generator; d) a transmission owner or operator; or a State owner of transmission or generation assets without a CPCN; e) any other relevant entity, as determined by the Secretary (of DOE). Additionally, AEA will accept joint applications comprised of one or more of the above eligible entities for a specific project. An eligible entity may submit no more than three grant applications under the competitive solicitation, inclusive of both single applications and joint applications with a group of eligible entities. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 6 Minimum Grant Amount and Performance Period AEA has established a minimum grant award amount of $2 million. Awarded projects must start construction and preferably complete construction within a 5-year performance period. The period of performance may be extended to span the amount of time necessary for sub-grantees to complete all subaward project efforts, up to a maximum of 10 years, inclusive of the initial 5-year period, at the sole discretion of AEA and subject to the approval of DOE. Non-federal Match Requirements Alaska is served by small electricity utility providers that sell not more than 4,000,000 megawatts per year. Accordingly, the cost match requirement for sub-grantees is 1/3 of the Federal share of the cost of each respective project. AEA will allow the match to be provided through cash or in-kind contributions in accordance with the grant requirements. This will be set-forth in the grant agreement between AEA and each respective sub-grantee. The match amount required for a joint application will be based on the megawatt hours of electricity sold per year for each eligible entity partnering in the joint application, not the collective megawatt hours of electricity sold as a whole. Accordingly, if the partnering eligible entities of a joint application each sell not more than 4,000,000 megawatt hours of electricity per year, the required match will be one-third of the amount of the subaward. In addition to sub-grantee match requirements, AEA will provide a 15% cost match of the Federal allocation as required by the program. Eligible Uses of Funds Sub-grantees may use grant awards to implement a wide range of resilience measures intended to mitigate the impact of disruptive events, including: Weatherization technologies and equipment; Fire-resistant technologies and fire prevention systems; Monitoring and control technologies; The undergrounding of electrical equipment; Utility pole management; The relocation of power lines or the reconductoring of power lines with low-sag, advanced conductors; Vegetation and fuel-load management; The use or construction of “distributed energy resources” (“DERs”) for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events, including: o Microgrids; and o Battery storage subcomponents Adaptive protection technologies Advanced modeling technologies; Hardening of power lines, facilities, substations, of other systems; and DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 7 Replacement of old overhead conductors and underground cables. Funding may also be used for the training, recruitment, retention, and reskilling of skilled and properly credentialed workers in order to perform the work required for the particular resilience measures listed above. Ineligible Uses of Funds Ineligible project types and uses of funds include the following: Construction of a new: electric generating facility; or large-scale battery storage facility that is not used for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events; and Cybersecurity. 4. Equity Approach: AEA is committed to sharing and maximizing project benefits across disadvantaged communities and tribal lands by selecting projects that invest in quality jobs, generate the greatest community benefit, and promote diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility. Quality Jobs: As part of its selection criteria Implementation Measures (15% weight), AEA will evaluate the extent to which an eligible entity plans to utilize project labor agreements, local hire agreements, and/or has or will develop a plan to attract, train, and retain a local workforce including minority/women owned businesses. Additionally, AEA will consider job creation estimates for each project. Projects with the greatest impact on new job creation and attracting, training, and retaining a local workforce will rank the highest under the Implementation Measu res selection criteria. Sub-grantees will also be required to adhere to all terms and conditions of the grant agreement, including those that pertain to prevailing wages, American- made products, and a free and fair choice to join or form a union. Greatest Community Benefit: As part of its selection criteria Population Impacted (30%), AEA will evaluate the number of residents, businesses, and disadvantaged communities and/or tribal lands served by a proposed project. Residents and businesses will be reported at the borough/municipal level utilizing U.S. Census Bureau (1) ACS 5-Year Estimates for population; and (2) Business and County Business Patterns & Nonemployer Statistics data for business and nonemployer establishments. AEA is proposing to utilize the U.S. Department of Energy’s Disadvantaged Communities Reporter Tool to determine if a proposed project will serve one or more census tracts defined as a disadvantaged commun ity. Projects serving one or more of the following will rank the highest under the Greatest Community Benefit selection criteria: o Serving more than 50,000 residents; and DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D pg. 8 o Serving one or more disadvantaged communities. 5. Technical Assistance and Administration: In total, AEA proposes that 5% of the annual Federal grant fund allocation be utilized for AEA project administration and technical assistance. An AEA project manager will be assigned to assist each sub-grantee whose application is selected for subaward grant funding. AEA’s project management will vary according to the project management plan developed under the grant agreement with the goal of safeguarding Federal and State investment in the project. At a minimum, the AEA project manager will clarify grant requirements, review progress reports and billing, and review and accept deliverables of the grant project. The project management plan developed under the grant agreement may have sub-grantees self- manage the awarded project or have AEA manage the project. Unless AEA is the primary project manager, sub-grantees will be required to have staff or a contractor available to perform all of the duties required to adequately manage the project. AEA’s project manager will also support technical assistance as needed, which is anticipated to include a broad range of eligible entity questions regarding the application process, potential projects, reporting metrics, and so forth. 6. Public Notice and Hearing: AEA held four public hearings and facilitated two open comment periods, as follows. All meetings were made available for both in-person and virtual attendance. Public Hearing and Comment Period #1 Notice of Meetings Published: August 31st, 2022 Public Meeting #1: September 7th, 2022 @ 1PM AKST / 5PM EST Public Meeting #2: September 13th, 2022 @ 11AM AKST / 3PM EST End of Public Comment Period: September 20th, 2022 Public Hearing and Comment Period #2 Notice of Meeting Published: December 6th, 2022 Public Meeting #3: December 13th, 2022 @ 1PM AKST / 5PM EST Notice of Meeting Published: January 6th, 2023 Public Meeting #4: January 12th, 2023 @ 10:30AM AKST / 2:30PM EST End of Public Comment Period: January 26th, 2023 Additionally, AEA created a website specifically concerning the 40101(d) - PREVENTING OUTAGES AND ENHANCING THE RESILIENCE OF THE ELECTRIC GRID FORMULA GRANTS TO STATES AND INDIAN TRIBES where members of the public can access updates and information regarding the program. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D 813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG RGYAUTHORITY.ORG Alaska Energy Authority Cost Match Information for BIL Sec. 40101(d) Application Requirements Alaska Energy Authority Cost Match: $3,633,158.00 Federal Allocation for State of Alaska (Funding Years 1 & 2): $22,174,492.00 Alaska Energy Authority Cost Match as Percentage Share of Federal Allocation: 16.3% Type of Cost Match: Cash, as appropriated by the Alaska State Legislature (see Appendix A for supporting documentation). DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 of 2 Appendix A: Cost Match Supporting Documentation DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Enrolled HB 281 -143- Enrolled HB 281 * Sec. 32. INSURANCE CLAIMS: CAPITAL. The amounts to be received in settlement of 1 insurance claims for losses and the amounts to be received as recovery for losses are 2 appropriated from the general fund to the 3 (1) state insurance catastrophe reserve account (AS 37.05.289(a)); or 4 (2) appropriate state agency to mitigate the loss. 5 * Sec. 33. NATIONAL PETROLEUM RESERVE - ALASKA IMPACT GRANT 6 PROGRAM: CAPITAL. The amount received by the National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska 7 special revenue fund (AS 37.05.530(a)) under 42 U.S.C. 6506a(l) or former 42 U.S.C. 6508 8 by June 30, 2022, estimated to be $13,800,000, is appropriated from that fund to the 9 Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development for capital project grants 10 under the National Petroleum Reserve - Alaska impact grant program. 11 * Sec. 34. DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION: CAPITAL. The sum of $250,000 is 12 appropriated from the general fund to the Department of Administration, division of finance, 13 for the creation of a centralized website that contains unaudited and estimated statewide 14 financial information and related expenses, including the procurement of software, server 15 capacity, design expertise, and contractor assistance with design, programming, and reporting. 16 * Sec. 35. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, COMMUNITY, AND ECONOMIC 17 DEVELOPMENT: CAPITAL. (a) The amount of interest earned on funds from the 2016 18 Volkswagen Settlement environmental mitigation trust, estimated to be $400,000, is 19 appropriated to the Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development, 20 Alaska Energy Authority, for activities related to the Volkswagen Settlement. 21 (b) The sum of $100,000,000 is appropriated from the budget reserve fund 22 (AS 37.05.540(a)) to the Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development 23 for payment as a grant under AS 37.05.315 to the Municipality of Anchorage for the Port of 24 Alaska modernization project, to be distributed as follows: 25 (1) $25,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2023; and 26 (2) $75,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2024. 27 (c) The Municipality of Anchorage shall, not later than February 1, 2023, submit a 28 report on the Port of Alaska modernization project to the co-chairs of the finance committees 29 of each house of the legislature and the legislative finance division. The report must include a 30 financial plan for the Port of Alaska modernization project. 31 DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Enrolled HB 281 -144- (d) The unexpended and unobligated balance, not to exceed $3,633,158 of the 1 estimated balance of $4,395,564, of the appropriation made in sec. 78(c), ch. 1, SSSLA 2002, 2 as amended by sec. 69, ch. 29, SLA 2008, and sec. 7(b), ch. 5, SLA 2012 (Department of 3 Commerce, Community, and Economic Development, Alaska Energy Authority, upgrade and 4 extend the Anchorage to Fairbanks power transmission intertie to the Teeland substation), is 5 reappropriated to the Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development, 6 Alaska Energy Authority, for statewide grid resilience and reliability for the fiscal years 7 ending June 30, 2023, and June 30, 2024. 8 (e) The sum of $750,000 is appropriated to the Department of Commerce, 9 Community, and Economic Development, Alcohol and Marijuana Control Office, for the 10 licensing and enforcement solutions project, from the following sources: 11 (1) $375,000 from the general fund; 12 (2) $375,000 from general fund program receipts for the licensing and 13 application fees related to the regulation of alcohol. 14 * Sec. 36. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT: 15 CAPITAL. The unexpended and unobligated balance, after the appropriations made in secs. 16 41 and 52(a) of this Act, not to exceed $95,000 of the total estimated balance of $705,300, of 17 the appropriation made in sec. 1, ch. 18, SLA 2014, page 9, lines 9 - 11 (Angoon, existing 18 community sewer system and outfall line replacement - $709,500), is reappropriated to the 19 Department of Education and Early Development for Mount Edgecumbe High School 20 bleachers and swimming and water survival education equipment. 21 * Sec. 37. DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES: CAPITAL. (a) 22 The unexpended and unobligated balances of the following appropriations are reappropriated 23 to the Department of Family and Community Services for the purposes stated below: 24 (1) sec. 5(c), ch. 10, SLA 2007, as amended by secs. 12(b) and 30(a) - (c), ch. 25 38, SLA 2015, and sec. 21(j)(3), ch. 1, TSSLA 2017 (Department of Health and Social 26 Services, Fairbanks virology laboratory completion), for completion of the Fairbanks virology 27 laboratory; 28 (2) sec. 1, ch. 5, FSSLA 2011, page 2, lines 13 - 14, as amended by sec. 16(a), 29 ch. 1, TSSLA 2017 (Department of Health and Social Services, deferred maintenance, 30 renovation, repair, and equipment for Alaska Pioneers' Homes), for deferred maintenance, 31 DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D 10. a. Name and Address of Lobbying Registrant: 9. Award Amount, if known: $ * Street 1 * City State Zip Street 2 * Last Name Prefix * First Name Middle Name Suffix DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES Complete this form to disclose lobbying activities pursuant to 31 U.S.C.1352 OMB Number: 4040-0013 Expiration Date: 02/28/2022 1. * Type of Federal Action: a. contract b. grant c. cooperative agreement d. loan e. loan guarantee f. loan insurance 2. * Status of Federal Action: a. bid/offer/application b. initial award c. post-award 3. * Report Type: a. initial filing b. material change 4. Name and Address of Reporting Entity: Prime SubAwardee * Name Alaska Energy Authority * Street 1 813 W Northern Lights Blvd Street 2 * City Anchorage State AK: Alaska Zip 99515 Congressional District, if known: 5. If Reporting Entity in No.4 is Subawardee, Enter Name and Address of Prime: 6. * Federal Department/Agency: DOE/NETL 7. * Federal Program Name/Description: Electricity, Research, Development & Analysis CFDA Number, if applicable: 81.122 8. Federal Action Number, if known: DE-FOA-0002736 b. Individual Performing Services (including address if different from No. 10a) Prefix * First Name Middle Name * Street 1 * City State Zip Street 2 11. * Last Name Suffix Information requested through this form is authorized by title 31 U.S.C. section 1352. This disclosure of lobbying activities is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed by the tier above when the transaction was made or entered into. This disclosure is required pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1352. This information will be reported to the Congress semi-annually and will be available for public inspection. Any person who fails to file the required disclosure shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. * Signature: *Name:Prefix * First Name Curtis Middle Name * Last Name Thayer Suffix Title:Executive Director Telephone No.:907-771-3000 Date: Federal Use Only: Authorized for Local Reproduction Standard Form - LLL (Rev. 7-97) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D 4/14/2023 OMB Number: 4040-0004 Expiration Date: 11/30/2025 * 1. Type of Submission: * 2. Type of Application: * 3. Date Received: 4. Applicant Identifier: 5a. Federal Entity Identifier: 5b. Federal Award Identifier: 6. Date Received by State: 7. State Application Identifier: * a. Legal Name: * b. Employer/Taxpayer Identification Number (EIN/TIN): * c. UEI: * Street1: Street2: * City: County/Parish: * State: Province: * Country: * Zip / Postal Code: Department Name: Division Name: Prefix: * First Name: Middle Name: * Last Name: Suffix: Title: Organizational Affiliation: * Telephone Number: Fax Number: * Email: * If Revision, select appropriate letter(s): * Other (Specify): State Use Only: 8. APPLICANT INFORMATION: d. Address: e. Organizational Unit: f. Name and contact information of person to be contacted on matters involving this application: Application for Federal Assistance SF-424 Preapplication Application Changed/Corrected Application New Continuation Revision ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY 92-6001185 F3N8ZSHJXUH8 813 W NORTHERN LIGHTS BLVD ANCHORAGE AK: Alaska USA: UNITED STATES 99503-2407 Mr.Conner Erickson Director of Planning 907-771-3000 907-771-3044 cerickson@akenergyauthority.org DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D * 9. Type of Applicant 1: Select Applicant Type: Type of Applicant 2: Select Applicant Type: Type of Applicant 3: Select Applicant Type: * Other (specify): * 10. Name of Federal Agency: 11. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: CFDA Title: * 12. Funding Opportunity Number: * Title: 13. Competition Identification Number: Title: 14. Areas Affected by Project (Cities, Counties, States, etc.): * 15. Descriptive Title of Applicant's Project: Attach supporting documents as specified in agency instructions. Application for Federal Assistance SF-424 A: State Government Department of Energy 81.122 Electricity, Research, Development & Analysis DE-FOA-0002736 BIL - SECTION 40101(d) – PREVENTING OUTAGES AND ENHANCING THE RESILIENCE OF THE ELECTRIC GRID FORMULA GRANTS TO STATES AND INDIAN TRIBES BIL - SECTION 40101(d) – PREVENTING OUTAGES AND ENHANCING THE RESILIENCE OF THE ELECTRIC GRID FORMULA GRANTS TO STATE OF ALASKA View AttachmentsDelete AttachmentsAdd Attachments View AttachmentDelete AttachmentAdd Attachment DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D * a. Federal * b. Applicant * c. State * d. Local * e. Other * f. Program Income * g. TOTAL . Prefix: * First Name: Middle Name: * Last Name: Suffix: * Title: * Telephone Number: * Email: Fax Number: * Signature of Authorized Representative: * Date Signed: 18. Estimated Funding ($): 21. *By signing this application, I certify (1) to the statements contained in the list of certifications** and (2) that the statements herein are true, complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I also provide the required assurances** and agree to comply with any resulting terms if I accept an award. I am aware that any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or claims may subject me to criminal, civil, or administrative penalties. (U.S. Code, Title 18, Section 1001) ** The list of certifications and assurances, or an internet site where you may obtain this list, is contained in the announcement or agency specific instructions. Authorized Representative: Application for Federal Assistance SF-424 * a. Applicant Attach an additional list of Program/Project Congressional Districts if needed. * b. Program/Project * a. Start Date: * b. End Date: 16. Congressional Districts Of: 17. Proposed Project: AK-all AK-all Add Attachment Delete Attachment View Attachment 22,174,492.00 3,633,158.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25,807,650.00 a. This application was made available to the State under the Executive Order 12372 Process for review on b. Program is subject to E.O. 12372 but has not been selected by the State for review. c. Program is not covered by E.O. 12372. Yes No Add Attachment Delete Attachment View Attachment ** I AGREE Curtis Thayer Executive Director 907-771-3000 907-771-3044 cthayer@akenergyauthority.org * 20. Is the Applicant Delinquent On Any Federal Debt? (If "Yes," provide explanation in attachment.) * 19. Is Application Subject to Review By State Under Executive Order 12372 Process? If "Yes", provide explanation and attach DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D 4/14/2023 Last Updated March 22, 2022 PRE-AWARD INFORMATION SHEET THE USE OF THE PRE-AWARD INFORMATION SHEET TEMPLATE IS OPTIONAL, BUT ALL DATA ELEMENTS WITHIN THE PRE-AWARD INFORMATION SHEET ARE MANDATORY. A. BUSINESS ASSURANCES AND PAYMENT INFORMATION 1. DISCLOSURE OF POTENTIAL IMPROPRIETIES Below, please disclose if any of the following conditions exist. If the answer to any question (a) through (g) below is yes, provide a detailed explanation in an attachment to this document. a. Is the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals1 under investigation for or charged with a covered offense2? Yes 1 For this form, “principal” means: (1) An officer, director, owner, partner, principal investigator (PI), or other person (as defined in 2 C.F.R. 180.95) within the project team with management or supervisory responsibilities related to this project and any resulting transaction; or (2) A consultant or other person, whether or not employed by the Recipient, Subrecipient, or their principals, or paid with Federal funds, who (a) is in a position to handle Federal funds, (b) is in a position to influence or control the use of those funds, or (c) occupies a technical or professional position capable of substantially influencing the development or outcome of an activity required to perform the transaction, including but not limited to, any Co-PIs. 2 For this form, “covered offenses” include: (1) Commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public or private agreement or transaction; (2) Violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes, including those proscribing price fixing between competitors, allocation of customers between competitors, and bid rigging; (3) Commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, tax evasion, receiving stolen property, making false claims, or obstruction of justice; or (4) Commission of any other offense indicating a lack of business integrity or business honesty that seriously and directly affects the Recipient’s present responsibility. Name of Organization Street Address City and County State and Zip + 4 (matches the USPS database) Alaska Energy Authority 813 West Northern Lights Boulevard Anchorage, Alaska 99503 ALRD/FOA Number DE‐FOA‐0002736 Business Officer and contact information: Pamela Ellis, Controller 907-771-3981 pellis@akenergyauthority.org Technical Project Manager and contact information: Conner Erickson, Director of Planning 907-771-3025 cerickson@akenergyauthority.org Unique Entity Identifier F3N 8ZS HJX UH8 Organization’s Fiscal Year End Date 06/30/2023 DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 2 of 10 No b. Has the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals been convicted of a covered offense in the last five-years or had a civil judgment rendered against them for one of those offenses in that time period? Yes No c. Is the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals under investigation for potential violation of U.S. export control laws and regulations, or has the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals been convicted of any violations of U.S. export control laws and regulations? Yes No d. Is the proposed Recipient or Subrecipient(s) under investigation for potential violations of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988, or has the proposed Recipient or Subrecipient(s) been convicted of any violations of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988? Yes No e. Is the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals under investigation for research misconduct, or has the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals been convicted of research misconduct? Yes No f. Has any Federal agency recommended or initiated proceedings against the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals for suspension or debarment, or is the proposed Recipient, Subrecipient(s), or any of the Recipient’s or Subrecipient’s principals debarred, suspended, publicly banned from doing business with the Federal government, or otherwise declared ineligible from receiving Federal contracts, subcontracts or financial assistance? Yes No g. Is the proposed Recipient or Subrecipient(s) delinquent on federal debt or insolvent or at risk of insolvency or have the proposed Recipient or Subrecipient(s) filed for bankruptcy in any domestic or foreign jurisdiction? Yes No DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 3 of 10 2. POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST a. Financial Conflicts of Interest: The Recipient must disclose in writing any managed or unmanageable financial conflicts of interest involving a member of the project team (i.e. investigators) and include sufficient information to enable DOE to understand the nature and extent of the financial conflict, and to assess the appropriateness of the non-Federal entity's management plan. See Section V(b)(3) of the DOE Interim Conflict of Interest Policy. As part of this DOE funded project, does the recipient or any subrecipients have any managed or unmanageable financial conflicts of interest involving a member of the project team? No Yes. If yes, in a separate attachment, the Recipient must provide relevant disclosures/supporting documentation as required by the DOE Interim Conflict of Interest Policy Section V(b)(3). b. Organizational Conflicts of Interest3: The Recipient must disclose in writing any potential or actual organizational conflict of interest to DOE. See DOE Interim Conflict of Interest Policy Section VI and 2 CFR 200.318 for more information. As part of this DOE funded project, does the recipient or any subrecipients intend to engage in a procurement with a parent, affiliate, or subsidiary organization that is not a state, local government, or Indian tribe? No Yes. If yes, in a separate attachment, the Recipient must provide relevant disclosures/supporting documentation as required by the DOE Interim Conflict of Interest Policy Section VI. 3. PAYMENT INFORMATION AND ASSURANCES a. Has your organization received any prior DOE awards administered by NETL? If yes, please list the most recent award number: DE-OE-0000795 EETF Microgrid Technology No Questions b through d are reserved for institutions of higher education, hospitals, other non-profit organizations and state and local governments that are not considered for-profit entities. b. Is the Awardee currently enrolled with the U.S. Department of Treasury/ASAP system (Automated Standard Application for Payment System)? Yes, please enter Awardee Seven-digit ASAP ID Number: 0265466 No c. Please provide the following contact information for ASAP and/or Payments: Important: If not currently enrolled in the ASAP system, the person identified below will be contacted by the U.S. Department of Treasury with further instruction on completing the ASAP enrollment process. ASAP / Payments Contact Person: Amy Jackson Phone No.: 907-771-3902 Extension: n/a E-mail: ajackson@aidea.org 3 Organizational Conflict of Interest means a situation where because of relationships with a parent company, affiliate, or subsidiary organization, the non-Federal entity is unable or appears to be unable to be impartial in conducting a procurement action involving a related organization. 2 CFR 200.318(c)(2). DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 4 of 10 d. Indicate preferred payment method below: (NOTE: this section is reserved for universities, hospitals, other non-profit organizations and state and local governments that are authorized to receive advance payments, unless a specific need is supported). Payment by Advance is preferred. Payment by Reimbursement is preferred. e. Total Estimated Project Cost is the sum of the Federal Government share and Recipient share of the estimated project costs. The Recipient’s cost share or matching must come from non-Federal sources unless otherwise allowed by law (Please reference 2 CFR 200.1 and 2 CFR 200.306). By accepting Federal funds under this award, you agree that you are liable for your percentage share of allowable project costs, on a budget period basis, even if the project is terminated early or is not funded to its completion. Yes, the percentage share of allowable project costs (cost share) will be provided on a budget period basis. If cost share is not provided on a budget period basis, please explain. Use this block to provide a detailed explanation for not providing cost share on a budget period basis or provide an attachment. f. Indicate the name, phone number, and email address of the Designated Responsible Employee for complying with national policies prohibiting discrimination (see 10 CFR 1040.5 and the Certifications and Assurances SF-424B Assurances for Non-Construction Programs or SF-424D Assurances for Construction Programs found at: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/forms/sf-424-family.html). Name/Title Curtis Thayer, Executive Director Phone No/Email 907-771-3009 cthayer@akenergyauthority.org B. ACCOUNTING SYSTEM Your organization should have an accounting system that meets government standards for recording and collecting costs in accordance with 2 CFR 200.302(b)(1). If you have not had prior government awards or a recent accounting system review, the DOE may request the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) or an independent auditor to verify that the accounting system is acceptable. Indirect costs are an acceptable cost component of an approved budget if they are adequately supported and properly allocated. Organizations proposing indirect costs will need to demonstrate that the proposed indirect (e.g., overhead, G&A) rates were developed using a methodology acceptable for Government contracting, and in accordance with applicable Federal cost principles. If a current provisional indirect rate agreement has been issued by a Federal agency then that agreement should have been provided with the initial application. If it has not been, or a more current provisional indirect rate agreement has been executed, it needs to be provided as an attachment. In the absence of a provisional indirect rate agreement, the most current final indirect rate agreement should be provided as an attachment to this document. 1. Information for Determining Cognizant Agency/Office Cognizance related duties (i.e.; negotiating provisional/final indirect rates) are the responsibility of the Cognizant Federal Agency (CFA). The CFA is the Federal agency (e.g., Department of Defense, Department of Energy, etc.) that provided the preponderance (largest amount) of funding for your awards, across all federal agencies. Once a DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 5 of 10 Federal agency assumes cognizance for an organization, it should remain cognizant for at least 5 years to ensure continuity and ease of administration. It is extremely important to confirm that you work with the correct cognizant federal agency/office. As a rule of thumb, Department of Health & Human Services (DHHS) or the Office of Naval Research (ONR) is usually the CFA for Universities, Cities, States, and Counties. DHHS/ONR cognizance is not usually transferred. Please identify the CFA by providing the following information: Agency: Denali Commission Point-of-Contact: Janet Davis Phone No.:907-271-3036 E-mail:jdavis@denali.gov To assist our office in validating the CFA, please provide the following information for the five (5) highest dollar award values for current Federal contracts, grants or awards for which the organization receives funding (either as a prime or subcontract) directly from a Governmental agency. (State and Local Governments, Institutions of Higher Education, and Tribal organizations can skip this section if DHHS/ONR is the cognizant agency). The total federal contract/award dollars should include the full project period, not just the incremental funding. Contract/Award # Awarding Agency (e.g. DOE) Awarding Office (e.g. NETL) Agency Contact Name/Phone/E- mail Start Date End Date Total Value of Contract or Subcontract DC-1551-07 Denali Commission Denali Commission Katie Conway kconway@denali.gov 907-341-9617 5/1/2018 12/31/2025 $7,350,000 DC-1571-02 Denali Commission Denali Commission Katie Conway kconway@denali.gov 907-341-9617 8/15/2019 12/31/2023 $5,605,810 DC-1618-01 Denali Commission Denali Commission Katie Conway kconway@denali.gov 907-341-9617 9/1/2020 6/30/24 $6,396,240 DC-1731-00 Denali Commission Denali Commission Katie Conway kconway@denali.gov 907-341-9617 1/1/23 3/31/2024 $5,096,032.04 HQ00052210045 CIP2019-22-01 Department of Defense Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation Tim Robert Timothy.b.robert.civ@mail.mil 916-557-7315 9/1/2022 3/31/2027 $13,024,868 If awardee has current DOE awards, identify Cognizant DOE Office (CDO) (office providing the preponderance of DOE funding), and provide DOE office name, a point-of-contact, phone number, and e-mail (If same as above, proceed to Section F, Financial Management System-Accounting System Survey). DOE Office: Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Point-of-Contact (Contracting Officer):Julie Howe Phone No.:720-356-1628 E-mail:Julie.howe@ee.doe.gov To assist our office in validating the CDO, please provide the following information for the 5 highest dollar value awards for current DOE contracts, grants or awards for which the organization receives funding (either as a prime or subcontract) directly from a DOE office. (State and Local Governments, Institutions of Higher Education, and Tribal organizations can skip this section if DHHS/ONR is the cognizant agency). The total DOE contract/award dollars should include the full project period, not just the incremental funding. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 6 of 10 DOE Contract/Award # DOE Awarding Office DOE Contact Name/Phone/E-mail Start Date End Date Total Value of Contract or Subcontract DE-EE0008618 DOE- EERE Jason Nguyen Jason.nguyen@hq.doe.gov 970-248-6707 2/1/2019 1/31/2023 $360,000 DE-EE0009472 DOE- EERE Julie Howe Julie.howe@ee.doe.gov 720-356-1628 7/01/2021 6/30/2023 $984,956 DE-EE0010056 DOE- EERE Julie Howe Julie.howe@ee.doe.gov 720-356-1628 7/1/2022 6/30/2023 $200,000 DE-OE0000795 DOE- NETL - OE Kimberly Nuhfer Kimberly.nuhfer@netl.doe.gov 304-285-6544 1/7/2016 8/30/2023 $500,000 C. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM – ACCOUNTING SYSTEM SURVEY To qualify for a financial assistance award, compliance with 2 CFR 200 as amended by 2 CFR 910 is required. This includes assurance of an adequate accounting system for estimating, accounting and billing for governmental funding received. For additional information, please visit https://www.dcaa.mil. Under “CUSTOMERS->checklists and Tools,” click on “Pre-award Accounting System Adequacy Checklist”. Please complete the checklist below as assurance of this requirement. Yes No NA 1. Has your organization’s accounting system ever been audited by DCAA? a. If yes, please provide a copy of the audit report as an attachment to this document. b. If yes, did DCAA determine the accounting system acceptable for Federal awards? c. If yes, have there been any changes to the accounting system since the DCAA audit? If the answer is “yes”, please provide a detailed explanation of the changes. Use this block to explain the changes or provide an attachment. 2. Has your organization’s accounting system been audited by an outside Certified Public Accountant/consultant or other Cognizant Federal Agency other than DCAA? Important: Annual Financial Audits should be excluded. 3. Is the Accounting System in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles applicable to the circumstances and associated applicable Federal regulations? 4. Accounting System provides for: Yes No NA a. Segregation of direct costs from indirect costs. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 7 of 10 b. Identification and accumulation of direct costs by project. c. A logical and consistent method for the allocation of indirect costs to intermediate and final cost objectives. (Project line items are final cost objective) d. Accumulation of costs under general ledger control. e. A timekeeping system that identifies employees’ labor by intermediate and final cost objective (i.e., project level, division level). f. A labor distribution system that charges direct and indirect labor to appropriate cost objectives. g. Interim (at least monthly) determination of costs charged to a project through routine posting of books of account. h. Excluding costs charged to Government projects which are not allowable in terms of 2 CFR 200, Subpart E, or 48 CFR 31.2 (FAR Part 31), Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, or other provisions, as applicable. i. Identification of costs by project line item and by units (as if each unit or line item were a separate project) if required by the proposed award. 5. Is the Accounting System designed, and are the records maintained in such a manner that adequate, reliable data are developed for use in developing cost proposals? 6. Is the Accounting System currently in full operation? 7. Is your organization’s accounting system ready for a DCAA or independent Certified Public Accountant audit? Microsoft Dynamics NAV – Dynamics 365 Business Central D. ANNUAL AUDIT REQUIREMENTS 1. Single Audit – A non-Federal entity that expends $750,000 or more during the non-Federal entity’s fiscal year in Federal awards must have a single audit conducted in accordance with 2 CFR 200.514. a. Has your organization had an independent single audit performed? Yes No b. Has your organization undergone a financial audit within the last 3 years? Yes No If Yes to either a or b, please include a copy of the audit as an attachment to this file. If No to either a or b, complete the block below. Use this block to explain why a financial audit was not completed or performed or provide an attachment. E. REPRESENTATION/CERTIFICATION Important: Certification of the information is required by the organization’s authorized representative. I certify that I have an active System for Award Management (SAM) registration. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 8 of 10 I certify that I have registered in FedConnect.net to receive award documentation. I certify that the processes undertaken to solicit any subrecipients, subawards, subcontracts and vendors comply with our organization’s written procurement procedures as outlined in “Procurement Standards” 2 CFR 200.317 through 2 CFR 200.328 inclusive. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D Page 9 of 10 I certify the Recipient: (1) Has in effect an up-to-date, written, and enforced administrative process to identify and manage conflicts of interest with respect to all projects for which financial assistance funding is sought or received from DOE; (2) Shall promote and enforce Investigator compliance with the DOE Interim Conflict of Interest Policy requirements including those pertaining to disclosure of significant financial interests; (3) Shall manage financial conflicts of interest and provide initial and ongoing financial conflicts of interest reports to DOE; (4) Agrees to make information available, promptly upon request, to DOE relating to any Investigator disclosure of financial interests and the Recipient’s review of, and response to, such disclosure, whether or not the disclosure resulted in the Recipient’s determination of a financial conflict of interest; and (5) Shall fully comply with the requirements of the DOE Interim Conflict of Interest Policy. (6) Has in effect an up-to-date, written, and enforced policy and process for effective internal controls over, and accountability for, all funds, property and other assets to ensure they are used solely for authorized purposes. F. SIGNATURES I, the Authorization Official named below, represent by my signature that I am authorized to certify this information on behalf of the Recipient. I certify under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this Pre- Award Information Sheet is true, accurate and complete. I understand that false, fictitious, or fraudulent information, misrepresentations, half-truths, or omissions of any material fact, may subject me to criminal, civil, or administrative penalties for fraud, false statements, false claims or others. (18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 and 287, and 31 U.S.C. 3729-.730 and 3801-.3812). I further understand and agree that (1) the statements and representations made herein are material to DOE’s funding decisions, and (2) I have a responsibility to update the disclosures during the period of performance of the award should circumstances change which impact the responses provided above. Name: Curtis Thayer Title: Executive Director Signature of Authorized Official: Date: I, the Principal Investigator named below, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that the information contained in this Pre-Award Information Sheet is true, complete, and accurate. I understand that false, fictitious, or fraudulent information, misrepresentations, half-truths, or omissions of any material fact may subject me to criminal, civil, or administrative penalties for fraud, false statements, false claims or otherwise. (18 U.S.C. 1001 §§ 1001 and 287, and 31 U.S.C. 3729-3730 and 3801-3812). I further understand and agree that (1) the statements and representations made herein are material to DOE’s funding decision, and (2) I have a responsibility to update the disclosures during the period of performance of the award should circumstances change which impact the responses provided above. Name: Conner Erickson Title: Director of Planning Signature of Principal Investigator: Date: DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D 4/14/2023 4/14/2023 Page 10 of 10 G. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION 1. Does your organization anticipate utilizing foreign nationals (FNs) in the performance of the award? Yes (If yes, please provide a list of all FNs planned to participate on the award along with basic information about each. Basic information includes FN name, country of origin/citizenship, and FN role in the project (e.g. business officer, technical project manager, etc.). Attach the list to to the Pre-Award Information Sheet. No DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Previous Editions Obsolete) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE I. INSTRUCTIONS The proposer shall prepare this Environmental Questionnaire (EQ) as accurately and completely as possible. Supporting information can be provided as attachments. The proposer must identify the location of the project and specifically describe the activities that would occur at that location. The proposer must provide specific information and quantities, regarding air emissions, wastewater discharges, solid wastes, etc., to facilitate the necessary review. In addition, the proposer must submit with this EQ a FINAL copy of the project’s statement of work (SOW) or statement of project objective (SOPO) that will be used in the contract/agreement between the proposer and the U.S Department of Energy (DOE). II. QUESTIONNAIRE A. PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Solicitation/Project Number: Proposer: 2. This Environmental Questionnaire pertains to a:Recipient or Prime Contractor Sub-recipient or Subcontractor 3. Principal Investigator: Telephone Number: 4. Project Title: 5. Expected Project Duration: 6. Location of Activities covered by this Environmental Questionnaire: (City/Township, County, State): 7. List the full scope of activities planned (only for the location that is the subject of this Environmental Questionnaire). 8. List all other locations where work would be performed by the primary contractor of the project and subcontractor(s). Each of the following must have an individual Environmental Questionnaire. Subcontractor or sub-recipient Location of activities for this project 9. Identify and select the checkbox with the predominant project work activities under Group A, B, or C Group A Routine administrative, procurement, training, and personnel actions. Contract activities/awards for management support, financial assistance, and technical services in support of agency business, programs, projects, and goals. Literature searches and information gathering, material inventories, property surveys; data analysis, computer modeling, analytical reviews, technical summary, conceptual design, feasibility studies, document preparation, data dissemination, and paper studies. Technical assistance including financial planning, assistance, classroom training, public meetings, management training, survey participation, academic contribution, technical consultation, and stakeholders surveys. Workshop and conference planning, preparation, and implementation which may involve promoting energy efficiency, renewable energy, and energy conservation. STOP!If all work activities related to this project can be classified and described within categories under Group A, proceed directly to Section III CERTIFICATION BY PROPOSER. No additional information is required. If project work activities are described in either Group(s) B or C; then continue filling out questionnaire. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 2) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE Group B Laboratory Scale Research, Bench Scale Research, Pilot Scale Research, Proof-of-Concept Scale Research, or Field Test Research. Work DOES NOT involve new building/facilities construction and site excavation/groundbreaking activities. This work typically involves routine operation of existing laboratories, commercial buildings/properties, offices and homes, project test facilities, factories/power plants, vehicles test stands and components, refueling facilities, utility systems, or other existing structures/facilities. Work will NOT involve major change in facilities missions and operations, land use planning, new/modified regulatory/operating permit requirements. Includes work specific to routine DOE Site operations and Lab research work activities, but NOT building construction and site preparation. DOE work typically involves laboratory facilities and lab equipment operations, buildings and grounds management activities; and buildings and facilities maintenance, repairs, reconfiguration, remodeling, equipment use and replacement. Group C Pilot Test Facilities Construction, Pilot Scale Research, Field Scale Demonstration, or Commercial Scale Application. Work typically involves facility construction, site preparation/excavation/groundbreaking, and/or demolition. This work would include construction, retrofit, replacement, and/or major modifications of laboratories, test facilities, energy system prototypes, and power generation infrastructure. Work may also involve construction and maintenance of utilities system right-of-ways, roads, vehicle test facilities, commercial buildings/properties, fuel refinery/mixing facilities, refueling facility, power plants, underground wells, and pipelines, and other types of energy research related facilities. This work may require new or modified regulatory permits, environmental sampling and monitoring requirements, master planning, public involvement, and environmental impact review. Includes work specific to DOE Site Operations and Lab operation activities involving building and facilities construction, replacement, decommissioning/demolition, site preparation, land use changes, or change in research facilities mission or operations. B. PROPOSED PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1. If applicable, list any project alternatives considered to achieve the project objectives. C. PROJECT LOCATION 1. Provide a brief description of the project location (physical location, surrounding area, adjacent structures). 2.Attach a project site location map of the project work area. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NEPA procedures require evaluations of possible effects (including land use, energy resource use, natural, historic and cultural resources, and pollutants) from proposed projects on the environment. 1. Land Use a. Characterize present land use where the proposed project would be located. Urban Industrial Commercial Agricultural Suburban Rural Residential Research Facilities Forest University Campus Other: b. Identify the total size of the facility, structure, or system and what portion would be used for the proposed project. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 3) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE c. Describe planned construction, installation, and/or demolition activities, i.e., roads, utilities system right-of-ways, parking lots, buildings, laboratories, storage tanks, fueling facilities, underground wells, pipelines, or other structures. No construction would be anticipated for this project. d. Describe how land use would be affected by operational activities associated with the proposed project. No land areas would be affected. e. Describe any plans to reclaim areas that would be affected by the proposed project. No land areas would be affected. f. Would the proposed project affect any unique or unusual landforms (e.g., cliffs, waterfalls, etc.)? No Yes (describe) g. Would the proposed project be located in or near local, state, or federal parks; forests; monuments; scenic waterways; wilderness; recreation facilities; or tribal lands?No Yes (describe) 2. Construction Activities and/or Operation a. Identify project structure(s), power line(s), pipeline(s), utilities system(s), right-of-way(s) or road(s) that will be constructed and clearly mark them on a project site map or topographic map as appropriate.None b. Would the proposed project require the construction of waste pits or settling ponds? No Yes (describe and identify location, and estimate surface area disturbed) c. Would the proposed project affect any existing body of water?No Yes (describe) d. Would the proposed project impact a floodplain or wetland?No Yes (describe) e. Would the proposed project potentially cause runoff/sedimentation/erosion?No Yes (describe) f. Would the proposed project include activities located on perma-frost, near fault zones, or involve fracturing, well drilling, geologic stimulation, sequestration, active seismic data collection, and/or deepwater operations? No Yes (describe) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 4) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE g. Would the proposed project involve any of the following: nanotechnology; recombinant DNA or genetic engineering; facility decommissioning or disposition of equipment/materials; or management of radioactive wastes/materials? No Yes (describe) 3. Biological Resources a. Identify any State or Federally listed endangered or threatened plant or animal species potentially affected by the proposed project. None b. Would any designated critical habitat be affected by the proposed project?No Yes (describe) c. Describe any impacts that construction would have on any other types of sensitive or unique habitats. No planned construction No habitats None Impact (describe) d. Would any foreign substances/materials be introduced into ground or surface waters, soil, or other earth/geologic resource because of project activities? How would these foreign substances/materials affect the water, soil, biota, and geologic resources?No Yes (describe) e. Would any migratory animal corridors be impacted or disrupted by the proposed project?No Yes (describe) 4. Socioeconomic and Infrastructure Conditions a. Would local socio-economic changes result from the proposed project?No Yes (describe) b. Would the proposed project generate increased traffic use of roads through local neighborhoods, urban or rural areas? No Yes (describe) c. Would the proposed project require new transportation access (roads, rail, etc.)? Describe location, impacts, costs. No Yes (describe) d. Would the proposed project create a significant increase in local energy usage?No Yes (describe) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 5) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE 5. Historical/Cultural Resources a. Describe any historical, archaeological, or cultural sites in the vicinity of the proposed project; note any sites included on the National Register of Historic Places.None b. Would construction or operational activities planned under the proposed project disturb any historical, archaeological, or cultural sites?No planned construction No historic sites Yes (describe)No Impact (discuss) c. Has the State Historic Preservation Office been contacted with regard to this project?No Yes (describe) d. Would the proposed project interfere with visual resources (e.g., eliminate scenic views) or alter the present landscape? No Yes (describe) e. Would the proposed project be located on or adjacent to tribal lands, lands considered to be sacred, or lands used for traditional purposes? Describe any known tribal sensitivities for the proposed project area. 6. Atmospheric Conditions/Air Quality a. Identify air quality conditions in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project with regard to attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). This information is available under the Green Book Non-Attainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants located at http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/astate.html Attainment Non-Attainment O3 - 1 Hour O3 - 8 Hour SOx PM - 2.5 PM - 10 CO NO2 Lead b. Would proposed project require issuance of new or modified local, state, or federal air permits to perform project related work and activities?No Yes (describe) c. Would the proposed project be in compliance with local and state air quality requirements?Yes If not, please explain. DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 6) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE d. Would the proposed project be classified as either a New Source or a major modification to an existing source? No Yes (describe) e. What types of air emissions, including fugitive emissions, would be anticipated from the proposed project, and what would be the maximum annual rate of emissions for the project? Maximum per Year Total for Project SOx NOx PM - 2.5 PM - 10 CO CO2 Lead H2S Organic solvent vapors or other volatile organic compounds--List: Hazardous air pollutants -- List: Other -- List: None f. Would any types of emission control or particulate collection devices be used? No Yes (describe, including collection efficiencies) g. How would emissions be vented? 7. Hydrologic Conditions/Water Quality a. What nearby water bodies may be affected by the proposed project? Provide distance(s) from the project site. b. What sources would supply potable and process water for the proposed project? DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 7) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE c. Quantify the wastewater that would be generated by the proposed project. Gallons/day Gallons/year Non-contact cooling water Process water Sanitary Other -- describe: None d. What would be the major components of each type of wastewater (e.g., coal fines)?No wastewater produced e. Identify the local treatment facility that would receive wastewater from the proposed project. No discharges to local treatment facility f. Describe how wastewater would be collected and treated.No wastewater produced g. Would any run-off or leachates be produced from storage piles or waste disposal sites?No Yes (describe source) h. Would project require issuance of new or modified water permits to perform project work or site development activities? No Yes (describe) i. Where would wastewater effluents from the proposed project be discharged?No wastewater produced j. Would the proposed project be permitted to discharge effluents into an existing body of water? No Yes (describe water use and effluent impact) k. Would a new or modified National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit be required? No Yes (describe) l. Would the proposed project adversely affect the quality or movement of groundwater?No Yes (describe) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 8) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE m. Would the proposed project require issuance of an Underground Injection Control (UIC)permit? No Yes (describe) n. Would the proposed project be located in or near a wellhead protection area, drinking water protection area, or above a sole source aquifer or underground source of drinking water (USDW)? No Yes (describe) 8. Solid and Hazardous Wastes a. Identify and estimate wastes that would be generated from the project. Solid wastes are defined as any solid, liquid, semi- solid, or contained gaseous material that is discarded, has served its intended purpose, or is a manufacturing or mining by- product (See EPA Municipal Solid Waste and Municipal Solid by State). Annual Quantity Municipal solid waste (e.g., paper, plastic, etc.) Coal or coal by-products Other -- Identify: Hazardous waste – Identify: None b. Would project require issuance of new or modified solid waste and/or hazardous waste related permits to perform project work activities?No Yes (explain) c. How and where would solid waste disposal be accomplished? None generated On-site (identify and describe location) Off-site (identify location and describe facility and treatment) d. How would wastes for disposal be transported? e. Describe hazardous wastes that would be generated, treated, handled, or stored under this project. Hazardous waste information can be found at EPA Hazardous Waste website.None f. How would hazardous or toxic waste be collected and stored?None used or produced DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 9) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE g. If hazardous wastes would require off-site disposal, have arrangements been made with a certified TSD (Treatment, Storage, and Disposal) facility? Not required Arrangements not yet made Arrangements made with a certified TSD facility (identify) 9. Health/Safety Factors a. Identify hazardous or toxic materials that would be used in the proposed project. None Hazardous or toxic materials that would be used (identify): b. Describe the potential impacts of this project’s hazardous materials on human health and the environment. None c. Would there be any special physical hazards or health risks associated with the project?No Yes (describe) d. Does a worker safety program exist at the location of the proposed project?No Yes (describe) e. Would additional safety training be necessary for any new laboratory, equipment, or processes involved with the project? No Yes (describe) f. Describe any increases in ambient noise levels to the public from construction and operational activities. None Increase in ambient noise level (describe) g. Would project construction result in the removal of natural or other barriers that act as noise screens? No construction planned No Yes (describe) h. Would hearing protection be required for workers?No Yes (describe) 10. Environmental Restoration and/or Waste Management a. Would the proposed project include CERCLA removals or similar actions under RCRA or other authorities? No Yes (describe) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 10) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE b. Would the proposed project include siting, construction, and operation of temporary pilot-scale waste collection and treatment facilities or pilot-scale waste stabilization and containment facilities?No Yes (describe) c. Would the proposed project involve operations of environmental monitoring and control systems? No Yes (describe) d. Would the proposed project involve siting, construction, operation, or decommissioning of a facility for storing packaged hazardous waste for 90 days or less?No Yes (describe) E. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE 1. For the following laws, describe any existing permits, new or modified permits, manifests, responsible authorities or agencies, contacts, etc., that would be required for the proposed project a. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: b. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA): None New Required Modification Required Describe: c. Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: d. Clean Water Act (CWA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: e. Underground Storage Tank Control Program (UST):None New Required Modification Required Describe: f. Underground Injection Control Program (UIC):None New Required Modification Required Describe: g. Clean Air Act (CAA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 11) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE h. Endangered Species Act (ESA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: i.Floodplains and Wetlands Regulations:None New Required Modification Required Describe: j. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: k. National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: l. Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA):None New Required Modification Required Describe: 2. Identify any other environmental laws and regulations (Federal, state, and local) for which compliance would be necessary for this project, and describe the permits, manifests, and contacts that would be required. F. DESCRIBE ANY ISSUES THAT WOULD GENERATE PUBLIC CONTROVERSY REGARDING THE PROPOSED PROJECT.None G. WOULD THE PROPOSED PROJECT PRODUCE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT, OR ARE OTHER MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS PLANNED OR UNDERWAY, IN THE PROJECT AREA? No Yes (describe) H. SUMMARIZE THE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT WOULD RESULT FROM THE PROPOSED PROJECT. None (provide supporting detail)Significant impacts (describe) DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D NETL F 451.1-1/3 Revised: Reviewed: (Page 12) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE I. PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE PROJECT WOULD BE DECOMMISSIONED, INCLUDING THE DISPOSITION OF EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS. III. CERTIFICATION BY PROPOSER I hereby certify that the information provided herein is current, accurate, and complete as of the date shown immediately below. Signature: Date (mm/dd/yyyy): Typed Name: Title: Organization: IV. REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY DOE I hereby certify that I have reviewed the information provided in this questionnaire, have determined that all questions have been appropriately answered, and judge the responses to be consistent with the efforts proposed. DOE Project Manager Signature: Date (mm/dd/yyyy): Typed Name: DocuSign Envelope ID: E32DF9BF-D0B3-496A-89D0-D1ECA5FE378D 4/14/2023 Certificate Of Completion Envelope Id: E32DF9BFD0B3496A89D0D1ECA5FE378D Status: Completed Subject: Complete with DocuSign: Alaska Energy Authority Program Narrative.pdf, Alaska Energy Authority ... Source Envelope: Document Pages: 40 Signatures: 5 Envelope Originator: Certificate Pages: 2 Initials: 0 Grants AutoNav: Enabled EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled Time Zone: (UTC-09:00) Alaska 813 W Northern Lights Blvd Anchorage, AK 99503-2407 grants@aidea.org IP Address: 206.174.41.28 Record Tracking Status: Original 4/14/2023 10:17:54 AM Holder: Grants grants@aidea.org Location: DocuSign Signer Events Signature Timestamp Conner Erickson cerickson@akenergyauthority.org Economist AEA Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Signature Adoption: Uploaded Signature Image Using IP Address: 206.174.41.28 Sent: 4/14/2023 10:46:53 AM Viewed: 4/14/2023 10:50:07 AM Signed: 4/14/2023 10:51:23 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Curtis Thayer cthayer@akenergyauthority.org AEA Executive Director AEA Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Signature Adoption: Uploaded Signature Image Using IP Address: 139.60.224.233 Signed using mobile Sent: 4/14/2023 10:51:24 AM Viewed: 4/14/2023 10:53:44 AM Signed: 4/14/2023 10:59:11 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign In Person Signer Events Signature Timestamp Editor Delivery Events Status Timestamp Agent Delivery Events Status Timestamp Intermediary Delivery Events Status Timestamp Certified Delivery Events Status Timestamp Carbon Copy Events Status Timestamp Witness Events Signature Timestamp Notary Events Signature Timestamp Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps Envelope Sent Hashed/Encrypted 4/14/2023 10:46:53 AM Certified Delivered Security Checked 4/14/2023 10:53:44 AM Signing Complete Security Checked 4/14/2023 10:59:11 AM Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps Completed Security Checked 4/14/2023 10:59:11 AM Payment Events Status Timestamps Control Number 2936-1932 US Department of Energy, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations Industrial Decarbonization and Emissions Reduction Demonstration-to-Deployment Funding Opportunity Announcement: DE-FOA-0002936 CONCEPT PAPER Control Number 2936-1932 Project Title: Creating a Green Pathway for the Blue Economy Applicant: Trident Seafoods Topic Area 1: BIL: Near-Net-Zero Facility Build Projects Industry Sector: Food and Beverage Areas of Interest (AOI): Integrating clean energy generation to displace onsite diesel generation, lowering energy unit operations and GHG intensity of operations, optimizing productivity and minimizing waste through smart manufacturing and supply chain logistics, cross-cutting and integrated process improvements in energy efficiency. Business Point of Contact: Stefanie Moreland, Trident Seafoods Corporation Technical Point of Contact: Jarred Brand, Trident Seafoods Corporation Team Members: • Trident Seafoods • Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 2 Project Plan Alaska produces two-thirds of the natfon’s seafood harvest in a typical year and is home to eight of the top 20 US ports by volume. Within the state, the Bering Sea and Aleutfan Islands region produces 70% of Alaska’s seafood by volume. The remote communitfes in the Aleutfans host one of the most significant food harvestfng, processing, and shipping industries in the world. The largest port in the Aleutfans, Dutch Harbor, is the number one seafood port by volume in the United States. The adjacent community of Unalaska is less than 10,000 people; located 800 miles from Anchorage, Unalaska is the economic anchor for the region, comprising the Aleutfans East Borough and Aleutfans West Census Area—two of the most diverse county-equivalents in America. Harvestfng, processing, packaging, and shipping billions of pounds of seafood to markets around the world involve immense logistfcs, complicated supply chains and a skilled, diverse workforce. The complexity and scale of these operatfons comes with associated GHG emissions that are driven by the region’s near total reliance on diesel-generated power. The carbon-intensity of seafood operatfons in the region contrasts markedly with the world-class sustainable management of Alaska fisheries, the inherent environmental efficiency of wild fish productfon, and the well documented health benefits of seafood consumptfon. The entfre industry is searching for the missing ingredient: a low-carbon source of power at the scale and with the reliability required by this demanding industry. An award under this FOA would enable a collaboratfve partnership between the private sector, local, state, and federal governments that would decarbonize the heart of Alaska’s seafood industry, rewrite the sustainability equatfon for Alaska’s fisheries, and deliver billions of pounds of low carbon protein to the world. Trident Seafoods is the largest vertfcally integrated seafood harvestfng and processing company in North America. As such it is uniquely positfoned to innovate in GHG reductfons across the complicated supply chains and industrial processes involved in processing seafood in the Aleutfan Islands. Trident’s largest processing facility was built in the 1980s in Akutan, Alaska, and needs to be both relocated and rebuilt to remain economically viable in global seafood markets. The size, complexity, and consequences of this reinvestment is strategically significant for the company, for the seafood sector, and for the economic welfare of the communitfes in the region. The viability of this reinvestment, and the company’s ability to invest in environmentally valuable technologies for heat recovery, energy- efficient buildings, wastewater management, and byproduct recovery, all hinge on uncertaintfes in the availability, cost, and carbon intensity of the available energy infrastructure. The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) is a public corporatfon of the state of Alaska governed by an independent board of directors whose mission is the reduce the cost of energy in Alaska. As Alaska’s lead agency for statewide energy policy and program development, AEA collaborates Trident’s Current Plant in Akutan, Alaska Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 3 with utflitfes, private companies, local governments, and Alaskan energy innovators to diversify the state’s energy portiolio. AEA is supportfng the City of Unalaska’s consideratfon of the Makushin Geothermal Project (MGP - a consortfum that includes the local Alaska Natfve Corporatfon) and other renewable energy resources to source clean energy for the city’s utflity and to improve the local grid to enable the distributfon of clean power to the industrial processing plants on the island. In the extremely remote community of Unalaska, it is unlikely that absent federal support, a clean energy grid will be competftfve with the current system of distributed self-generatfon with diesel. Trident proposes that integratfng the City and State’s efforts to develop a clean energy grid with Trident’s interest in building the seafood processing plant-of-the-future presents a unique opportunity to demonstrate industrial decarbonizatfon at a scale that provides the foundatfon for sector-wide decarbonizatfon. The project would involve the constructfon of a state -of-the-art seafood processing plant at a new site at Captains Bay on Unalaska and the development of the clean energy resources and associated grid upgrades. Trident estfmates that the new fa cility would achieve an X% reductfon in carbon emissions compared to its current operatfons, and the availability of the clean energy grid to all processors and shoreside vessel operatfons in the area would amplify that impact proportfonately. As currently envisioned, Trident would lead in the development of the state-of-the-art seafood processing plant while the state of Alaska, through Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) would support the City of Unalaska in securing the clean energy and grid modernizatfon necessary to deliver clean power to the plant and support broader decarbonizatfon of the industrial sector on the island. DOE funds would primarily be directed through the state of Alaska and City to support that effort and integratfon with the Captains Bay plant. Trident would subsequently enter into long- term power purchase agreements with the City. With this $250 million award, DOE can reduce the carbon emissions by up to 90% for approximately 15% of the entfre volume seafood produced in the U.S. annually (and ultfmately, if extended beyond the Aleutfan Islands to all of Alaska, the impact could reach 60% of all seafood produced in the United States). Technology and Systems to be Deployed Trident has already secured a site at Captains Bay, has completed site preparatfon, initfal design, and other actfvitfes ahead of a final investment decision. Consolidatfng Trident’s operatfons at the Captains Bay, Unalaska locatfon would certainly achieve immediate GHG reductfons by improving the supply chain and logistfcs of transportfng and supportfng a substantfal workforce. Captains Bay Site: January 2022 Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 4 However, the greatest GHG reductfons would come from a shift from onsite diesel-powered generatfon to renewable energy—preferably geothermal power. The City of Unalaska has entered into a power purchase agreement and is working with the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) and another public corporatfon of the state of Alaska, the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) to pursue development of a geothermal resource on the eastern flank of the Makushin volcano on Unalaska island. The Makushin Geothermal Project (MGP) is being developed by a joint venture between the local Alaska Natfve Village Corporatfon (Ounalashka Corporatfon) and an Alaskan company Chena Power, LLC. MGP has secured an agreement with Ormat Technologies, one of the preeminent geothermal companies in the world. Development of the MGP would significantly reduce GHG emissions by displacing the current diesel generatfon for the City of Unalaska and through displacing diesel generatfon at Trident’s current processing facility in Akutan. As proposed, the MGP is a 36 MWg/30 Mwe geothermal system that would provide power to the City of Unalaska and the new facility Trident would build at Capta ins Bay. To deliver power to the Captains Bay plant, the project would require upgrades to the local grid that could also support future expansion of the MGP to deliver clean energy to the other seafood processing facilitfes on the island. If the MGP proves to be unfeasible (cost or reservoir performance), with DOE support Trident would contfnue to work with the City of Unalaska, AEA and AIDEA to pursue alternatfve clean energy sources (most likely wind/solar and storage) for the community and Captains Bay plant. Development Plan and Timeline Following a decision to proceed we expect the following tfmeline by major project component. It is important to note that the following is presented in terms of seasons as the subarctfc climate and remote locatfon makes much of the actfvity highly seasonal. Project Component Season 1 2024 Season 2 2025 Season 3 2026 Season 4 2027 Season 5 2028 Trident Captains Bay Plant Foundatfon work at site Plant constructfon begins Utflitfes to site completed Equipment installatfon and testfng Unalaska site fully operatfonal Makushin Geothermal Project Finalize diligence on MGP and advance to development Complete well field development Install foundatfon, terrestrial power cables Install subsea cables, BESS system and mobilize plant equipment Install power plant and remote gathering system; commission. Clean Energy Alternatives Develop alternatfves to MGP Permitting and long-lead tfme procurement Constructfon Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 5 Risks In additfon to the implicatfons of a highly seasonal constructfon environment, the extreme remoteness of the operatfon elevates the risk of misalignment in progress of the various components of the project. The potentfal for long-lead tfme or critfcal components to miss the window necessary to support executfon of a season can have cascading effects on the rest of the project. The project also inherent faces risks in the fisheries that ultfmately support the investment due to climate change driven environmental impacts on abundance of key species, regulatory or other actfon that could limit or close critfcal fisheries. Finally, market risks due to internatfonal demand for seafood, tariffs and other market drivers pose an ongoing risk to the project. With 50 years of experience successfully navigatfng these challenges in Alaska and the Aleutfans, Trident is well equipped to manage and mitfgate these risks. The total cost of the integrated project is currently estfmated at significantly more than half a billion dollars, enabling the project to easily satfsfy the minimum 50% non-federal cost share. Federal funding would be focused primarily on the MGP and associated infrastructure needed to develop an affordable clean energy source for the Captains Bay plant as well as set the stage for broader adoptfon of clean energy by other processors on the island. Project Component Estimated Cost Impact of DOE Funding Trident Captains Bay Plant Proprietary (measured in hundreds of millions) Enables final investment decision Makushin Geothermal Project $280 million Enables development and affordable power compared to onsite diesel generatfon Associated Infrastructure $68 million Facilitates broader adoptfon within the community when MGP is expanded. DOE Grant $250 million Offsets MGP geothermal productfon, energy grid, and integratfon Trident estfmates that the new facility in Captains Bay, if powered by conventfonal diesel, would be able to achieve 10-15% emissions reductfons due to more energy-efficient buildings and equipment. However, if powered by the Makushin Geothermal Project, the plan would be able to achieve a net reductfon in carbon emissions of 90% compared to its current operatfons, with further reductfons over tfme as vehicles and heavy equipment can be converted to electric power. The availability of the clean energy grid to all processors and shoreside vessel operatfons in the area would amplify that impact proportfonately, providing the pathway for industrial decarbonizatfon of Alaska’s seafood sector. Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 6 Project Component Current Emissions Projected Emissions Reductions Trident Captains Bay Plant Diesel power generatfon emissions: 43.5 metric tons CO2 per year 10 – 15%, from more efficient facilitfes and equipment Makushin Geothermal Project N/A 90%; vehicle and heavy equipment emissions to be reduced over tfme Long Term Project Viability and Objectives Trident has successfully operated in the Bering Sea for 50 years and understands the risks and opportunitfes inherent in the seafood industry. As a privately owned, stakeholder driven company Trident’s investment in a plant the scale of Captains Bay will inherently be made based on an internal assessment of the long-term viability of that investment. The DOE investment will, through the City and State of Alaska, ensure that clean energy is competftfve enough on a per -unit basis with self-generated fossil energy to ensure the viability of the Captains Bay plant. Trident’s willingness to collaborate with the city, state and federal governments and assume the risk of demonstratfng the viability of a decarbonized processing plant will provide a foundatfon for sector-wide adoptfon both in Unalaska and across the state. The initfal investments by all the partfes will ensure that any incremental investment in additfonal clean energy generatfon capacity will be substantfally less costly and risky, spurring broader adoptfon. Beyond the obvious direct benefits to the residents of Unalaska, this project envisions transforming the energy infrastructure and economy of the entfre Bering Sea and Aleutfan Islands (BSAI) region. By providing a large and stable source of renewable energy, the project will deliver a form of global competftfve advantage that few other seafood producers could match at any scale: zero to low-carbon operatfons. If Unalaska could offer this advantage, it would attract additfonal investment from other partfcipants in the BSAI fisheries, all of which would benefit from the existfng communitfes in the region. The replicability of the proposed Unalaska model throughout the Aleutfans could bring a broader level of economic renewal to the seafood-dependent communitfes in the region, including Adak, Atka, False Pass, King Cove, Sand Point, and Kodiak. With a base populatfon of 8000, the BSAI region generates over half of the value and 79% of the volume of total Alaskan fisheries. The seafood industry accounts for 50% of all local resident employment, with other temporary seasonal workers generatfng additfonal economic value for the region. Whether through tapping the vast geothermal resources of the 59 Aleutfan volcanoes or through a combinatfon of renewable energy technologies, this project could drive not only the future competftfveness of the Alaskan seafood sector but also the potentfal development of complementary large-scale industrial businesses such as green methanol. Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 7 Community Benefits Plan The project presents a unique opportunity to advance a transformatfonal investment in decarbonizatfon of the food and beverage industry with a global scale footprint. Despite the global implicatfons of the project, Trident is deeply focused on the community and local benefits of the project. As a privately held company, Trident is stakeholder rather than shareholder driven and able to think long-term about the communitfes we work in. 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 the early engagement with partners and stakeholders that has been undertaken to date. The CBP will define measurable project benefits, set workforce goals, and advance formal partn erships 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 durin g 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 a local Alaska Native Village Corporation, the municipality, 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 project approach to the CBP will be to engage its labor partners early to initiate discussions toward labor agreements for components of the project, specifically the MGP and any associated infrastructure. The CBP would establish a timeline and milestones for negotiations with organized labor, including discussions on local and Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 8 targeted hiring goals, card-check neutrality, and possible provisions advancing programs to attract, train, and retain new workers. The CBP would prioritize formalizing the existing relationships within the partnership including tribal entities and Alaska Native Corporations, 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 incorporating our local government partners and tribal entities. 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. 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 Community Benefits Plan. Alaska is not a right-to-work state. Trident maintains strict policies fostering safe, healthy, inclusive workplaces free of discrimination and harassment. Trident also supports continual development of a skilled, inclusive local workforce; its continuous learning and development opportunities include instructor-led, on-the-job development and training, as well as access to formal education. In addition, Trident provides many e-learning courses and other opportunities for employees to develop or refine their professional skills, learn new software, and explore other careers. Element 3: Advancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility The Aleutians East Borough is one of the most diverse census districts in the U.S. 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 Jutice40 Initiative goal While Unalaska is the location of the project and has an extremely diverse community struggling with the high cost of its remote location, the Captains Bay plant itself will serve the broader Bering Sea region and have economic implications for these fishery dependent communities . In addition to the direct relationship of the MGP to tribal entities, the CBP will demonstrate how the project is of regional significance and supports disadvantaged communities throughout the Bering Sea. Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 9 Project Team Description Trident Seafoods is the largest vertically integrated seafood harvesting and processing company in North America, employing more than 9,000 people during the course of e ach year and serving over 1,000 independent fishermen. Trident is percent American-owned and privately held. Stefanie Moreland, Executive Vice President for Public Affairs: Ms. Moreland has more than 20 years of experience in natural resource management and public policy development, primarily in the Alaska region. She has been an active participant in multi - stakeholder forums addressing fisheries management, marine ecosystem research, and global seafood standards and benchmarking initiatives. Jarred Brand, Senior Director, Engineering, Alaska Operations: Mr. Brand has over 15 years of experience in Trident’s fishing and processing operations. He is responsible for marine and shore-based engineering and capital investments for Trident’s Alaska operations, covering over 200 plant, port, and marine engineers across the state. Alaska Energy Authority is a public corporation of the State of Alaska and is the state’s designated energy agency. AEA has managed and administered more than $300 million in grants to renewable energy projects in Alaska and has extensive experience operating and developing projects including bulk fuel tank farms, diesel powerhouses, and electric distribution grids. AEA also currently owns the 120-megawatt Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, the largest in Alaska. 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. 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. Organization Chart Trident Seafoods Captains Bay Plant Alaska Energy Authority Technical Support and Administration City of Unalaska Electric Grid and Clean Energy Control Number 2936-1932 US Department of Energy, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations Industrial Decarbonization and Emissions Reduction Demonstration-to-Deployment Funding Opportunity Announcement: DE-FOA-0002936 CONCEPT PAPER Control Number 2936-1932 Project Title: Creating a Green Pathway for the Blue Economy Applicant: Trident Seafoods Topic Area 1: BIL: Near-Net-Zero Facility Build Projects Industry Sector: Food and Beverage Areas of Interest (AOI): Integrating clean energy generation to displace onsite diesel generation, lowering energy unit operations and GHG intensity of operations, optimizing productivity and minimizing waste through smart manufacturing and supply chain logistics, cross-cutting and integrated process improvements in energy efficiency. Business Point of Contact: Stefanie Moreland, Trident Seafoods Corporation Technical Point of Contact: Jarred Brand, Trident Seafoods Corporation Team Members: • Trident Seafoods • Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 2 Project Plan Alaska produces two-thirds of the natfon’s seafood harvest in a typical year and is home to eight of the top 20 US ports by volume. Within the state, the Bering Sea and Aleutfan Islands region produces 70% of Alaska’s seafood by volume. The remote communitfes in the Aleutfans host one of the most significant food harvestfng, processing, and shipping industries in the world. The largest port in the Aleutfans, Dutch Harbor, is the number one seafood port by volume in the United States. The adjacent community of Unalaska is less than 10,000 people; located 800 miles from Anchorage, Unalaska is the economic anchor for the region, comprising the Aleutfans East Borough and Aleutfans West Census Area—two of the most diverse county-equivalents in America. Harvestfng, processing, packaging, and shipping billions of pounds of seafood to markets around the world involve immense logistfcs, complicated supply chains and a skilled, diverse workforce. The complexity and scale of these operatfons comes with associated GHG emissions that are driven by the region’s near total reliance on diesel-generated power. The carbon-intensity of seafood operatfons in the region contrasts markedly with the world-class sustainable management of Alaska fisheries, the inherent environmental efficiency of wild fish productfon, and the well documented health benefits of seafood consumptfon. The entfre industry is searching for the missing ingredient: a low-carbon source of power at the scale and with the reliability required by this demanding industry. An award under this FOA would enable a collaboratfve partnership between the private sector, local, state, and federal governments that would decarbonize the heart of Alaska’s seafood industry, rewrite the sustainability equatfon for Alaska’s fisheries, and deliver billions of pounds of low carbon protein to the world. Trident Seafoods is the largest vertfcally integrated seafood harvestfng and processing company in North America. As such it is uniquely positfoned to innovate in GHG reductfons across the complicated supply chains and industrial processes involved in processing seafood in the Aleutfan Islands. Trident’s largest processing facility was built in the 1980s in Akutan, Alaska, and needs to be both relocated and rebuilt to remain economically viable in global seafood markets. The size, complexity, and consequences of this reinvestment is strategically significant for the company, for the seafood sector, and for the economic welfare of the communitfes in the region. The viability of this reinvestment, and the company’s ability to invest in environmentally valuable technologies for heat recovery, energy- efficient buildings, wastewater management, and byproduct recovery, all hinge on uncertaintfes in the availability, cost, and carbon intensity of the available energy infrastructure. The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) is a public corporatfon of the state of Alaska governed by an independent board of directors whose mission is the reduce the cost of energy in Alaska. As Alaska’s lead agency for statewide energy policy and program development, AEA collaborates Trident’s Current Plant in Akutan, Alaska Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 3 with utflitfes, private companies, local governments, and Alaskan energy innovators to diversify the state’s energy portiolio. AEA is supportfng the City of Unalaska’s consideratfon of the Makushin Geothermal Project (MGP - a consortfum that includes the local Alaska Natfve Corporatfon) and other renewable energy resources to source clean energy for the city’s utflity and to improve the local grid to enable the distributfon of clean power to the industrial processing plants on the island. In the extremely remote community of Unalaska, it is unlikely that absent federal support, a clean energy grid will be competftfve with the current system of distributed self-generatfon with diesel. Trident proposes that integratfng the City and State’s efforts to develop a clean energy grid with Trident’s interest in building the seafood processing plant-of-the-future presents a unique opportunity to demonstrate industrial decarbonizatfon at a scale that provides the foundatfon for sector-wide decarbonizatfon. The project would involve the constructfon of a state -of-the-art seafood processing plant at a new site at Captains Bay on Unalaska and the development of the clean energy resources and associated grid upgrades. Trident estfmates that the new fa cility would achieve an X% reductfon in carbon emissions compared to its current operatfons, and the availability of the clean energy grid to all processors and shoreside vessel operatfons in the area would amplify that impact proportfonately. As currently envisioned, Trident would lead in the development of the state-of-the-art seafood processing plant while the state of Alaska, through Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) would support the City of Unalaska in securing the clean energy and grid modernizatfon necessary to deliver clean power to the plant and support broader decarbonizatfon of the industrial sector on the island. DOE funds would primarily be directed through the state of Alaska and City to support that effort and integratfon with the Captains Bay plant. Trident would subsequently enter into long- term power purchase agreements with the City. With this $250 million award, DOE can reduce the carbon emissions by up to 90% for approximately 15% of the entfre volume seafood produced in the U.S. annually (and ultfmately, if extended beyond the Aleutfan Islands to all of Alaska, the impact could reach 60% of all seafood produced in the United States). Technology and Systems to be Deployed Trident has already secured a site at Captains Bay, has completed site preparatfon, initfal design, and other actfvitfes ahead of a final investment decision. Consolidatfng Trident’s operatfons at the Captains Bay, Unalaska locatfon would certainly achieve immediate GHG reductfons by improving the supply chain and logistfcs of transportfng and supportfng a substantfal workforce. Captains Bay Site: January 2022 Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 4 However, the greatest GHG reductfons would come from a shift from onsite diesel-powered generatfon to renewable energy—preferably geothermal power. The City of Unalaska has entered into a power purchase agreement and is working with the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) and another public corporatfon of the state of Alaska, the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) to pursue development of a geothermal resource on the eastern flank of the Makushin volcano on Unalaska island. The Makushin Geothermal Project (MGP) is being developed by a joint venture between the local Alaska Natfve Village Corporatfon (Ounalashka Corporatfon) and an Alaskan company Chena Power, LLC. MGP has secured an agreement with Ormat Technologies, one of the preeminent geothermal companies in the world. Development of the MGP would significantly reduce GHG emissions by displacing the current diesel generatfon for the City of Unalaska and through displacing diesel generatfon at Trident’s current processing facility in Akutan. As proposed, the MGP is a 36 MWg/30 Mwe geothermal system that would provide power to the City of Unalaska and the new facility Trident would build at Capta ins Bay. To deliver power to the Captains Bay plant, the project would require upgrades to the local grid that could also support future expansion of the MGP to deliver clean energy to the other seafood processing facilitfes on the island. If the MGP proves to be unfeasible (cost or reservoir performance), with DOE support Trident would contfnue to work with the City of Unalaska, AEA and AIDEA to pursue alternatfve clean energy sources (most likely wind/solar and storage) for the community and Captains Bay plant. Development Plan and Timeline Following a decision to proceed we expect the following tfmeline by major project component. It is important to note that the following is presented in terms of seasons as the subarctfc climate and remote locatfon makes much of the actfvity highly seasonal. Project Component Season 1 2024 Season 2 2025 Season 3 2026 Season 4 2027 Season 5 2028 Trident Captains Bay Plant Foundatfon work at site Plant constructfon begins Utflitfes to site completed Equipment installatfon and testfng Unalaska site fully operatfonal Makushin Geothermal Project Finalize diligence on MGP and advance to development Complete well field development Install foundatfon, terrestrial power cables Install subsea cables, BESS system and mobilize plant equipment Install power plant and remote gathering system; commission. Clean Energy Alternatives Develop alternatfves to MGP Permitting and long-lead tfme procurement Constructfon Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 5 Risks In additfon to the implicatfons of a highly seasonal constructfon environment, the extreme remoteness of the operatfon elevates the risk of misalignment in progress of the various components of the project. The potentfal for long-lead tfme or critfcal components to miss the window necessary to support executfon of a season can have cascading effects on the rest of the project. The project also inherent faces risks in the fisheries that ultfmately support the investment due to climate change driven environmental impacts on abundance of key species, regulatory or other actfon that could limit or close critfcal fisheries. Finally, market risks due to internatfonal demand for seafood, tariffs and other market drivers pose an ongoing risk to the project. With 50 years of experience successfully navigatfng these challenges in Alaska and the Aleutfans, Trident is well equipped to manage and mitfgate these risks. The total cost of the integrated project is currently estfmated at significantly more than half a billion dollars, enabling the project to easily satfsfy the minimum 50% non-federal cost share. Federal funding would be focused primarily on the MGP and associated infrastructure needed to develop an affordable clean energy source for the Captains Bay plant as well as set the stage for broader adoptfon of clean energy by other processors on the island. Project Component Estimated Cost Impact of DOE Funding Trident Captains Bay Plant Proprietary (measured in hundreds of millions) Enables final investment decision Makushin Geothermal Project $280 million Enables development and affordable power compared to onsite diesel generatfon Associated Infrastructure $68 million Facilitates broader adoptfon within the community when MGP is expanded. DOE Grant $250 million Offsets MGP geothermal productfon, energy grid, and integratfon Trident estfmates that the new facility in Captains Bay, if powered by conventfonal diesel, would be able to achieve 10-15% emissions reductfons due to more energy-efficient buildings and equipment. However, if powered by the Makushin Geothermal Project, the plan would be able to achieve a net reductfon in carbon emissions of 90% compared to its current operatfons, with further reductfons over tfme as vehicles and heavy equipment can be converted to electric power. The availability of the clean energy grid to all processors and shoreside vessel operatfons in the area would amplify that impact proportfonately, providing the pathway for industrial decarbonizatfon of Alaska’s seafood sector. Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 6 Project Component Current Emissions Projected Emissions Reductions Trident Captains Bay Plant Diesel power generatfon emissions: 43.5 metric tons CO2 per year 10 – 15%, from more efficient facilitfes and equipment Makushin Geothermal Project N/A 90%; vehicle and heavy equipment emissions to be reduced over tfme Long Term Project Viability and Objectives Trident has successfully operated in the Bering Sea for 50 years and understands the risks and opportunitfes inherent in the seafood industry. As a privately owned, stakeholder driven company Trident’s investment in a plant the scale of Captains Bay will inherently be made based on an internal assessment of the long-term viability of that investment. The DOE investment will, through the City and State of Alaska, ensure that clean energy is competftfve enough on a per -unit basis with self-generated fossil energy to ensure the viability of the Captains Bay plant. Trident’s willingness to collaborate with the city, state and federal governments and assume the risk of demonstratfng the viability of a decarbonized processing plant will provide a foundatfon for sector-wide adoptfon both in Unalaska and across the state. The initfal investments by all the partfes will ensure that any incremental investment in additfonal clean energy generatfon capacity will be substantfally less costly and risky, spurring broader adoptfon. Beyond the obvious direct benefits to the residents of Unalaska, this project envisions transforming the energy infrastructure and economy of the entfre Bering Sea and Aleutfan Islands (BSAI) region. By providing a large and stable source of renewable energy, the project will deliver a form of global competftfve advantage that few other seafood producers could match at any scale: zero to low-carbon operatfons. If Unalaska could offer this advantage, it would attract additfonal investment from other partfcipants in the BSAI fisheries, all of which would benefit from the existfng communitfes in the region. The replicability of the proposed Unalaska model throughout the Aleutfans could bring a broader level of economic renewal to the seafood-dependent communitfes in the region, including Adak, Atka, False Pass, King Cove, Sand Point, and Kodiak. With a base populatfon of 8000, the BSAI region generates over half of the value and 79% of the volume of total Alaskan fisheries. The seafood industry accounts for 50% of all local resident employment, with other temporary seasonal workers generatfng additfonal economic value for the region. Whether through tapping the vast geothermal resources of the 59 Aleutfan volcanoes or through a combinatfon of renewable energy technologies, this project could drive not only the future competftfveness of the Alaskan seafood sector but also the potentfal development of complementary large-scale industrial businesses such as green methanol. Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 7 Community Benefits Plan The project presents a unique opportunity to advance a transformatfonal investment in decarbonizatfon of the food and beverage industry with a global scale footprint. Despite the global implicatfons of the project, Trident is deeply focused on the community and local benefits of the project. As a privately held company, Trident is stakeholder rather than shareholder driven and able to think long-term about the communitfes we work in. 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 the early engagement with partners and stakeholders that has been undertaken to date. The CBP will define measurable project benefits, set workforce goals, and advance formal partn erships 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 durin g 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 a local Alaska Native Village Corporation, the municipality, 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 project approach to the CBP will be to engage its labor partners early to initiate discussions toward labor agreements for components of the project, specifically the MGP and any associated infrastructure. The CBP would establish a timeline and milestones for negotiations with organized labor, including discussions on local and Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 8 targeted hiring goals, card-check neutrality, and possible provisions advancing programs to attract, train, and retain new workers. The CBP would prioritize formalizing the existing relationships within the partnership including tribal entities and Alaska Native Corporations, 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 incorporating our local government partners and tribal entities. 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. 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 Community Benefits Plan. Alaska is not a right-to-work state. Trident maintains strict policies fostering safe, healthy, inclusive workplaces free of discrimination and harassment. Trident also supports continual development of a skilled, inclusive local workforce; its continuous learning and development opportunities include instructor-led, on-the-job development and training, as well as access to formal education. In addition, Trident provides many e-learning courses and other opportunities for employees to develop or refine their professional skills, learn new software, and explore other careers. Element 3: Advancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility The Aleutians East Borough is one of the most diverse census districts in the U.S. 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 Jutice40 Initiative goal While Unalaska is the location of the project and has an extremely diverse community struggling with the high cost of its remote location, the Captains Bay plant itself will serve the broader Bering Sea region and have economic implications for these fishery dependent communities . In addition to the direct relationship of the MGP to tribal entities, the CBP will demonstrate how the project is of regional significance and supports disadvantaged communities throughout the Bering Sea. Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 9 Project Team Description Trident Seafoods is the largest vertically integrated seafood harvesting and processing company in North America, employing more than 9,000 people during the course of e ach year and serving over 1,000 independent fishermen. Trident is percent American-owned and privately held. Stefanie Moreland, Executive Vice President for Public Affairs: Ms. Moreland has more than 20 years of experience in natural resource management and public policy development, primarily in the Alaska region. She has been an active participant in multi - stakeholder forums addressing fisheries management, marine ecosystem research, and global seafood standards and benchmarking initiatives. Jarred Brand, Senior Director, Engineering, Alaska Operations: Mr. Brand has over 15 years of experience in Trident’s fishing and processing operations. He is responsible for marine and shore-based engineering and capital investments for Trident’s Alaska operations, covering over 200 plant, port, and marine engineers across the state. Alaska Energy Authority is a public corporation of the State of Alaska and is the state’s designated energy agency. AEA has managed and administered more than $300 million in grants to renewable energy projects in Alaska and has extensive experience operating and developing projects including bulk fuel tank farms, diesel powerhouses, and electric distribution grids. AEA also currently owns the 120-megawatt Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, the largest in Alaska. 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. 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. Organization Chart Trident Seafoods Captains Bay Plant Alaska Energy Authority Technical Support and Administration City of Unalaska Electric Grid and Clean Energy Control Number 2936-1932 US Department of Energy, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations Industrial Decarbonization and Emissions Reduction Demonstration-to-Deployment Funding Opportunity Announcement: DE-FOA-0002936 CONCEPT PAPER Control Number 2936-1932 Project Title: Creating a Green Pathway for the Blue Economy Applicant: Trident Seafoods Topic Area 1: BIL: Near-Net-Zero Facility Build Projects Industry Sector: Food and Beverage Areas of Interest (AOI): Integrating clean energy generation to displace onsite diesel generation, lowering energy unit operations and GHG intensity of operations, optimizing productivity and minimizing waste through smart manufacturing and supply chain logistics, cross-cutting and integrated process improvements in energy efficiency. Business Point of Contact: Stefanie Moreland, Trident Seafoods Corporation Technical Point of Contact: Jarred Brand, Trident Seafoods Corporation Team Members: • Trident Seafoods • Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 2 Project Plan Alaska produces two-thirds of the natfon’s seafood harvest in a typical year and is home to eight of the top 20 US ports by volume. Within the state, the Bering Sea and Aleutfan Islands region produces 70% of Alaska’s seafood by volume. The remote communitfes in the Aleutfans host one of the most significant food harvestfng, processing, and shipping industries in the world. The largest port in the Aleutfans, Dutch Harbor, is the number one seafood port by volume in the United States. The adjacent community of Unalaska is less than 10,000 people; located 800 miles from Anchorage, Unalaska is the economic anchor for the region, comprising the Aleutfans East Borough and Aleutfans West Census Area—two of the most diverse county-equivalents in America. Harvestfng, processing, packaging, and shipping billions of pounds of seafood to markets around the world involve immense logistfcs, complicated supply chains and a skilled, diverse workforce. The complexity and scale of these operatfons comes with associated GHG emissions that are driven by the region’s near total reliance on diesel-generated power. The carbon-intensity of seafood operatfons in the region contrasts markedly with the world-class sustainable management of Alaska fisheries, the inherent environmental efficiency of wild fish productfon, and the well documented health benefits of seafood consumptfon. The entfre industry is searching for the missing ingredient: a low-carbon source of power at the scale and with the reliability required by this demanding industry. An award under this FOA would enable a collaboratfve partnership between the private sector, local, state, and federal governments that would decarbonize the heart of Alaska’s seafood industry, rewrite the sustainability equatfon for Alaska’s fisheries, and deliver billions of pounds of low carbon protein to the world. Trident Seafoods is the largest vertfcally integrated seafood harvestfng and processing company in North America. As such it is uniquely positfoned to innovate in GHG reductfons across the complicated supply chains and industrial processes involved in processing seafood in the Aleutfan Islands. Trident’s largest processing facility was built in the 1980s in Akutan, Alaska, and needs to be both relocated and rebuilt to remain economically viable in global seafood markets. The size, complexity, and consequences of this reinvestment is strategically significant for the company, for the seafood sector, and for the economic welfare of the communitfes in the region. The viability of this reinvestment, and the company’s ability to invest in environmentally valuable technologies for heat recovery, energy- efficient buildings, wastewater management, and byproduct recovery, all hinge on uncertaintfes in the availability, cost, and carbon intensity of the available energy infrastructure. The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) is a public corporatfon of the state of Alaska governed by an independent board of directors whose mission is the reduce the cost of energy in Alaska. As Alaska’s lead agency for statewide energy policy and program development, AEA collaborates Trident’s Current Plant in Akutan, Alaska Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 3 with utflitfes, private companies, local governments, and Alaskan energy innovators to diversify the state’s energy portiolio. AEA is supportfng the City of Unalaska’s consideratfon of the Makushin Geothermal Project (MGP - a consortfum that includes the local Alaska Natfve Corporatfon) and other renewable energy resources to source clean energy for the city’s utflity and to improve the local grid to enable the distributfon of clean power to the industrial processing plants on the island. In the extremely remote community of Unalaska, it is unlikely that absent federal support, a clean energy grid will be competftfve with the current system of distributed self-generatfon with diesel. Trident proposes that integratfng the City and State’s efforts to develop a clean energy grid with Trident’s interest in building the seafood processing plant-of-the-future presents a unique opportunity to demonstrate industrial decarbonizatfon at a scale that provides the foundatfon for sector-wide decarbonizatfon. The project would involve the constructfon of a state -of-the-art seafood processing plant at a new site at Captains Bay on Unalaska and the development of the clean energy resources and associated grid upgrades. Trident estfmates that the new fa cility would achieve an X% reductfon in carbon emissions compared to its current operatfons, and the availability of the clean energy grid to all processors and shoreside vessel operatfons in the area would amplify that impact proportfonately. As currently envisioned, Trident would lead in the development of the state-of-the-art seafood processing plant while the state of Alaska, through Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) would support the City of Unalaska in securing the clean energy and grid modernizatfon necessary to deliver clean power to the plant and support broader decarbonizatfon of the industrial sector on the island. DOE funds would primarily be directed through the state of Alaska and City to support that effort and integratfon with the Captains Bay plant. Trident would subsequently enter into long- term power purchase agreements with the City. With this $250 million award, DOE can reduce the carbon emissions by up to 90% for approximately 15% of the entfre volume seafood produced in the U.S. annually (and ultfmately, if extended beyond the Aleutfan Islands to all of Alaska, the impact could reach 60% of all seafood produced in the United States). Technology and Systems to be Deployed Trident has already secured a site at Captains Bay, has completed site preparatfon, initfal design, and other actfvitfes ahead of a final investment decision. Consolidatfng Trident’s operatfons at the Captains Bay, Unalaska locatfon would certainly achieve immediate GHG reductfons by improving the supply chain and logistfcs of transportfng and supportfng a substantfal workforce. Captains Bay Site: January 2022 Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 4 However, the greatest GHG reductfons would come from a shift from onsite diesel-powered generatfon to renewable energy—preferably geothermal power. The City of Unalaska has entered into a power purchase agreement and is working with the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) and another public corporatfon of the state of Alaska, the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) to pursue development of a geothermal resource on the eastern flank of the Makushin volcano on Unalaska island. The Makushin Geothermal Project (MGP) is being developed by a joint venture between the local Alaska Natfve Village Corporatfon (Ounalashka Corporatfon) and an Alaskan company Chena Power, LLC. MGP has secured an agreement with Ormat Technologies, one of the preeminent geothermal companies in the world. Development of the MGP would significantly reduce GHG emissions by displacing the current diesel generatfon for the City of Unalaska and through displacing diesel generatfon at Trident’s current processing facility in Akutan. As proposed, the MGP is a 36 MWg/30 Mwe geothermal system that would provide power to the City of Unalaska and the new facility Trident would build at Capta ins Bay. To deliver power to the Captains Bay plant, the project would require upgrades to the local grid that could also support future expansion of the MGP to deliver clean energy to the other seafood processing facilitfes on the island. If the MGP proves to be unfeasible (cost or reservoir performance), with DOE support Trident would contfnue to work with the City of Unalaska, AEA and AIDEA to pursue alternatfve clean energy sources (most likely wind/solar and storage) for the community and Captains Bay plant. Development Plan and Timeline Following a decision to proceed we expect the following tfmeline by major project component. It is important to note that the following is presented in terms of seasons as the subarctfc climate and remote locatfon makes much of the actfvity highly seasonal. Project Component Season 1 2024 Season 2 2025 Season 3 2026 Season 4 2027 Season 5 2028 Trident Captains Bay Plant Foundatfon work at site Plant constructfon begins Utflitfes to site completed Equipment installatfon and testfng Unalaska site fully operatfonal Makushin Geothermal Project Finalize diligence on MGP and advance to development Complete well field development Install foundatfon, terrestrial power cables Install subsea cables, BESS system and mobilize plant equipment Install power plant and remote gathering system; commission. Clean Energy Alternatives Develop alternatfves to MGP Permitting and long-lead tfme procurement Constructfon Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 5 Risks In additfon to the implicatfons of a highly seasonal constructfon environment, the extreme remoteness of the operatfon elevates the risk of misalignment in progress of the various components of the project. The potentfal for long-lead tfme or critfcal components to miss the window necessary to support executfon of a season can have cascading effects on the rest of the project. The project also inherent faces risks in the fisheries that ultfmately support the investment due to climate change driven environmental impacts on abundance of key species, regulatory or other actfon that could limit or close critfcal fisheries. Finally, market risks due to internatfonal demand for seafood, tariffs and other market drivers pose an ongoing risk to the project. With 50 years of experience successfully navigatfng these challenges in Alaska and the Aleutfans, Trident is well equipped to manage and mitfgate these risks. The total cost of the integrated project is currently estfmated at significantly more than half a billion dollars, enabling the project to easily satfsfy the minimum 50% non-federal cost share. Federal funding would be focused primarily on the MGP and associated infrastructure needed to develop an affordable clean energy source for the Captains Bay plant as well as set the stage for broader adoptfon of clean energy by other processors on the island. Project Component Estimated Cost Impact of DOE Funding Trident Captains Bay Plant Proprietary (measured in hundreds of millions) Enables final investment decision Makushin Geothermal Project $280 million Enables development and affordable power compared to onsite diesel generatfon Associated Infrastructure $68 million Facilitates broader adoptfon within the community when MGP is expanded. DOE Grant $250 million Offsets MGP geothermal productfon, energy grid, and integratfon Trident estfmates that the new facility in Captains Bay, if powered by conventfonal diesel, would be able to achieve 10-15% emissions reductfons due to more energy-efficient buildings and equipment. However, if powered by the Makushin Geothermal Project, the plan would be able to achieve a net reductfon in carbon emissions of 90% compared to its current operatfons, with further reductfons over tfme as vehicles and heavy equipment can be converted to electric power. The availability of the clean energy grid to all processors and shoreside vessel operatfons in the area would amplify that impact proportfonately, providing the pathway for industrial decarbonizatfon of Alaska’s seafood sector. Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 6 Project Component Current Emissions Projected Emissions Reductions Trident Captains Bay Plant Diesel power generatfon emissions: 43.5 metric tons CO2 per year 10 – 15%, from more efficient facilitfes and equipment Makushin Geothermal Project N/A 90%; vehicle and heavy equipment emissions to be reduced over tfme Long Term Project Viability and Objectives Trident has successfully operated in the Bering Sea for 50 years and understands the risks and opportunitfes inherent in the seafood industry. As a privately owned, stakeholder driven company Trident’s investment in a plant the scale of Captains Bay will inherently be made based on an internal assessment of the long-term viability of that investment. The DOE investment will, through the City and State of Alaska, ensure that clean energy is competftfve enough on a per -unit basis with self-generated fossil energy to ensure the viability of the Captains Bay plant. Trident’s willingness to collaborate with the city, state and federal governments and assume the risk of demonstratfng the viability of a decarbonized processing plant will provide a foundatfon for sector-wide adoptfon both in Unalaska and across the state. The initfal investments by all the partfes will ensure that any incremental investment in additfonal clean energy generatfon capacity will be substantfally less costly and risky, spurring broader adoptfon. Beyond the obvious direct benefits to the residents of Unalaska, this project envisions transforming the energy infrastructure and economy of the entfre Bering Sea and Aleutfan Islands (BSAI) region. By providing a large and stable source of renewable energy, the project will deliver a form of global competftfve advantage that few other seafood producers could match at any scale: zero to low-carbon operatfons. If Unalaska could offer this advantage, it would attract additfonal investment from other partfcipants in the BSAI fisheries, all of which would benefit from the existfng communitfes in the region. The replicability of the proposed Unalaska model throughout the Aleutfans could bring a broader level of economic renewal to the seafood-dependent communitfes in the region, including Adak, Atka, False Pass, King Cove, Sand Point, and Kodiak. With a base populatfon of 8000, the BSAI region generates over half of the value and 79% of the volume of total Alaskan fisheries. The seafood industry accounts for 50% of all local resident employment, with other temporary seasonal workers generatfng additfonal economic value for the region. Whether through tapping the vast geothermal resources of the 59 Aleutfan volcanoes or through a combinatfon of renewable energy technologies, this project could drive not only the future competftfveness of the Alaskan seafood sector but also the potentfal development of complementary large-scale industrial businesses such as green methanol. Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 7 Community Benefits Plan The project presents a unique opportunity to advance a transformatfonal investment in decarbonizatfon of the food and beverage industry with a global scale footprint. Despite the global implicatfons of the project, Trident is deeply focused on the community and local benefits of the project. As a privately held company, Trident is stakeholder rather than shareholder driven and able to think long-term about the communitfes we work in. 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 the early engagement with partners and stakeholders that has been undertaken to date. The CBP will define measurable project benefits, set workforce goals, and advance formal partn erships 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 durin g 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 a local Alaska Native Village Corporation, the municipality, 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 project approach to the CBP will be to engage its labor partners early to initiate discussions toward labor agreements for components of the project, specifically the MGP and any associated infrastructure. The CBP would establish a timeline and milestones for negotiations with organized labor, including discussions on local and Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 8 targeted hiring goals, card-check neutrality, and possible provisions advancing programs to attract, train, and retain new workers. The CBP would prioritize formalizing the existing relationships within the partnership including tribal entities and Alaska Native Corporations, 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 incorporating our local government partners and tribal entities. 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. 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 Community Benefits Plan. Alaska is not a right-to-work state. Trident maintains strict policies fostering safe, healthy, inclusive workplaces free of discrimination and harassment. Trident also supports continual development of a skilled, inclusive local workforce; its continuous learning and development opportunities include instructor-led, on-the-job development and training, as well as access to formal education. In addition, Trident provides many e-learning courses and other opportunities for employees to develop or refine their professional skills, learn new software, and explore other careers. Element 3: Advancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility The Aleutians East Borough is one of the most diverse census districts in the U.S. 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 Jutice40 Initiative goal While Unalaska is the location of the project and has an extremely diverse community struggling with the high cost of its remote location, the Captains Bay plant itself will serve the broader Bering Sea region and have economic implications for these fishery dependent communities . In addition to the direct relationship of the MGP to tribal entities, the CBP will demonstrate how the project is of regional significance and supports disadvantaged communities throughout the Bering Sea. Concept Paper: DE-FOA 0002936 Control Number 2936-1932 9 Project Team Description Trident Seafoods is the largest vertically integrated seafood harvesting and processing company in North America, employing more than 9,000 people during the course of e ach year and serving over 1,000 independent fishermen. Trident is percent American-owned and privately held. Stefanie Moreland, Executive Vice President for Public Affairs: Ms. Moreland has more than 20 years of experience in natural resource management and public policy development, primarily in the Alaska region. She has been an active participant in multi - stakeholder forums addressing fisheries management, marine ecosystem research, and global seafood standards and benchmarking initiatives. Jarred Brand, Senior Director, Engineering, Alaska Operations: Mr. Brand has over 15 years of experience in Trident’s fishing and processing operations. He is responsible for marine and shore-based engineering and capital investments for Trident’s Alaska operations, covering over 200 plant, port, and marine engineers across the state. Alaska Energy Authority is a public corporation of the State of Alaska and is the state’s designated energy agency. AEA has managed and administered more than $300 million in grants to renewable energy projects in Alaska and has extensive experience operating and developing projects including bulk fuel tank farms, diesel powerhouses, and electric distribution grids. AEA also currently owns the 120-megawatt Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, the largest in Alaska. 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. 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. Organization Chart Trident Seafoods Captains Bay Plant Alaska Energy Authority Technical Support and Administration City of Unalaska Electric Grid and Clean Energy 1 Category Tax Provision Description Eligible Recipients Base Credit Amount Bonus Credit Amount U.S. Code IRA Section Funding Mechanism New or Modified?Period of Availability Direct Pay Transferable Stackable Tribal Eligibilit y Relevant Links Buildings and Homes Energy Efficiency Home Improvement Credit Provides a tax credit for energy- efficiency improvements of residential homes. Homeowners; renters for certain improvements 30% of cost, with limits for each type of improvement and total per year. Credit capped at $600 for "energy property," e.g. efficient heating and cooling equipment; $600 for windows; $250 per door, $500 total for doors; $2,000 for heat pumps; $1,200 for qualified energy efficiency improvements to the building envelope, including insulation and air sealing. Total annual credit capped at $1,200, with a separate annual $2,000 limit for heat pumps. $150 credit for home energy audits. None 26 U.S. Code 25C 13301 Consumer tax credit Modified and extended. Credit rate increased from 10% to 30%. Eligibility and standards are modified. $500/per taxpayer lifetime limit eliminated and replaced with increased annual limits. 2022-2032 No No No rules Yes Energy Efficient Home Improvement Credit | Internal Revenue Service (irs.gov) Buildings and Homes Residential Clean Energy Credit Provides a tax credit for the purchase of residential clean energy equipment, including battery storage with capacity of at least 3 kWh. Homeowners (including renters)30% of cost of equipment through 2032; 26% in 2033; 22% in 2034. None 26 U.S. Code 25D 13302 Consumer tax credit Modified and extended. Credit extended at 30% through 2032, with phasedown through 2034. Battery storage newly eligible in 2023; biomass fuel property credit eliminated. 2022-2032, with phasedown over 2033- 2034. No No No rules Yes Residential Clean Energy Credit | Internal Revenue Service (irs.gov) Buildings and Homes Energy Efficient Commercial Buildings Deduction Provides a tax deduction for energy efficiency improvements to commercial buildings, such as improvements to interior lighting; heating, cooling, and ventilation, hot water; and building envelope. Owners and long-term lessees of commercial buildings. Designers of energy efficient building property (architects, engineers). Tax-exempt owners of commercial properties, pending Treasury guidance on deduction allocation. $0.50-$1 per square foot, depending on increase in efficiency, with deduction over four year periods capped at $1 per square foot. Inflation adjusted. Alternatively, taxpayers can deduct adjusted basis in "qualified retrofit plans" that reduce a building's energy use intensity by at least 25%. 5 times the base amount if the project meets prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements. 26 U.S. Code 179D 13303 Business tax deduction Modified and extended. Efficiency requirements updated. Permanent; new rules generally begin in 2023. No No No rules Yes Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 | (irs.gov) Buildings and Homes New Energy Efficient Homes Credit Provides a tax credit for construction of new energy efficient homes. Homebuilders $2,500 for new homes meeting Energy Star standards; $5,000 for certified zero-energy ready homes. For multifamily, base amounts are $500 per unit for Energy Star and $1000 per unit for zero-energy ready. For multifamily homes, 5 times the base amount if prevailing wage requirements are met. 26 U.S. Code 45L 13304 Tax credit for homebuilders Existing, but the credit had previously expired at end of 2021. Retroactively extended with new rules effective for homes acquired after 2022. 2023-2032 No No Yes. Taxpayers claiming the Low- Income Housing Tax Credit do not have to reduce basis for 45L credits claimed. Yes Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 | (irs.gov) Energy Producers Production Tax Credit for Electricity from Renewables Provides a tax credit for production of electricity from renewable sources. Facilities generating electricity from wind, biomass, geothermal, solar, small irrigation, landfill and trash, hydropower, and marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy. $0.03/kW, inflation adjusted Credit is increased by 5 times for projects meeting prevailing wage and registered apprenticeship requirements. Credit is increased by 10% if the project meets certain domestic content requirements for steel, iron, and manufactured products. Credit is increased by 10% if located in an energy community. 26 U.S. Code 45 13101 Production tax credit Modified and extended. Extended for projects beginning construction before 1/1/25. Modified to tie the value of the credit to meeting prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements. Projects beginning construction before 1/1/25. Yes, for tax-exempt organizations; states; political subdivisions; the Tennessee Valley Authority; Indian Tribal governments; Alaska Native Corporations; and rural electricity co- ops. Applies to qualified facilities that are originally placed in service after December 31, 2022; applies separately with respect to each qualified facility. Yes Credit reduced for tax-exempt bonds with similar rules as section 45(b)(3). Yes https://www.irs.gov/forms- pubs/about-form-8835 https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n- 23-29.pdf https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/fe deral-solar-tax-credits-businesses Tax Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act 2 Category Tax Provision Description Eligible Recipients Base Credit Amount Bonus Credit Amount U.S. Code IRA Section Funding Mechanism New or Modified?Period of Availability Direct Pay Transferable Stackable Tribal Eligibilit y Relevant Links Tax Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act Energy Producers Investment Tax Credit for Energy Property Provides a tax credit for investment in renewable energy projects. Fuel cell, solar, geothermal, small wind, energy storage, biogas, microgrid controllers, and combined heat and power properties. For solar, includes (1) equipment that uses solar energy to generate electricity, to heat or cool (or provide hot water for use in) a structure, or to provide solar process heat, and (2) equipment that uses solar energy to illuminate the inside of a structure using fiber-optic distributed sunlight or electrochromic glass that uses electricity to change its light transmittance properties in order to heat or cool a structure. 6% of qualified investment (basis of energy property) Credit is increased by 5 times for projects meeting prevailing wage and registered apprenticeship requirements. Credit is increased by up to 10 percentage points for projects meeting certain domestic content requirements for steel, iron, and manufactured products. Credit is increased by up to 10 percentage points if located in an energy community. 26 U.S. Code 48 13102 Investment tax credit Modified and extended to include standalone energy storage with capacity of at least 5 kWh, biogas, microgrid controllers (20MW or less), and interconnection property for small projects (5MW or less). Value of the credit tied to prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements. Facilities beginning construction before 1/1/25. For geothermal heat property, the base investment tax credit is 6% for the first 10 years, scaling down to 5.2% in 2033 and 4.4% in 2034. Yes, for tax-exempt organizations; states; political subdivisions; the Tennessee Valley Authority; Indian Tribal governments; Alaska Native Corporations; and rural electricity co- ops. Yes Credit reduced for tax-exempt bonds with similar rules as section 45(b)(3). Yes Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 | (irs.gov) https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n- 23-29.pdf https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/fe deral-solar-tax-credits-businesses Energy Producers Credit for Carbon Oxide Sequestration Provides a credit for carbon dioxide sequestration coupled with permitted end uses within the United States. U.S. facilities within minimum volumes: 1,000 metric tons of CO2 per year for DAC facilities; 18,750 metric tons for electricity generating facilities (with carbon capture capacity of 75% of baseline CO2 production); 12,500 metric tons for any other facility. $17/metric ton of carbon dioxide captured and sequestered; $12/metric ton for carbon dioxide that is injected for enhanced oil recovery or utilized. Those amounts are $36 and $26, respectively, for direct air capture facilities. 5 times the base amounts if the facility meets prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements. 26 U.S. Code 45Q 13104 Production tax credit based on carbon capture and sequestration, injection for enhanced oil recovery (EOR), or utilization Extended and modified, tying the credit amounts to meeting prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements, providing an enhanced credit for direct air capture (DAC), and lowering the carbon capture threshold requirements at facilities. Credit can be claimed for 12 years after a facility is placed in service. Facilities must be placed in service before 1/1/33. Yes, for tax-exempt organizations, states, political subdivisions, the Tennessee Valley Authority, Indian Tribal governments, Alaska Native Corporations, and rural electricity co- ops (applicable entities). Entities other than applicable entities are eligible for up to 5 years of direct pay (which is less than the full credit period and expires at the end of 2032) if they make an election. Applies to CCE that is originally placed in service after December 31, 2022. Applies separately with respect to CCE placed in service during a taxable year. Yes Credit reduced for tax-exempt bonds with similar rules as section 45(b)(3). Yes Carbon Oxide Sequestration Credit | (irs.gov) Energy Producers Zero-Emission Nuclear Power Production Credit Provides tax credit for electricity from qualified nuclear power facilities and sold after 2023. Existing nuclear power plants at time of enactment that are not eligible for the 45J credit. 0.3 cents/kWh, inflation adjusted after 2024. Credit amount phases down depending on the amount of energy produced and the gross receipts of the nuclear power facility. 5 times the base credit if prevailing wage requirement is met for workers doing alteration or repair at the facility. 26 U.S. Code 45U 13105 Production tax credit New Available for electricity produced and sold after 12/31/23, in tax years beginning after that date. Not available for tax years beginning after 12/31/32. Yes, for tax-exempt organizations; states; political subdivisions; the Tennessee Valley Authority; Indian Tribal governments; Alaska Native Corporations; and rural electricity co- ops. Yes Facilities eligible for the 45J advanced nuclear production tax credit are not eligible for the 45U credit. Payments from federal, state, or local zero- emission nuclear subsidies reduce the credit amount. Yes Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 | (irs.gov) 3 Category Tax Provision Description Eligible Recipients Base Credit Amount Bonus Credit Amount U.S. Code IRA Section Funding Mechanism New or Modified?Period of Availability Direct Pay Transferable Stackable Tribal Eligibilit y Relevant Links Tax Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act Energy Producers Clean Hydrogen Production Tax Credit Provides a tax credit for the production of clean hydrogen at a qualified clean hydrogen production facility. Producers of hydrogen in the United States.$0.60/kg multiplied by the applicable percentage. The applicable percentage ranges from 20% to 100% depending on lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions. The $0.60/kg is adjusted for inflation. 5 times the base credit if the facility meets prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements. 26 U.S. Code 45V 13204 Production tax credit New. The existing excise tax credit for liquefied hydrogen terminates after 12/31/22. Credit is for hydrogen produced after 12/31/22. Credit is available for facilities placed in service before 1/1/33 for their first 10 years in service. Yes, for tax-exempt organizations, states, political subdivisions, the Tennessee Valley Authority, Indian Tribal governments, Alaska Native Corporations, and rural electricity co- ops (applicable entities). Applies to facilities placed in service after December 31, 2012. Applies separately with regard to each facility. Entities other than applicable entities are eligible for up to 5 years of direct pay, which is less than the full credit period and expires at the end of 2032, if they make an election. Yes Taxpayers can make an irrevocable election to choose the ITC in lieu of the 45V credit as long as they have not claimed the 45Q credit for carbon sequestration. Credit reduced for tax-exempt bonds with similar rules as section 45. Yes Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 | (irs.gov) Energy Producers Clean Electricity Production Tax Credit PProvides a technology-neutral tax credit for production of clean electricity. Replaces the production tax credit for electricity generated from renewable sources (§45) for facilities placed in service in 2025 and later. Facilities generating electricity for which the greenhouse gas emissions rate is not greater than zero. $0.03/kW [inflation adjusted]Credit is increased by 5 times for projects meeting prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements. Credit is increased by 10% for projects meeting certain domestic content requirements for steel, iron, and manufactured products. Credit is increased by 10% if located in an energy community. 26 U.S. Code 45Y 13701 Production tax credit New Facilities placed in service after 12/31/24. Phase-out starts the later of (a) 2032 or (b) when U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from electricity are 25% of 2022 emissions or lower. Yes, for tax-exempt organizations; states; political subdivisions; the Tennessee Valley Authority; Indian Tribal governments; Alaska Native Corporations; and rural electricity co- ops. Applies separately with regard to each facility. Yes Credit reduced for tax-exempt bonds with similar rules as section 45(b)(3). Yes https://www.irs.gov/forms- pubs/about-form-8835 https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n- 23-29.pdf https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/fe deral-solar-tax-credits-businesses Energy Producers Clean Electricity Investment Tax Credit Provides a technology-neutral tax credit for investment in facilities that generate clean electricity. Replaces the investment tax credit for energy property (§48) for property placed in service in 2025 and later. Facilities that generate electricity with a greenhouse gas emissions rate that is not greater than zero and qualified energy storage technologies. 6% of qualified investment (basis)Credit is increased by 5 times for facilities meeting prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements. Credit is increased by up to 10 percentage points for facilities meeting certain domestic content requirements for steel, iron, and manufactured products. Credit is increased by up to 10 percentage points if located in an energy community. 26 U.S. Code 48E 13702 Investment tax credit New Facilities placed in service after 12/31/24. Phase-out starts the later of (a) 2032 or (b) when U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from electricity are 25% of 2022 emissions or lower. Yes, for tax-exempt organizations; states; political subdivisions; the Tennessee Valley Authority; Indian Tribal governments; Alaska Native Corporations; and rural electricity co- ops. Yes Credit reduced for tax-exempt bonds with similar rules as section 45(b)(3). Yes https://www.irs.gov/credits-and- deductions-under-the-inflation- reduction-act-of-2022 https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n- 23-29.pdf https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/fe deral-solar-tax-credits-businesses 4 Category Tax Provision Description Eligible Recipients Base Credit Amount Bonus Credit Amount U.S. Code IRA Section Funding Mechanism New or Modified?Period of Availability Direct Pay Transferable Stackable Tribal Eligibilit y Relevant Links Tax Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act Energy Producers Cost Recovery for Qualified Facilities, Qualified Property, and Energy Storage Technology Section 13703 offers an additional tax deduction for facilities or property qualifying for this tax credit. These facilities or property will be treated as a 5-year property for purposes of cost recovery; meaning, they will be able to deduct from their taxable income the depreciating value of their business assets, such as equipment, faster than the value actually declines. In practical terms, qualifying facilities or property will be able to take bigger deductions—leaving them with lower taxable income—in the earlier years of a clean energy investment. Any qualified facility (as defined in section 45Y(b)(1)(A)), any qualified property (as defined in subsection (b)(2) of section 48E) that is a qualified investment (as defined in subsection (b)(1) of such section), or any energy storage technology (as defined in subsection (c)(2) of such section). 168(e)(3)(B)13703 Cost Recovery Modified Applies to facilities and property placed in service after December 31, 2024. No rules Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 | (irs.gov) Energy Producers Increase in Energy Credit for Solar and Wind Facilities Placed in Service in Connection with Low-Income Communities Provides an additional investment tax credit for small-scale solar and wind facilities in low-income communities. Solar and wind facilities with a maximum net output of less than 5 MW, including associated energy storage technology. The notice announces allocations for 2023: 700 MW for facilities located in low-income communities; 200 MW for facilities located on Tribal land; 200 MW for facilities serving federally-subsidized residential buildings, including housing supported by the Low- Income Housing Tax Credit and Section 8 of the Housing Act; and 700 MW for facilities where at least 50 percent of the financial benefits of the electricity produced go to households with incomes below 200 percent of the poverty line or below 80 percent of area median gross income. Subject to annual capacity limits. Application Process, Year 1 application opens in late 2023. 6% of qualified investment (basis of energy property) Credit is increased by 10 percentage points for projects located in low- income communities or on Tribal land. Credit is increased by 20 percentage points for projects that are part of certain federally subsidized housing programs or that offer at least 50 percent of the financial benefits of the electricity produced to low-income households. This bonus amount will require an application by the taxpayer, with a cumulative total of 1.8 GW of direct current capacity per year available for allocation. 26 U.S. Code 48(e); 26 U.S. Code 48E(h) 13103, 13702(h) Allocated investment credit, capped at 1.8 GW per year. Unused capacity carries over to following year. New 48(e) begins in 2023 and ends when the 48E(h) Clean Electricity Investment Tax Credit becomes available in 2025 through 2032. Yes, for tax-exempt organizations; states; political subdivisions; the Tennessee Valley Authority; Indian Tribal governments; Alaska Native Corporations; and rural electricity co- ops. Yes No rules Yes, facilities on Indian land qualify for the 10 percenta ge point bonus credit. Initial Guidance Establishing Program to Allocate Environmental Justice Solar and Wind Capacity Limitation Under Section 48(e) Fuels Extension of Incentives for Biodiesel, Renewable Diesel, and Alternative Fuels To provide tax credits for biodiesel and renewable diesel. Producers of biodiesel, biodiesel mixtures, and renewable diesel. $1.00 per gallon for biodiesel, biodiesel mixtures, and renewable diesel. Additional $0.10 credit for small agri-diesel producers. In addition, there is a $1.00-per- gallon excise tax credit for biodiesel and renewable diesel mixtures. N/A 26 U.S. Code 40A, 26 U.S. Code 6426(c), 26 U.S. Code 6427(e) 13201 Income tax credit and excise tax credit Extended from 12/31/2022 through 12/31/2024. Through 12/31/24 No No No rules No Fuel Tax Credits | (irs.gov) Fuels Extension of Tax Credit for Alternative Fuels To provide tax credits for alternative fuels Registered producers $0.50 per gallon for alternative fuels and alternative fuel mixtures. N/A 26 U.S. Code 6426(d), 26 U.S. Code 6426(e), 26 U.S. Code 6427(e) 13201 Excise tax credit Extended from 12/31/2021 through 12/31/2024. Through 12/31/24 No No Fuels eligible for the biodiesel mixture excise tax credit or the income tax credits under sections 40A or 40B (sustainable aviation fuels) are not eligible for the alternative fuels or alternative fuels mixture excise tax credits. No Fuel Tax Credits | (irs.gov) 5 Category Tax Provision Description Eligible Recipients Base Credit Amount Bonus Credit Amount U.S. Code IRA Section Funding Mechanism New or Modified?Period of Availability Direct Pay Transferable Stackable Tribal Eligibilit y Relevant Links Tax Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act Fuels Extension of Second- Generation Biofuel Incentives To provide an income tax credit for second-generation biofuel production. Registered producers of second-generation biofuels. $1.01 per gallon N/A 26 U.S. Code 40 13202 Income tax credit (general business credit, nonrefundable) Extended from 12/31/2021 through 12/31/2024. Through 12/31/24 No No Fuel eligible for the section 40 credit is not eligible for the credits under section 40A/6426. No Fuel Tax Credits | (irs.gov) Fuels Sustainable Aviation Fuel Credit Provides a tax credit for the sale or use of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) that achieves a lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions reduction of at least 50% as compared with petroleum-based jet fuel Producers and blenders of SAF-kerosene fuel mixtures for aviation. Qualified SAF mixture must be made in the United States, and fueling of the aircraft must occur in the United States. $1.25/gallon of SAF.Up to $0.50/gallon depending on lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of SAF relative to petroleum-based jet fuel. 26 U.S. Code 40B 13203 Tax credit New January 1, 2023- December 31, 2024 No No Credit can be claimed against income tax or fuel excise tax. Credit included in gross income (similar to alcohol and biodiesel fuels credits). No Sustainable Aviation Fuel Credit | (irs.gov) Fuels Clean Fuel Production Credit Provides a tax credit for domestic production of clean transportation fuels, including sustainable aviation fuels. Registered producers in the United States. Fuels with less than 50 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent per million British thermal units (CO2e per mmBTU) qualify as clean fuels eligible for credits. The base amount is $0.20/gallon for non-aviation fuel and $0.35/gallon for aviation fuel, multiplied by the carbon dioxide "emissions factor" of the fuel. Inflation adjusted after 2024. Credit is 5 times the base amount ($1/gallon for non-aviation fuel, $1.75 gallon for aviation fuel, multiplied by the emissions factor) for facilities meeting prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements. Inflation adjusted after 2024. 26 U.S. Code 45Z 13704 Production tax credit New Fuel produced after 12/31/24 and used or sold before 12/31/27. Yes, for tax-exempt organizations; states; political subdivisions; the Tennessee Valley Authority; Indian Tribal governments; Alaska Native Corporations; and rural electricity co- ops. Yes No rules Yes Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 | (irs.gov) Manufacturing Advanced Energy Project Credit Provides a tax credit for investments in advanced energy projects, as defined in 26 USC § 48C(c)(1). A project that (1) re-equips, expands, or establishes an industrial or manufacturing facility for the production or recycling of a range of clean energy equipment and vehicles; (2) re-equips an industrial or manufacturing facility with equipment designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 20 percent; or (3) re- equips, expands, or establishes an industrial facility for the processing, refining, or recycling of critical materials. 6% of taxpayer's qualifying investment Businesses can claim a 30% credit for projects meeting prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements. 26 U.S. Code 48C 13501 Allocated investment credit. 48C provides $10 billion of allocations, at least $4 billion of which must be allocated in energy communities. Modified and extended. 48C had been enacted in 2009 but was fully allocated after the 2nd allocation round in 2013. The Inflation Reduction Act provides $10 billion of allocations, directs a minimum share to energy communities, and expands eligibility to new types of projects. The credit is available when the application and certification process begins and ends when credits are fully allocated. Yes, for tax-exempt organizations; states; political subdivisions; the Tennessee Valley Authority; Indian Tribal governments; Alaska Native Corporations; and rural electricity co- ops. Yes Cannot claim 45X credit for property produced at facilities that received the 48C credit. Yes Initial Guidance Establishing Qualifying Advanced Energy Project Credit Allocation Program Under Section 48C(e) Manufacturing Advanced Manufacturing Production Credit Provides a production tax credit for domestic manufacturing of components for solar and wind energy, inverters, battery components, and critical minerals. Domestic manufacturers Varies by technology None 26 U.S. Code 45X 13502 Production tax credit New Credit for critical minerals is permanent starting in 2023. For other items, the full credit is available between 2023-2029 and phases down over 2030- 2032. Yes, for tax-exempt organizations, states, political subdivisions, the Tennessee Valley Authority, Indian Tribal governments, Alaska Native Corporations, and rural electricity co- ops (applicable entities). Entities other than applicable entities are eligible for up to 5 years of direct pay (which expires at the end of 2032) for tax years after December 31, 2022 if they make an election. Yes Cannot claim 45X credit for property produced at facilities that received the 48C credit. Yes Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 | (irs.gov) 6 Category Tax Provision Description Eligible Recipients Base Credit Amount Bonus Credit Amount U.S. Code IRA Section Funding Mechanism New or Modified?Period of Availability Direct Pay Transferable Stackable Tribal Eligibilit y Relevant Links Tax Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act Vehicles Clean Vehicle Credit Provides a tax credit for purchasers of clean vehicles. The tax credit is not available for consumers who have adjusted gross incomes for the current or preceding year above $300,000 (couples), $225,000 (heads of household), $150,000 (singles). Not inflation adjusted. $0 $3,750 credit for vehicles meeting critical minerals requirement. The vehicle must contain a threshold percentage of critical minerals extracted or processed in the U.S. or in a country with which the U.S. has a free trade agreement, or recycled in North America. Additional $3,750 credit for vehicles meeting the requirement that a threshold percentage of battery components be manufactured or assembled in North America. Vehicles must meet other requirements, including final assembly in North America and MSRP limits (generally $55,000; for vans, SUVs, and pickups $80,000). In 2024, qualifying vehicles cannot have battery components manufactured or assembled by a foreign entity of concern. In 2025, qualifying vehicles’ batteries cannot contain critical minerals extracted, processed, or recycled by a foreign entity of concern. 26 U.S. Code 30D 13401 Tax credit for consumers Modified and extended. Credit extended with new rules pertaining to final assembly in the United States, critical minerals/battery components, and foreign entities of concern. Per manufacturer limit is lifted. Generally, vehicles placed in service in 2023- 2032. Some of the 30D rules have differing timeframes. No Yes. Starting in 2024, transferable only to the dealer at point of sale under section 30D(g) but not under section 6418. Cannot claim both 30D credit and 45W credit. Yes, point of sale transfer to registere d dealers (definitio n of dealer includes persons licensed by Indian Tribal governm ents to engage in the sale of vehicles) Clean Vehicle Credit | (irs.gov) https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/taxcent er.shtml Vehicles Credit for Previously-Owned Clean Vehicles To provide a tax credit for purchasers of pre-owned clean vehicles Tax credit is not available for consumers who have adjusted gross incomes for the current or preceding year above $150,000 (couples), $112,500 (heads of household), $75,000 (singles). Individuals can claim only once per three years. Vehicles must be sold by a dealer; the sale price must be $25,000 or less; and it can only be claimed once per vehicle. The lesser of $4,000 or 30% of sale price None 26 U.S. Code 25E 13402 Tax credit for consumers New Generally, vehicles placed in service in 2023- 2032. No Yes. Starting in 2024, transferable only to the dealer at point of sale under section 25E(f) but not under section 6418. No rules Yes, point of sale transfer to registere d dealers (definitio n of dealer includes persons licensed by Indian Tribal governm ents to engage in the sale of vehicles) Credit for Previously-Owned Clean Vehicles | (irs.gov) Vehicles Credit for Qualified Commercial Clean Vehicles Provides a tax credit for purchasers of qualified commercial clean vehicles Businesses that acquire motor vehicles or mobile machinery for use or lease; applicable entities, including Indian Tribal governments and Alaska Native Corporations, that acquire them for use. The amount of the credit is the lesser of (a) 15% of the vehicle's basis (i.e. its cost to the purchaser) or 30% for vehicles without internal combustion engines, or (b) the amount the purchase price exceeds the price of a comparable internal combustion vehicle. The credit is capped at $7,500 for vehicles < 14,000 lbs. and $40,000 for all other clean vehicles. None 26 U.S. Code 45W 13403 Tax credit for commercial use or lease New Vehicles placed in service after 1/1/23 and acquired before 1/1/33. Yes, for states, political subdivisions, tax- exempt organizations (other than co-ops described in section 521), and Indian Tribal governments. No Cannot claim both the 30D credit and 45W credit. Yes Credit for Qualified Commercial Clean Vehicles | (irs.gov) 7 Category Tax Provision Description Eligible Recipients Base Credit Amount Bonus Credit Amount U.S. Code IRA Section Funding Mechanism New or Modified?Period of Availability Direct Pay Transferable Stackable Tribal Eligibilit y Relevant Links Tax Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act Vehicles Alternative Fuel Vehicle Refueling Property Credit Provides a tax credit for alternative fuel vehicle refueling and charging property in low-income and rural areas. Alternative fuels include electricity, ethanol, natural gas, hydrogen, biodiesel, and others. The qualified alternative fuel vehicle refueling property must be for clean- burning fuels, as defined in the statute, and must be located in low-income or rural areas. 6% of the cost for businesses, limited to a $100,000 credit per item of property for businesses. 30% for individuals, limited to $1,000. Businesses can claim a 30% credit for projects meeting prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements. 26 U.S. Code 30C 13404 Tax credit for consumers and businesses. Extended and modified to include prevailing wage and registered apprenticeship requirements for businesses claiming the credit. Adds bidirectional charging equipment, charging equipment for 2- and 3- wheel electric vehicles. Limited to low-income and non-urban areas. January 1, 2023- December 31, 2032 Yes, for tax-exempt organizations; states; political subdivisions; the Tennessee Valley Authority; Indian Tribal governments; Alaska Native Corporations; and rural electricity co- ops. Yes, for property used in a trade or business. No rules Yes Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 | (irs.gov) Note: This resource provides an overview of clean energy tax provisions included in the IRA and is based on the best available information at the time it was last updated. This information does not constitute professional tax advice or professional financial guidance and should not be used as the only source of information when making decisions. The IRS continues to work on implementing the IRA and will post guidance as it becomes available at Credits and Deductions Under the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 at www.irs.gov. April 12, 2023 (Wednesday) Legislative Meeting in Juneau Time Curtis /Tim Senator /Representative / Other Committee Location Phone 8:30 am 9:00 am Representative Dan Ortiz House Finance Room 500 907-465-3824 9:30 am Representative Will Stapp House Finance Room 513 907-465-3004 9:30 am Representative Ashley Carrick Room 428 907-465-4976 9:45 am Check in at Legislative Office (Akis) 10:00 am Representative Rauscher Room 406 907-465-4859 10:30 am Representative Mike Cronk House Finance Room 418 907-465-4527 10:30 am Representative Stanley Wright (Akis) Room 412 907-465-2095 1:00 pm Representative Prax (Akis) Room 108 1:30 pm Representative Laddie Shaw Room 403 907465-4945 1:30 pm Representative Zack Fields Room 13 907-465-2647 1:30 pm Representative Carrick (Akis) Room 428 907-465-4976 2:00 pm Representative Mike Prax House Energy Room 108 907-465-4797 2:45 pm Senator Gary Stevens Senate President Room 111 907-465-4925 3:00 pm Representative McKay (AKis) Room 128 907-465-4993 3:00 pm Speaker Cathy Tilton Speaker Room 208 907-465-2199 3:30 pm Representative Alyse Galvin (as long as Finance Cmte does not run long) House Finance Room 405 907-465-3875 4:00 pm Ralph Sammuels / Holland America Commissioner’s Office. State Office Building, 9th Floor 4:30 pm 5:00 pm Representative Schrage Room 404 907-465-4931 Page 1 of 2 Legislative Requests Date Request Who Assigned to Date answered 4/19/2023 Bulk Fuel Upgrades Questions Tim Grussendorf, Senator Lyman Hoffman’s Office Curtis / Tim 4/20/2023 (email) 4/12/2023 Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Representative Alyse Galvin Curtis 4/19/2023 4/4/2023 REF Legislative Appropriations by Year Courtney Owen, Rep Zack Fields Office Conner / Curtis 4/4/2023 (email) 3/31/2023 Power Cost Equalization (PCE) – SB98 questions Tim from Senator Hoffman’s Office Curtis 3/31/2023 (by phone) 3/30/2023 Inquiries of Tesla EV Warranties Representative Sarah Vance Curtis / Audrey 4/4/23 (email) 3/24/2023 Ref Project Descriptions Rep Zack Fields Curtis 4/3/2023 by email 3/21/2023 Active Projects and Services House Energy Committee Curtis / Brandy / Directors 4/24/2023 (email) 3/21/2023 REF Project List inquiry Representative Zack Fields Curtis / Conner 3/24/2023 (email) 3/20/2023 AEA – PCE Inquiry Dawson Verley – Representative Armstrong’s Office Curtis / Tim 3/20/2023 (email) 3/20/2023 Hydroelectric budget appropriation – Dixon and Godwin Cody Grussendorf - Senator Click Bishop’s Office Curtis / Bryan 3/20/2023 (email) 3/16/2023 Banner Peak Wind Farm kilowatt per hour cost House Finance Committee Curtis / Karen/ Josi 3/29/2023 (email) 3/14/2023 HB62 Renewable Energy Grant Fund – Rep Ortiz follow up on personnel Laib Allensworth – on behalf of Representative Ortiz Curtis 3/15/2023 (email) 3/13/2023 HB62 Renewable Energy Grant Fund – Rep Cronk, Rep Stapp and Rep Edgmon Laib Allensworth – Representative Edgmon’s Office Curtis / Conner 3/14/2023 (email) Page 2 of 2 3/9/2023 Renewable Energy Fund balance Edra Morledge – Representative Coulombe’s Office Curtis/Conner 3/15/2023 (email) 3/8/2023 Bulk Fuel Upgrade / Power Project questions from Senator Click Bishop Senator Click Bishop’s Office (Cody Grussendorf) Curtis / Tim 3/10/2023 (email) 3/7/2023 AEA Vacancies Senator Hoffman Curtis / Megan 3/14/2023 (email) 3/6/2023 Renewable Energy or Alternative Energy Inventory / opportunities Representative Dan Saddler Curtis / Audrey 3/8/2023 (email) 3/2/2023 Questions from meeting with Senator Stedman in Juneau on 3/2/23 Senator Stedman Curtis / Tim 3/8/2023 (email) 2/16/2023 Bristol Bay Communities considered for Renewable Energy Grants Dillingham Legislative information Office (Valerie Burgess) Conner / Curtis 2/16/2023 (email) 2/13/2023 SB33 – Renewable Energy Grant Fund – follow up questions Emma Torkelson – Senator Kaufman’s Office Conner 2/13/2023 (email) 2/10/2023 City of Pelican – increase in cost of Hydro Mayor of Pelican / Rep Himschoot / Senator Stedman / John Espindola Curtis / Tim 2/14/2023 (email) 2/6/2023 SB33 – Renewable Energy Grant Fund – REF Projects by Region and REF Fact Sheet Emma Torkelson – Senator Kaufman’s Office Conner 2/8/2023 (email) 2/6/2023 PCE Electrical Data - follow up Senator Bert Stedman office (Rose Foley) Tim 2/6/2023 (email) 1/27/2023 Community of Pelican – power challenges Thatcher Brown – Representative Himschoot’s office Tim 1/27/2023 (email) 1/26/2023 Su-Wa Historical Funding (2009 forward) House Energy Committee Pam Ellis 2/3/2023 (email) 1/25/2023 DOR on PCE re: Senate Finance Committee questions Senate Finance Committee through DOR Curtis 1/26/2023 (email) House Bill 154: Alaska’s Energy Independence Fund Presented by Alaska Housing Finance Corporation & Alaska Energy Authority to the House Finance Committee May 5, 2023 2 INTRODUCTION Akis Gialopsos Deputy Executive Director Alaska Housing Finance Corporation Curtis W. Thayer Executive Director Alaska Energy Authority PRESENTATION OUTLINE •Policy objectives •House Bill 154 overview 3 POLICY OBJECTIVES Establishing the Alaska Energy Independence Fund (AEIF) and a subsidiary corporation managing assets: •Helps Alaskans be more resilient, less energy constrained with a stronger economy •Furthers the Alaska State Energy Goal 4 POLICY OBJECTIVES (CONTINUED) AEIF could help spur energy innovation consistent with Governor Dunleavy’s administration objectives: •The Office of Energy Innovation (AO 340) •The Alaska Energy Security Task Force (AO 344) AEIF would draw federal and private capital to assist Alaska homes and businesses be more independent in their energy choices 5 Governor Dunleavy signed AO 340 Sept. 30, 2022; AO 344 was signed Feb. 23, 2023. AEIF will help Alaska compete for historic federal funding opportunities to improve the energy profile for homes and businesses: •U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GHGRF) grant opportunity from a pool of $27 billion in available funding (no Notice of Funding yet, application period as early as summer 2023) •Waivers from the Department of Energy for loan guarantees if funded through a State Energy Finance Institute (e.g. AEIF) •Stacked with time-limited energy tax credits POLICY OBJECTIVES (CONTINUED) 6 Policy Objectives of establishing the Alaska Energy Independence Fund are: •Helping Alaskans be less dependent on expensive energy sources for their homes and businesses •Be competitive for once-in-a-generation federal funding opportunities to leverage public and private capital for energy projects POLICY OBJECTIVES SUMMARY 7 Alaska Housing Finance Corporation has a long track record of managing innovative programs to tackle energy challenges for homeowners and communities. Energy Efficiency Interest Rate Reduction: AHFC offers interest rate reductions when financing new or existing energy efficient homes, or when borrowers make energy improvements to an existing home. ROLE OF AHFC IN ENERGY 8 Renovation Loan Option: •Allows for improvements that increases a home’s value; increases the energy efficiency of a home; incorporates universal design principles to age-in-place – while improving Alaska’s aging housing stock. •Since FY20 AHFC has financed 338 renovation loans for just under $100M. ROLE OF AHFC IN ENERGY (CONTINUED) 9 Experiences meeting unique challenges: •AHFC has a tradition of working with sister agencies and organizations, stepping up, and meeting needs of Alaskans: •Standing up programs to help Alaskans in need: •Home Energy Rebate •Emergency Rental Assistance and Homeowner Assistance •Standing up subsidiaries to meet policy needs of Alaskans: •Alaska Corporation on Affordable Housing •Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (originally a subsidiary of AHFC) ROLE OF AHFC IN ENERGY (CONTINUED) 10 Railbelt Energy –AEA owns the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, the Alaska Intertie, and the Sterling to Quartz Creek Transmission Line —all of which benefit Railbelt consumers by reducing the cost of power. Power Cost Equalization (PCE) –PCE reduces the cost of electricity in rural Alaska for residential customers and community facilities, which helps ensure the sustainability of centralized power. Rural Energy –AEA constructs bulk fuel tank farms, diesel powerhouses, and electrical distribution grids in rural villages. AEA supports the operation of these facilities through circuit rider and emergency response programs. Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency –AEA provides funding, technical assistance, and analysis on alternative energy technologies to benefit Alaskans. These include biomass, hydro, solar, wind, and others. Grants and Loans –AEA provides loans to local utilities, local governments, and independent power producers for the construction or upgrade of power generation and other energy facilities. Energy Planning –In collaboration with local and regional partners, AEA provides economic and engineering analysis to plan the development of cost-effective energy infrastructure. AEA’s mission is to reduce the cost of energy in Alaska. To achieve this mission, AEA strives to diversify Alaska's energy portfolio — increasing resiliency, reliability, and redundancy. ABOUT AEA 11 AEA ACTIVE PROJECTS AND SERVICES 12 House Bill 154 (and Senate Bill 125) proposes two actions for the Legislature’s consideration: 1.Empowers AHFC to work with AEA on developing sustainable energy development through several tools, including establishing non-profit subsidiary corporations. 2.Establishes the Alaska Energy Independence Fund (AEIF) with the intent to be managed by AHFC’s non-profit subsidiary corporation. The fund is capitalized with General Funds initially and federal receipt authority . HOUSE BILL 154: OVERVIEW 13 1.Legislation creating the Alaska Energy Independence Fund (AEIF) & empowering AHFC to create a non-profit subsidiary passes and is enacted 2.The AHFC Board of Directors, in consultation with legal counsel, creates a non-profit subsidiary corporation to manage the AEIF. That creation includes bylaws and initial regulations by AHFC for the non-profit subsidiary 3.The created non-profit subsidiary acquires relevant staff, and works with the Alaska Energy Authority and AHFC on crafting the sustainable energy development programs articulated in House Bill 154 4.The created non-profit subsidiary pursues federal funding opportunities and establishes relationships with financial institutions to begin capital aggregation HOUSE BILL 154: PROPOSED POLICY IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS 14 QUESTIONS? 15 POWER COST EQUALIZATION Curtis W. Thayer Executive Director House Energy Committee May 4, 2023 ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY Railbelt Energy –AEA owns the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, the Alaska Intertie, and the Sterling to Quartz Creek Transmission Line —all of which benefit Railbelt consumers by reducing the cost of power. Power Cost Equalization (PCE) –PCE reduces the cost of electricity in rural Alaska for residential customers and community facilities, which helps ensure the sustainability of centralized power. Rural Energy –AEA constructs bulk fuel tank farms, diesel powerhouses, and electrical distribution grids in rural villages. AEA supports the operation of these facilities through circuit rider and emergency response programs. Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency –AEA provides funding, technical assistance, and analysis on alternative energy technologies to benefit Alaskans. These include biomass, hydro, solar, wind, and others. Grants and Loans –AEA provides loans to local utilities, local governments, and independent power producers for the construction or upgrade of power generation and other energy facilities. Energy Planning –In collaboration with local and regional partners, AEA provides economic and engineering analysis to plan the development of cost-effective energy infrastructure. About AEA AEA’s mission is to reduce the cost of energy in Alaska. To achieve this mission, AEA strives to diversify Alaska's energy portfolio — increasing resiliency, reliability, and redundancy. AEA PCE Overview | House Energy Committee | May 4, 2023 02 AEA Active Projects and Services AEA PCE Overview | House Energy Committee | May 4, 2023 03 Power Cost Equalization (PCE) The PCE Program was established in 1985 as one of the components of a statewide energy plan to help “equalize” the high cost of electricity in rural communities with the lower costs in more urban areas. AEA PCE Overview | House Energy Committee | May 4, 2023 04 Who is Eligible to Participate in PCE? PCE eligibility is determined by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska in accordance with Alaska Statute 42.45.100-170. Eligible customers include: Residential and community facilities (water, sewer, public lighting, and clinics, etc.) Non-eligible customers include: State and federal facilities and commercial customers Any community with rates lower than the urban average (the PCE floor) AEA PCE Overview | House Energy Committee | May 4, 2023 05 St. George Island, Pribilof Islands, AK Power Cost Equalization (PCE) AEA, along with the Regulatory Commission of Alaska, administers the PCE program, which serves remote communities that are largely reliant on diesel fuel for power generation. 193 91 82,000 AEA PCE Overview | House Energy Committee | May 4, 2023 06 PCE Endowment Fund Overview The PCE Endowment Fund was created and capitalized in Fiscal Year 2001,and is managed by the Department of Revenue PCE disbursements are funded from the PCE Endowment Fund —current market value $978.8 million on March 31, 2023 Alaska Statute 42.45.085 provides that five percent of the PCE Endowment Fund three-year average market value may be appropriated to the program Senate Bill 98 is pending before the Legislature to move the PCE Endowment Fund from the Department of Revenue to the Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation 07 FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 FY2021 FY2022 Beginning Investment Fund Balance $1,023,566 1,073,378 1,072,825 1,078,157 1,149,165 Inflows: Annual investment earnings 76,602 74,142 48,303 150,299 (143,842) Capital fund transfers in ———— Total inflows 76,602 74,142 48,303 150,299 (143,842) Outflows: Transfers to AEA for PCE payments (25,595)(29,719)(27,000)(28,237)(23,613) Transfers to Other Funds —(44,000)(14,867)(49,744)(12,395) Program administration –AEA (624)(444)(575)(737)(737) Administrative fee –Regulatory Commission (113)(102)(108)(123)(133) Management fee –Department of Revenue (458)(430)(421)(450)(1,030) Total outflows (26,790)(74,695)(42,971)(79,291)(37,908) Ending investment fund balance $1,073,378 1,072,825 1,078,157 1,149,165 967,416 Source: Unaudited schedule included in AEA's financial statements. Fiscal Year 2022 amounts are not final. PCE Endowment History (In Thousands) AEA PCE Overview | House Energy Committee | May 4, 2023 08 Fiscal Year 2024 Appropriations (SLA2023) Calculation of Excess PCE Earnings Available for Appropriation Average monthly market value for the previous three closed fiscal years (AS 42.45.080(c))$1,098,002,766 Fiscal Year 2022 Earnings (AS 42.45.080(c)(2))($143,841,594) FY2022 5% of Average Monthly Market Value (AS 42.45.085(a))$54,900,138 Fiscal Year 2023 PCE Appropriations AEA —Rural Energy Assistance (AS 42.45.085(a)(3))$381,800 AEA —PCE (AS 42.45.085(a)(1) and (a)(3))$48,049,800 Revenue —Treasury (AS 42.45.085(a)(2))$1,153,600 Less: Total Fiscal Year 2023 PCE Appropriations $49,585,200 Unobligated Fiscal Year 2022 Earnings $0 70% of Unobligated Fiscal Year 2022 Earnings per AS 42.45.085(d) (max $55 million per AS 42.45.085(d)(2))$0 Fiscal Year 2024 Appropriations per AS 42.45.085 (d)(2) Community Assistance Program (AS 42.45.085(d)(2)(A))$0 Renewable Energy Grant Fund (AS 42.45.085(d)(2)(B))$0 Rural Power Systems Upgrades (AS 42.45.085(d)(2)(B))$0 Less: Fiscal Year 2024 Appropriations $0 $0 PCE Endowment Earnings Calculation AEA PCE Overview | House Energy Committee | May 4, 2023 09 PCE Floor or Base Rate –The weighted average cost per kWh in Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau PCE Ceiling –The maximum cost per kWh that may be included when determining the power cost equalization per kWh PCE Effective Rate –Rate charged by the utility minus PCE level PCE Level –The state reimbursement per eligible kWh calculated for each community based on eligible fuel and non-fuel costs (more on next slide) PCE Terminology PCE Floor or Base Rate –The weighted average cost per kWh in Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau (20.03 cents) PCE Ceiling –The maximum cost per kWh that may be included when determining the power cost equalization per kWh ($1.00) PCE Effective Rate –Rate charged by the utility minus PCE level (varies by community) PCE Level –The state reimbursement per eligible kWh calculated for each community based on eligible fuel and non-fuel costs (varies by community) 10 On June 28, 2021, the Alaska House of Representatives voted to approve the July 1, 2021, effective date for the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget. This action did not address the reverse sweep, which failed in the House and Senate. In order to continue funding the PCE program beyond July 1, 2021, a reverse sweep was required. A friendly lawsuit was filed over the issue on July 19, 2021, challenging the idea that the PCE Endowment Fund should be swept as part of the budget, which resulted in the following ruling . . . Ruling on PCE —Not Subject to Sweep Provision In her order released Wednesday (August 11, 2021), Judge Josie Garton ruled that the Power Cost Equalization Endowment Fund “is not subject to the sweep provision.” The Legislature established the PCE endowment fund as a separate fund outside of the state’s general fund, the order states. —Anchorage judge rules energy subsidy program for rural Alaska was not unfunded Alaska’s News Source (August 11, 2021) AEA PCE Overview | House Energy Committee | May 4, 2023 11 813 W Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage, AK 99503 Main: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 info@akenergyauthority.org akenergyauthority.org @alaskaenergyauthority @alaskaenergyauthority Alaska Energy Authority AEA provides energy solutions to meet the unique needs of Alaska’s rural and urban communities. 12 APPENDIX AEA PCE Overview | House Energy Committee | May 4, 2023 13 Sec. 42.45.085. Use of the power cost equalization endowment fund. (a) Five percent of the amount determined by the commissioner of revenue on July 1 of each year under AS 42.45.080(c)(1) may be appropriated for the following purposes: (1) funding the power cost equalization and rural electric capitalization fund (AS 42.45.100); (2) reimbursement to the Department of Revenue for the costs of establishing and managing the fund; and (3) reimbursement of other costs of administration of the fund. (b) Nothing in this section creates a dedicated fund. (c) If the amount appropriated under (a) of this section is insufficient to achieve the purposes of (a)(1) -(3) of this section, the amount shall be prorated among the purposes listed in (a)(1) and (2) of this section. (d) If the earnings of the fund for the previous closed fiscal year, as calculated under AS 42.45.080(c)(2), exceed the appro priation under (a) of this section for the current fiscal year, the legislature may appropriate 70 percent of the difference between the earnings of the fund for the previous closed fiscal year, as calculated under AS 42.45.080(c)(2), and the appropriation made under (a) of this section for the current fiscal year as follows: (1) if the amount calculated under this subsection is less than $30,000,000, that amount to a community revenue sharing or community assistance fund; or (2) if the amount calculated under this subsection is $30,000,000 or more, (A) $30,000,000 to a community revenue sharing or community assistance fund; and (B) the remaining amount, not to exceed $25,000,000, to the renewable energy grant fund established under AS 42.45.045, to the bulk fuel revolving loan fund established under AS 42.45.250, or for rural power system upgrades or to a combination of the funds or pu rposes listed in this subparagraph. PCE Endowment Fund (Alaska Statute 42.45.085) AEA PCE Overview | House Energy Committee | May 4, 2023 14 AEA FISCAL YEAR 2024 CAPITAL BUDGET Curtis W. Thayer Executive Director House Finance Committee April 21, 2023 ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY Railbelt Energy –AEA owns the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, the Alaska Intertie, and the Sterling to Quartz Creek Transmission Line —all of which benefit Railbelt consumers by reducing the cost of power. Power Cost Equalization (PCE) –PCE reduces the cost of electricity in rural Alaska for residential customers and community facilities, which helps ensure the sustainability of centralized power. Rural Energy –AEA constructs bulk fuel tank farms, diesel powerhouses, and electrical distribution grids in rural villages. AEA supports the operation of these facilities through circuit rider and emergency response programs. Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency –AEA provides funding, technical assistance, and analysis on alternative energy technologies to benefit Alaskans. These include biomass, hydro, solar, wind, and others. Grants and Loans –AEA provides loans to local utilities, local governments, and independent power producers for the construction or upgrade of power generation and other energy facilities. Energy Planning –In collaboration with local and regional partners, AEA provides economic and engineering analysis to plan the development of cost-effective energy infrastructure. About AEA AEA’s mission is to reduce the cost of energy in Alaska. To achieve this mission, AEA strives to diversify Alaska's energy portfolio — increasing resiliency, reliability, and redundancy. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 02 AEA Active Projects and Services AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 03 FISCAL YEAR 2024 CAPITAL REQUESTS AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 04 Project/Program Budget Year Federal State UGF Total IIJA -Statewide Grid Resilience and Reliability Formula FY 24 12,110,523 1,816,579 13,927,102 IIJA -New Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund Capitalization FY 24 3,773,780 -3,773,780 IIJA -State Energy Program FY 23 Supplemental 2,865,930 -2,865,930 IIJA -EV Charging Equipment Competitive FY 24 1,670,000 -1,670,000 IIJA -Energy Auditor Training FY 24 63,600 -63,600 IRA -Home Energy and High Efficiency Rebate Allocations FY 24 Amended 74,519,420 -74,519,420 DOD -Black Rapids Training Site: Defense Community Infrastructure Pilot Program FY 23 Supplemental 12,752,540 -12,752,540 Rural Power Systems Upgrades FY 24 25,000,000 7,500,000 32,500,000 Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 FY 24 Amended -7,500,000 7,500,000 Bulk Fuel Upgrades FY 24 7,500,000 5,500,000 13,000,000 Hydroelectric Development -Dixon & Godwin Creek Studies FY 24 -5,000,000 5,000,000 Renewable Energy & Efficiency Programs FY 24 -5,000,000 5,000,000 Delta Phase 3 Power FY 24 3,000,000 3,000,000 Electrical Emergencies FY 24 -200,000 200,000 TOTAL 140,255,793 35,516,579 175,772,372 FY2024 Capital Budget Overview *National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program (funds from Department of Transportation RSA) -$52 million over five years. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 05 These federal formula grant funds will provide $60 million to Alaska over five years. AEA’s application to be submitted by March 31, 2023, will cover those allocations for the first two funding years, or approximately $22.2 million. Resilience measures include but are not limited to: -Relocating or reconductoring powerlines -Improvements to make the grid resistant to extreme weather -Increasing fire resistant components -Integrating distributed energy resources like microgrids and energy storage Formula-based funding requires a 15% state match. Statewide Grid Resilience and Reliability IIJA Formula Capital Request: State Match –$1.8 Million Federal Receipt Authority –$12.1 Million Per IIJA section 40101(a)(1),8 a disruptive event is defined as “an event in which operations of the electric grid are disrupted, preventively shut off, or cannot operate safely due to extreme weather, wildfire, or a natural disaster.” 06 New Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund Capitalization The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provides funding for a new Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund (EERLF) program. This funding will be used to establish and capitalize a revolving loan fund, under which the State shall provide loans and grants for commercial and residential energy audits, upgrades, and retrofits to increase energy efficiency, physical conform and air quality of existing building infrastructure. In collaboration with the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation, AEA will administer the EERLF commercial loans/grants program. No State match is required. Federal Receipt Authority –$3.8 Million AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 07 This request is for the balance of Alaska’s allocation for the State Energy Program (SEP) formula awards in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. AEA is developing activities for deployment that include: -Statewide Energy Plan -State Energy Security Plan -Renewable Energy Fund and Village Energy Efficiency Program construction projects -IIJA Required Grid Planning -Training and Workforce Development In collaboration with Alaska Housing Finance Corporation: -Update AkWarm Energy Modeling Software to the requirements imposed by the Inflation Reduction Act. -Modernize Alaska Retrofit Information Systems database to accept the AkWarm modifications. No State match is required. State Energy Program Federal Receipt Authority –$2.8 Million AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 08 EV Charging Equipment Competitive AEA applied for Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funding through the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Vehicle Technologies Office, Area of Interest 9: Community-Driven Electric Vehicle Charging (EV) Deployment in Underserved Communities. The goals of this project are to: -1) increase access to vehicle electrification in multiple rural and underserved communities across Alaska; -2) demonstrate the benefits of EVs to key decision-makers and the broader public to accelerate clean transportation transition; and -3) support the development of community charging equipment. A 20% match is required, shared by AEA and project partners. AEA is working with partners across Alaska to support vehicle electrification in rural, low-income, and Tribal communities to ensure an equitable and just transition to clean transportation. Federal Receipt Authority –$1.6 Million AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 09 Energy Auditor Training As part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funds will be allocated to the State Energy Program to fund the Energy Auditor Training Grant Program, which will train individuals to conduct energy audits or surveys of commercial and residential buildings. It is intended to (1) develop a clean energy workforce, (2) lower energy bills, and (3) reduce pollution from building energy use. Eligible fund uses include (1) costs associated with individuals being trained or certified to conduct energy audits by i) the State; or ii) a State-certified third-party training program; and (2) to pay the wages of a trainee during the period in which the trainee receives training and certification. This request is for two of a five-year annual funding allocation of $318,000. No State match is required. AEA is coordinating with the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation to administer the Energy Auditor Training Grant Program. Federal Receipt Authority –$63,600 AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 10 Rebates for energy efficiency retrofits range from $2,000-$4,000 for individual households and up to $400,000 for multifamily buildings. Grants to states to provide rebates for home retrofits. Up to $2,000 for retrofits reducing energy use by 20% or more, and up to $4,000 for retrofits saving 35% or more. Maximum rebates double retrofits of low-and moderate-income homes. No State match is required. Develop a high efficiency electric home rebate program. Include means testing and will provide 50% of the cost for incomes 80 to 150% of area median income, and 100% of the cost for incomes 80% of area medium income and below and similar tiers for multifamily buildings. Includes a $14,000 cap per household, with an $8,000 cap for heat pump costs, $1,750 for a heat pump water heater, and $4,000 for panel/service upgrade. Other eligible rebates include electric stoves, clothes dryers, and insulation/air sealing measures. No State match is required. Alaska Hope for Homes High Efficiency Electric Home Rebate Allocation Federal Receipt Authority –$37.4 Million Federal Receipt Authority –$37.1 Million Home Energy and High Efficiency Rebate Allocations AEA collaborating with the Alaska Housing Financing Corporation to distribute Alaska’s allocation of $74 Million AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 11 Black Rapids Training Site (BRTS) Defense Community Infrastructure Pilot Program AEA partnered with Golden Valley Electric Cooperative (GVEA) to apply for this grant from the Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation under the Defense Community Infrastructure Pilot Program. This request is for federal receipt authority. No State match is required. Federal Receipt Authority –$12.7 Million GVEA will use the funds to extend an transmission line 34 miles along the Richardson Highway to BTRS. Currently, BTRS is powered by three diesel generators that are nearing the end of their useful lives. This extension will improve long-term sustainability and reliability for BRTS by tying them into GVEA’s power grid. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 12 Rural Power System Upgrades BeforeAfter13 AEA’s Rural Power System Upgrades (RPSU) program builds and retrofits in communities with less than 2,000 people Typical efficiency improvement in diesel generation is between 10 and 20% ~197 eligible communities Active projects —10 full and 13 Maintenance and Improvement/Diesel Emissions Reduction Act Goal —improve power system efficiency, safety, and reliability Deferred maintenance is $300 million Capital Request: State Match –$7.5 Million Federal Receipt Authority –$25 Million AEA’s Bulk Fuel Upgrades (BFU) program repairs or upgrades fuel storage in communities with less than 2,000 people Upgrades reduce the unit cost of energy by replacing leaking tanks and reduces the risk of future tank equipment failure ~400 rural bulk fuel facilities Active projects —13 full and 22 Maintenance and Improvement; no funding for two years Goal —code compliant fuel storage facilities and prevention of spills and contamination Deferred maintenance is $800 million Bulk Fuel UpgradesBefore After14 Capital Request: State Match –$5.5 Million Federal Receipt Authority –$7.5 Million Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Established in 2008, the REF is a unique and robust competitive grant program, which provides critical financial assistance for statewide renewable energy projects, across a variety of project phases. Nearly $300 million invested in the REF by the State. Over 100 operational projects and 44 in development. The REF Advisory Committee unanimously approved 27 Round 15 projects for a total of $25.25 million. The REF funds projects across all development phases, serving as a catalyst for the continued pursuit of integrating proven and nascent technologies within Alaska’s energy portfolio. Capital Request: General Fund -$7.5 Million AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 15 Through recommendation by the Governor and approval by the Legislature, the State of Alaska appropriated nearly $20 million in support of 38 REF projects from Rounds 13 and 14. The appropriation of $15 million in the fiscal year 2023 for Round 14 was the largest appropriation since the fiscal year 2014. State funding has been supplemented with hundreds of millions of dollars from local sources to develop viable renewable energy projects that will reduce reliance on fossil fuels. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 16 Active REF Rounds 13 and 14 AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 17 REF Round 15 Recommendations Community Project Amount Adak Hydropower -Feasibility and Conceptual Design 497,650 Railbelt / GVEA Serving Area LIDAR Improvement to Interior Wind Energy Assessments 250,000 Railbelt / HEA Serving Area Mount Spurr Geothermal Feasibility and Conceptual Design 45,500 Railbelt / HEA Serving Area Augustine Island Geothermal Feasibility and Conceptual Design 68,000 Naknek, South Naknek, King Salmon Electric Battery Energy Storage System Design 2,172,984 Native Village of Kluti-Kaah (Copper Center)Woodchip Heating Project 500,000 Kipnuk Battery Installation, Integration and Commissioning 434,000 Hoonah Water Supply Creek Hydro Construction 3,538,526 Beluga Beluga Area Renewable Resource Assessment 298,000 Chefornak Battery Installation, Integration, and Commissioning 437,000 Healy Healy Area Renewable Resource Assessment 298,000 Railbelt / HEA Serving Area Cook Inlet Oil Platform Wind Project 214,400 Huslia Community-Scale Solar PV and Battery Project 2,082,000 Railbelt / MEA Serving Area Railbelt Wind Feasbility Study and Conceptual Design 1,833,333 Selawik Solar PV Array 1,134,500 Yakutat Community Health Center Heat Recovery Project 1,000,000 Kalskag Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design 267,300 Railbelt Utility-Scale Railbelt Wind –Alaska Renewables 2,000,000 New Stuyahok, Ekwok Solar Energy and Battery Storage Project 2,520,000 Chignik Hydroelectric Power System Design 802,394 Atmautluak Battery and Thermal Stove Installation, Integration and Commissioning 577,000 Railbelt / CEA Serving Area Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project 1,729,000 Railbelt Turnagain Arm Tidal Electricity Generation Project (TATEG)400,000 Tuntutuliak Community Services Association Solar Energy Project 1,197,768 Unalaska Wind Farm Design 420,000 Napaskiak Reconnaissance and Wind Assessment Project 337,500 Levelock Renewables Feasibility and Conceptual Design 197,000 Total:25,251,855 AEA is studying the Dixon and Godwin Creeks to optimize the hydro energy potential on the Railbelt. Funds will be used for engineering studies (feasibility, hydrological, geological) and environmental studies (fisheries, water quality, geomorphology). Hydroelectric Development BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT AEA owns the 120-megawatt hydro facility, which produces ~10% of the total annual electricity at 4.5 cents per kilowatt-hour and is used by more than 550,000 Alaskans on the Railbelt (~54,400 homes/year). DIXON PROJECT*GODWIN PROJECT* Located 5 miles from Bradley Lake and would utilize existing powerhouse at Bradley Lake Estimated annual energy 100,000- 200,000 MWh (~14,000-28,000 homes) Located adjacent to Seward and near Railbelt transmission lines lowering development costs Assumed annual energy next 50 years 117,000 MWh (~16,000 homes) Capital Request: General Fund -$5 Million 18 Renewable Energy & Efficiency Programs BIOMASS ENERGY EFFICIENCY ELECTRIC VEHICLES ENERGY STORAGE GEOTHERMAL HEAT RECOVERY HYDROELECTRIC NUCLEAR SOLAR WIND AEA’s renewable energy and efficiency programs provide critical technical support for communities interested in developing renewable energy programs in with the aim of growing Alaska's clean economy. Funds would be used for: Staffing of Renewable Energy and Efficiency Programs team. Technical assistance and support for utilities and communities interested in developing cost-effective renewable energy and energy efficiency projects. Additionally, the funds help AEA: Plan and prepare for incoming federal funds. Leverage federal funds from federal partners such as, but not limited to the Denali Commission, USDOE, and USDA —and is imperative for continued renewable development in Alaska. Capital Request: General Fund -$5 Million AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 19 Delta Phase 3 Power Producer Savings This extension and upgrade with lower input costs for producers. Customer Savings Lower prices for customers. Expanded Equipment Potentially facilitate expanded use of irrigation and drying equipment. This appropriation provides a $3 million grant to the Golden Valley Electric Association for the purpose of expanding three-phase power throughout the Delta region to boost production, incentivize expansion, and lower input costs for producers and customers. The purpose of this project is to further food security objectives in Alaska. Priorities in the near term will focus on enhancing existing production and incentivizing expansion. Many farms in the Delta region either lack three-phase power or are off the power grid entirely. AEA Modernizing Alaska’s Largest Electric System | Senate Resources Committee | April 5, 2023 20 Capital Request: General Fund -$3 Million Capital Request: General Fund -$200,000 AEA provides support when an electric utility has lost or will lose the ability to generate or transmit power to its customers and the condition is a threat to life, health, and/or property. Funding provides the current level of technical support through the Electrical Emergencies Program. During the Fiscal Year 2022 there were three (3) electrical emergencies. Power was restored within 24 hours in each case. The average cost of an electrical emergency assistance is approximately $58,000 each. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 21 Electrical Emergencies ACTIVE PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 22 State of Alaska Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Implementation Plan AEA and the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF), submitted their State of Alaska EV Infrastructure Implementation Plan (The Plan) to the United States Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, as required by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act’s (IIJA) NEVI Formula Program. On September 27, 2022, The Plan was approved. The announcement unlocks $19 million to expand EV charging infrastructure in Alaska. Over the next five years, AEA anticipates receiving $52 million. Funds will be received by DOT&PF and administered by AEA. On March 1, 2023, AEA issued a Request for Applications for to site hosts compete for a share of Alaska's NEVI program funding. Applications are due by 4 p.m. on May 15, 2023. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 23 Funding must be used to build out Alternative Fuel Corridors (AFCs) first Alaska currently has one AFC (pending) After AFC buildout, funding can be used elsewhere Charging infrastructure must be DC fast-charging ⁻4 Combined Charging System Connectors ⁻>150 kW each Chargers must be located no more than 1 driving mile from AFC Charging stations must be located no more than 50 miles apart along designated AFC Match Requirements Federal share: 80% Private entity or other: 20% Justice40 Requirements NEVI Requirements AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 24 Transmission Upgrades and Battery Storage AEA and the Railbelt utilities closed on $166 million in bond financing to improve the efficiency and deliverable capacity of power from the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. The bonding comes at no additional cost to ratepayers or burden on the State treasury. Upgrade transmission line between Bradley Lake and Soldotna Substation Upgrade transmission line between Soldotna Substation and Sterling Substation Upgrade transmission line between Sterling Substation and Quartz Creek Substation Battery Energy Storage Systems for Grid Stabilization These projects will reduce constraints on the Railbelt by improving the Kenai Peninsula’s transmission capacity to export power from Bradley Lake —and allow for the integration of additional renewable energy generation. 25 To enhance the power system's resilience to extreme weather and climate change, the Grid Deployment Office is administering a $10.5 billion GRIP program under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. IIJA Competitive: Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP) 1) Railbelt Backbone Reconstruction Project $100 Million* (Requested of DOE; submitted April 5, 2023) 2) Battery Energy Storage/HVDC Coordinated Control $16 Million* (Requested of DOE; submitted March 16, 2023) 3) Railbelt Innovation Resiliency Project) $299 Million* (Due May 19, 2023) 3) Rural Alaska Microgrid Transformation $250 Million* (Due May 19, 2023) AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 26 *All four GRIP programs are in application phase. 813 W Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage, AK 99503 Main: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 info@akenergyauthority.org akenergyauthority.org @alaskaenergyauthority @alaskaenergyauthority Alaska Energy Authority AEA provides energy solutions to meet the unique needs of Alaska’s rural and urban communities. 27 APPENDIX AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 28 Round 15 (FY2024) Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Status Report Alaska Energy Authority — Renewable Energy Fund –Round XV REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA SAFE, RELIABLE, & AFFORDABLE ENERGY SOLUTIONS Alaska State Legislature April 2023 30 SAFE, RELIABLE, & AFFORDABLE ENERGY SOLUTIONS Table of Contents REF Overview Page 3 REF Statutory Guidance Page 4 Round XV Request for Applications Schedule Page 5 REF Evaluation Process Page 6 REF Funding Limits Page 10 Proposed REF Capitalization for Round 15 (FY2024)Page 11 REF Received Applications Summary Page 12 Non-Recommended Applications Summary Page 14 Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) Solicitation of Advice on Recommended Projects Page 16 REFAC Roles Page 17 REFAC Current Members Page 18 Recommended Applications Summary Page 19 Applications Forwarded for Legislature’s Decision on Funding Page 21 Partial Funding Recommendations Page 23 AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 30 REF Overview The Alaska Renewable Energy Fund (REF)is a competitive grant program that was establishedbytheAlaskaStateLegislaturein2008andisnowinits15thannualfundingcycle(i.e.Round).The program was established to help fund cost-effective renewable energy projects throughoutthestate.These projects are intended to help communities reduce their dependence on fossilfuelsinordertostabilizetheircostsofbothheatandelectricity.The program also creates jobs,promotes renewable energy technology transfer within Alaskan communities,utilizes localenergyresources,keeps money in local economies,and fosters economic development. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 31 REF Statutory Guidance (AS 42.45.045) Eligible projects must: Be a new project not in operation in 2008, and •be a hydroelectric facility; •direct use of renewable energy resources; •a facility that generates electricity from fuel cells that use hydrogen from renewable energy sources or natural gas (subject to additional conditions); or •be a facility that generates electricity using renewable energy. •natural gas applications must also benefit a community that: •Has a population of 10,000 or less, and •does not have economically viable renewable energy resources it can develop. Evaluation process Develop a methodology for determining the order of projects that may receive assistance, •most weight being given to projects that serve any area in which the average cost of energy to each resident of the area exceeds the average cost to each resident of other areas of the state, •significant weight given to a statewide balance of grant funds and to the amount of matching funds an applicant is able to make available •The REF evaluation process is comprised of four stages. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 32 DATE / ANTICIPATED DATE ACTION October 4, 2022 Request for Applications posted December 5, 2022 Application submission deadline December 2022 -March 2023 Evaluation of Applications April 5,2023 REFAC Meeting April 7, 2023 Submission of recommendations to Legislature July 1, 2023 If capital funds are appropriated by the Alaska Legislature –Grants could begin Request for Applications Schedule –REF Round XV AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 33 REF Evaluation Process: Stage 1 Eligibility and Completeness The REF evaluation process is comprised of four stages. Stage 1 is an evaluation of the applicant, project eligibility and, completeness of the application, as per 3 AAC 107.635. This portion of the evaluation process is conducted by AEA staff. •Applicant eligibility is defined as per AS 42.45.045 (l). •“electric utility holding a certificate of public convenience and necessity under AS 42.05, independent power producer, local government, or other governmental utility, including a tribal council and housing authority;” •Project eligibility is defined as per AS 42.45.045 (f)-(h) and is provided on the preceding page. •Project completeness: •An application is complete in that the information provided is sufficiently responsive to the RFA to allow AEA to consider the application in the next stage (Stage 2) of the evaluation. •The application must provide a detailed description of the phase(s) of project proposed. Applications that failed to meet the requirements of Stage 1 were rejected by the authority. Each applicant whose application was rejected was notified of the authority’s decision. STAGE 1 CRITERIA PASS/FAIL Applicant eligibility, including formal authorization and ownership, site control, and operation PASS/FAIL Project Eligibility PASS/FAIL Complete application,including Phase description(s) PASS/FAIL AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 34 REF Evaluation Process: Stage 2 Technical and Economic Feasibility Stage 2 is an evaluation concerning technical and economic feasibility. This portion of the evaluation process is conducted by AEA staff, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, and contracted third-party economists. The following items are evaluated as part of the Stage 2evaluation, as required per 3 AAC 107.645: •Project management, development, and operations; •Qualifications and experience of project management team, including on-going maintenance and operation; •Technical feasibility –including but not limited to sustainable current and future availability of renewable resource, site availability and suitability, technical and environmental risks, and reasonableness of proposed energy system; and, •Economic feasibility and benefits –including but not limited to project benefit-cost ratio, project financing plan, and other public benefits owing to the project. All Stage 2 criteria are weighted as follows as part of the evaluation process. Applications that score below 40 points in this stage are automatically rejected by the authority, however, those projects scoring above 40 may also be rejected as under 3 AAC 107.645(b) has the authority to reject applications that it determines to be not technically and economically feasible, or do not provide sufficient public benefit. CRITERIA CRITERIA DESCRIPTION WEIGHT 1 Project management, development, and operation 25% 2 Qualifications and experience 20% 3 Technical feasibility 20% 4.a Economic benefit-cost ratio 25% 4.b Financing plan 5% 4.c Other public benefit 5% AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 35 REF Evaluation Process: Stage 3 Project Ranking Stage 3 is an evaluation concerning the ranking of eligible projects. This portion of the evaluation process is conducted by AEA staff in conjunction with solicitation from the Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) . The following items are evaluated as part of the stage three evaluation, as required per 3 AAC 107.655-660: •Cost of energy •Applicant matching funds •Project feasibility (levelized score from stage 2) •Project readiness •Public benefits (evaluated through stage 2 benefits) •Sustainability •Local Support •Regional Balance •Compliance All Stage 3 criteria are weighted as follows as part of the evaluation process. The Stage 3 scoring is used to determine the ranking score. CRITERIA CRITERIA DESCRIPTION WEIGHT 1 Cost of Energy 30% 2 Matching Funds 15% 3 Project Feasibility (levelized score from Stage 2) 25% 4 Project Readiness 5% 5 Public Benefits 10% 6 Sustainability 10% 7 Local Support 5% 8 Regional Balance Pass/Fail 9 Compliance Pass/Fail AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 36 REF Evaluation Process: Stage 4 Regional Spreading Stage 4 is a final ranking of eligible projects, as required per 3 AAC 107.660, which gives “significant weight to providing a statewide balance of grant money, taking into consideration the amount of money available, number and types of projects within each region, regional rank, and statewide rank.” This portion of the evaluation process is conducted by AEA staff in conjunction with solicitation from the Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) . The following items are evaluated as part of the stage four evaluation, as required per 3 AAC 107.660: •Cost of energy burden = [HH cost of electric + HH heat cost] ÷ [HH income] –this is used to determine target funding allocation by region –for regional spreading Stage 4 cost of energy burden given below. The below table indicates target funding, as has been allocated, by region, this will be applied to Stage 3 statewide ranking to determine the regionally-spread rank. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 37 REF Round XV funding limits are limited by the requested phase(s) in the application and the technology type applied. Low vs High Cost Energy Areas: •Low Energy Cost Areas are defined as communities with a residential retail electric rate of below $0.20 per kWh, before Power Cost Equalization (PCE) reimbursement is applied. For heat projects, low energy cost areas are communities with natural gas available as a heating fuel to at least 50% of residences, or availability expected by the time the proposed project is constructed. •High Energy Cost Areas are defined as communities with a residential retail electric rate of $0.20 per kWh or higher, before PCE funding is applied. For heat projects, high energy cost areas are communities that do not have natural gas available as a heating fuel. REF Round XV Funding Limits REF Round XV Grant Funding Limits AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 38 Proposed REF Capitalization for FY2024 / Rd 15 The State of Alaska FY2024 proposed capital budget allocates $7.5 million for REF Round 15 grant funding of recommended projects. The current list of 27 recommended applications yields a total grant request of $25.25 million. With the proposed REF budget of $7.5 million, there would be insufficient funding to cover the current Round 15 recommendations. Additional funding of $17.75 million would need to be allocated to fund all of the current Round 15 recommendations or some of the Round 15 recommendations will not be funded. The table to the right indicates historical REF program funding from the inception of the REF program to the FY2023 appropriation. $15M was approved in the FY2023 capital budget for REF Round 14, the largest REF capitalization since FY2014. Legislative Appropriation Fiscal Year 100,001,000$ FY2008 25,000,000$ FY2009 25,000,000$ FY2010 36,620,231$ FY2011 25,870,659$ FY2012 25,000,000$ FY2013 22,843,900$ FY2014 11,512,659$ FY2015 -$ FY2016 -$ FY2017 (3,156,000)$ FY2018 - RPSU Reappropriation 11,000,000$ FY2019 -$ FY2020 -$ FY2021 4,750,973$ FY2022 15,000,000$ FY2023 299,443,422$ TOTAL (excl. operating appropriation) AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 39 For REF Round 15, AEA received 31 applications, with a corresponding total grant request of $33.0 million. Round XV –Received Applications Summary Round 15 Summary of Received Applications - by Energy Region Energy Region No. of Applications REF Funding Requested ($) Aleutians 2 4,497,650$ Bristol Bay 5 6,692,378$ Copper River Chugach 1 500,000$ Lower Yukon Kuskokwim 7 3,806,068$ Northwest Arctic 1 1,134,500$ Railbelt 12 9,788,733$ Southeast 2 4,538,526$ Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana 1 2,082,000$ Total 31 33,039,855$ Round 15 Summary of Received Applications - by Technology Technology No. of Applications REF Funding Requested ($) Biomass 1 500,000$ Geothermal 2 113,500$ Heat Recovery 1 1,000,000$ Hydro 6 8,967,570$ Solar 6 8,586,768$ Storage 1 2,172,984$ Wind 14 11,699,033$ Total 31 33,039,855$ $- $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 Round 15 Grant Funds Requested by Energy Region $- $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 Round 15 Grant Funds Requested by Technology AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 40 Round XV –Received Applications Summary The table to the right indicates the number of applications received by requested phase, along with the corresponding grant request totals. Per the current RFA, there are four phases, listed below in chronological order, for which an applicant may request funding: (1)Reconnaissance (2)Feasibility and Conceptual Design (3)Final Design and Permitting (4)Construction Several applications received in Round 15 requested funding for more than one phase. $- $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 $16,000,000 Round 15 Grant Funds Requested by Phase AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 41 Stage 1 Non-Recommended Applications Summary In AEA’s Stage 1 evaluation, as per 3 AAC 107.635, it was determined by AEA evaluation staff that 4applications did not meet the eligibility and/or completeness requirements and were rejected. Two applicants appealed their rejections as per 3 AAC 107.650 –“Requests for reconsideration”. Upon AEA’s due consideration and review of the appeals, both rejections were upheld, and final written notices were issued to those applicants. No additional applications were rejected as per 3 AAC 107.645, Stage 2 evaluations. With an initial receipt of 31 applications and 4 being rejected during Stage 1, there are 27 remaining applications which are recommended. With respect to grant funding requests, a total of $3.1 million was rejected in Stage 1. AEA received 31 initial applications. Owing to AEA’s Stage 1 review, 4 applications were rejected, reducing the total grant funds requested by $3.1 million. The remaining 27 applications, totaling a grant request of $29.9 million, were then evaluated according to Stage 2, Stage 3, and Stage 4 criteria. With the current proposed REF fund allocation of $7.5 million for FY2023, there are insufficient REF funds to cover one-hundred percent of the Round 15 requests. Partial funding recommendations, which are discussed further along in the presentation, were made in full consideration of project phases applied for, application scoring, project scope eligibility, and household cost of energy. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 42 Stage 1 Non-Recommended Applications Below are the 4 identified applications that were rejected during the Stage 1 evaluation: Application Number Applicant Application Name Technology Phase Community Funds Requested Election District Rejection Reason 15002 Nushagak Electric & Telephone Cooperative Nuyakuk Hydroelectric Project Hydro Feasibility and Conceptual Design Dillingham $1,000,000 37-S Project received maximum funding for requested phase in previous REF Rounds 15015 Beric Alaska Energy Beric Alaska Energy Solar One Solar Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt $ 52,500 30-O Application was not signed 15019 City of Akiak Akiak Reconnaissance and Wind Assessment Wind; Solar Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design Akiak $ 446,500 38-S Application was not signed 15030 City of Fairbanks Public Works Solar Panel Array Solar Final Design and Permitting; Construction Fairbanks $1,600,000 31-P Incomplete application AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 43 Solicitation of Advice from REFAC As statutorily required per AS 42.45.045 and set forth in 3 AAC 107.660, the authority is to solicit advice from the REFAC concerning making a final list / ranking of eligible projects, which gives “significant weight to providing a statewide balance of grant money, taking into consideration the amount of money available, number and types of projects within each region, regional rank, and statewide rank.” This finalized list will be provided to the legislature for recommendation in accordance with AS 42.45.045(d)(3). Any grant awards are subject to legislative approval and appropriation. The right-hand table is provided to assess the “regional spreading” of REF funding. As indicated, both the Railbelt and the Southeast energy regions currently exceed 200% of their target allocation based on their cost of energy burden. Bristol Bay and Yukon-Koyukuk/Upper Tanana energy regions are the remaining regions where the allocation, based on the cost of energy burden, has not met 50% of their potential allocation, categorizing these regions as “under-served”. The authority solicits advice from the REFAC relating to any recommendations in changes to funding level, ranking, and/or total amount of funding and number of projects. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 44 REFAC Roles Statutes (AS 42.45.045) •AEA “in consultation with the advisory committee…develop a methodology for determining the order of projects that may receive assistance….” •AEA “shall, at least once each year, solicit from the advisory committee funding recommendations for all grants.” Regulations (3 AAC 107.660) (a) To establish a statewide balance of recommended projects, the authority will provide to the advisory committee established in AS 42.45.045 (i) a statewide and regional ranking of all applications recommended for grants. (b) In consultation with the advisory committee established in AS 42.45.045 (i), the authority will (1) make a final prioritized list of all recommended projects, giving significant weight to providing a statewide balance of grant money, and taking into consideration the amount of money that may be available, number and types of projects within each region, regional rank, and statewide rank AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 45 REFAC Advisory Committee NAME TITLE SECTOR APPOINTED BY VACANT VACANT Small rural electric utility Governor (pending) Rose,Chris Founder / Executive Director, Renewable Energy Alaska Project (REAP) Business/organization involved in renewable energy Governor VACANT VACANT Representative of an Alaska Native Organization Governor (pending) Amberg, Alicia Member,Denali Commission; Exec Dir, Associated General Contractors of Alaska Denali Commission Governor Janorschke,Bradley General Manager,Homer Electric Association Large urban electric utility Governor Stedman, Bert Senator Senate Member 2 Senate President Wilson, David Senator Senate Member 1 Senate President Carpenter, Ben Representative House Member 2 Speaker of the House Cronk, Mike Representative House Member 1 Speaker of the House AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 46 There are 27 recommended applications, totaling a request of $25.25 million. Round XV –Recommended Applications Summary $- $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,000 $8,000,000 Round 15 Grant Funds Recommended by Energy Region $- $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,000 $8,000,000 Round 15 Grant Funds Recommended by Technology AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 47 Round XV Geographical Distribution of Recommended Applications AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 48 Applications Forwarded for Legislature’s Decision on Funding Please see related summary report for details concerning the evaluation and description of the individual applications. Recommended Projects*Recommendation App. #Applicant Project Title Phase Energy Region Election District Technology Community Grant Funds Requested Matching Funds Stage 3 Score Benefit / Cost Ratio HEC Regional Rank State Rank Rec. Funding Level Rec. Funding Amount Cumulative Rec. Funding** 15007 TDX Adak Generating, LLC Hydroelectric Power Adak -Feasibility and Conceptual Design Feasibility and Conceptual Design Aleutians 37-S Hydro Adak $ 497,650 $ 247,075 91.66 1.26 $ 12,265 1 1 Full $ 497,650 $ 497,650 15018 Golden Valley Electric Association LIDAR Improvement to Interior Wind Energy Assessments Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 36-R Wind Railbelt $ 250,000 $ 125,000 90.78 2.46 $ 9,943 1 2 Full $ 250,000 $ 747,650 15025 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. (AEEC)Mount Spurr Geothermal Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 37-S Geothermal Railbelt $ 45,500 $ 30,940 88.06 1.83 $ 7,523 2 3 Full $ 45,500 $ 793,150 15024 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. (AEEC)Augustine Island Geothermal Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 37-S Geothermal Railbelt $ 68,000 $ 42,140 87.76 1.83 $ 7,523 3 4 Full $ 68,000 $ 861,150 15022 Naknek Electric Association Inc Naknek Electric Battery Energy Storage System Final Design and Permitting; Construction Bristol Bay 37-S Storage Naknek, South Naknek, King Salmon $ 2,172,984 $ 1,950,000 83.47 1.07 $ 10,532 1 5 Full $ 2,172,984 $ 3,034,134 15001 Native Village of Kluti-Kaah Woodchip Heating Project Construction Copper River Chugach 36-R Biomass Native Village of Kluti- Kaah (Copper Center)$ 500,000 $ 403,400 81.84 1.04 $ 10,138 1 6 Full $ 500,000 $ 3,534,134 15013 Kipnuk Light Plant Kipnuk Battery Installation, Integration and Commissioning Construction Lower Yukon Kuskokwim 38-S Wind Kipnuk $ 434,000 $ 859,000 80.53 5.00 $ 9,624 1 7 Full $ 434,000 $ 3,968,134 15028 Inside Passage Electric Cooperative Water Supply Creek Hydro Construction Construction Southeast 2-A Hydro Hoonah $ 3,538,526 $ 6,853,474 80.42 0.38 $ 9,663 1 8 Full $ 3,538,526 $ 7,506,660 15005 Cook Inlet Region Inc (CIRI) Energy, LLC Beluga Renewable Resource Assessment Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 37-S Wind Beluga $ 298,000 $ 54,000 79.99 0.91 $ 13,101 4 9 Full $ 298,000 $ 7,804,660 15011 Naterkaq Light Plant Chefornak Battery Installation, Integration, and Commissioning Construction Lower Yukon Kuskokwim 38-S Wind Chefornak $ 437,000 $ 859,000 78.91 1.72 $ 8,946 2 10 Full $ 437,000 $ 8,241,660 15004 Cook Inlet Region Inc (CIRI) Energy, LLC Healy Renewable Resource Assessment Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 30-O Wind Healy $ 298,000 $ 54,000 78.36 2.59 $ 9,425 5 11 Full $ 298,000 $ 8,539,660 15023 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. (AEEC)Cook Inlet Oil Platform Wind Project Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 8-D Wind HEA Serving Area $ 214,400 $ 97,448 77.64 1.15 $ 7,523 6 12 Full $ 214,400 $ 8,754,060 15006 Tanana Chiefs Conference Huslia Community-Scale Solar PV and Battery Project Final Design and Permitting; Construction Yukon-Koyukuk Upper Tanana 36-R Solar Huslia $ 2,082,000 $ 110,000 74.77 1.00 $ 11,090 1 13 Full $ 2,082,000 $ 10,836,060 **Orange line indicates limit of recommended projects able to be funded with $7.5 million appropriation; funding of additional projects will require an increased appropriation equal to those cumulative funding amounts as recommended. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 49 Applications Forwarded for Legislature’s Decision on Funding (continued) Please see related summary report for details concerning the evaluation and description of the individual applications. Recommended Projects*Recommendation App. #Applicant Project Title Phase Energy Region Election District Technology Community Grant Funds Requested Matching Funds Stage 3 Score Benefit / Cost Ratio HEC Regional Rank State Rank Rec. Funding Level Rec. Funding Amount Cumulative Rec. Funding** 15009 Matanuska Electric Association Railbelt Wind Feasbility Study and Conceptual Design Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt Various Wind Railbelt $ 1,833,333 $ 550,000 73.83 1.10 $ 5,792 7 14 Full $ 1,833,333 $ 12,669,393 15003 Northwest Arctic Borough Selawik Solar PV Construction Northwest Arctic 40-T Solar Selawik $ 1,134,500 $ 251,500 72.86 0.88 $ 8,448 1 15 Full $ 1,134,500 $ 13,803,893 15026 Yakutat Community Health Center Yakutat Community Health Center Heat Recovery Project Final Design and Permitting; Construction Southeast 2-A Heat Recovery Yakutat $ 1,000,000 $ 273,000 72.19 1.24 $ 7,957 2 16 Full w/ special provisions $ 1,000,000 $ 14,803,893 15016 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative Kalskag Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design Feasibility and Conceptual Design Lower Yukon Kuskokwim 37-S Wind Kalskag $ 267,300 $ 29,700 72.10 0.30 $ 9,022 3 17 Full $ 267,300 $ 15,071,193 15021 Alaska Renewables LLC Utility-Scale Railbelt Wind –Alaska Renewables Final Design and Permitting Railbelt 30-O; 36-R Wind Railbelt $ 2,000,000 $ 3,546,500 71.64 0.68 $ 5,791 8 18 Full $ 2,000,000 $ 17,071,193 15017 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative New Stuyahok Solar Energy and Battery Storage Project Final Design and Permitting; Construction Bristol Bay 37-S Solar New Stuyahok, Ekwok $ 2,520,000 $ 280,000 64.67 0.07 $ 9,273 2 19 Full $ 2,520,000 $ 19,591,193 15014 City of Chignik Chignik Hydroelectric Power System Final Design and Permitting Bristol Bay 37-S Hydro Chignik $ 802,394 $ 43,767 61.47 0.67 $ 6,780 3 20 Full $ 802,394 $ 20,393,587 15012 Atmautluak Tribal Utilities Atmautluak Battery and Thermal Stove Installation, Integration and Commissioning Construction Lower Yukon Kuskokwim 38-S Wind Atmautluak $ 577,000 $ 81,000 59.18 0.77 $ 9,546 4 21 Full $ 577,000 $ 20,970,587 15029 Chugach Electric Association Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project Feasibility and Conceptual Design Railbelt 5-C Hydro CEA Serving Area $ 1,729,000 $ 306,117 58.53 0.40 $ 3,613 9 22 Full $ 1,729,000 $ 22,699,587 15008 Turnagain Arm Tidal Energy Corp Turnagain Arm Tidal Electricity Generation Project (TATEG)Reconnaissance Railbelt 16-H; 15-H; 8-D Hydro Railbelt $ 1,400,000 $ 280,000 56.41 1.07 $ 5,792 10 23 Partial w/ Special Provision $ 400,000 $ 23,099,587 15027 Tuntutuliak Community Services Association Tuntutuliak Community Services Association Solar Energy Project Final Design and Permitting; Construction Lower Yukon Kuskokwim 38-S Solar Tuntutuliak $ 1,197,768 $ 14,000 55.57 0.00 $ 10,426 5 24 Full w/ special provisions $ 1,197,768 $ 24,297,355 15031 City of Unalaska City of Unalaska Wind Power Design/Construction Final Design and Permitting; Construction Aleutians 37-S Wind Unalaska $ 4,000,000 $ 8,790,000 54.05 0.90 $ 8,418 2 25 Partial $ 420,000 $ 24,717,355 15010 City of Napaskiak Napaskiak Reconnaissance and Wind Assessment Project Reconnaissance; Feasibility and Conceptual Design Lower Yukon Kuskokwim 38-S Wind Napaskiak $ 446,500 $ 3,000 53.66 0.33 $ 10,069 6 26 Partial $ 337,500 $ 25,054,855 15020 Levelock Village Council Levelock Feasibility and Conceptual Design Feasibility and Conceptual Design Bristol Bay 37-S Wind Levelock $ 197,000 $ 9,000 53.35 0.04 $ 10,171 4 27 Full w/ special provision $ 197,000 $ 25,251,855 *If approved by the Legislature, this funding would become effective July 1, 2023 for inclusion in the Fiscal Year 2024 budget. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 50 Round XV –Partial Funding Recommendations As part of the evaluation process and pursuant to 3 AAC 170.655(b), 3 applications, as provided below, have been recommended for partial funding. If these partial funding recommendations are reversed and full funding recommended, this would raise the total grant request amount for all remaining 27 recommended applications to $29.9 million. Reasoning for recommendations of partial funding are provided on the following page. Partial funding recommendations have been made in full consideration of additional due diligence and information needed from preliminary project phases prior to funding for final design and/or construction; eligibility of items comprising project scope; and statewide balance of grant money, taking into consideration the amount of money available, number and types of projects within each region, regional rank, and statewide rank (as per 3 AAC 107.660). Application Number Applicant Name Project Title Project Phase Energy Region Election District Tech Grant Funds Requested Matching Funds Matc h Type Stage 3 Score Benefit/Co st Ratio Household Energy Cost Regiona l Rank State wide Rank Recommended Funding Amount 15008 Turnagain Arm Tidal Energy Corp Turnagain Arm Tidal Electricity Generation Reconnaissance Railbelt 16-H; 15- H; 8-D Hydro $1,400,000 $ 280,000 In Kind 56 1.07 $5,792 10 23 $ 400,000 15010 City of Napaskiak Napaskiak Reconnaissance and Wind Assessment Reconnaissance Lower Yukon Kuskokwi m 38-S Wind $ 446,500 $ 3,000 In Kind 54 0.33 $10,069 6 26 $ 337,500 15031 City of Unalaska City of Unalaska Wind Power Design/Construction Final Design and Permitting; Construction Aleutians 37-S Wind $4,000,000 $8,790,000 Cash 54 0.9 $8,418 2 25 $ 420,000 AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 51 Round XV –Partial Funding Reasoning Application Number Applicant Name Project Title Partial Funding Reasoning 15008 Turnagain Arm Tidal Energy Corp Turnagain Arm Tidal Electricity Generation The requested funding amount was to fund two studies, one study for regulatory requirements and permitting and one study for bathymetry for the site. AEA recommends funding only the study for regulatory requirements and permitting in Round 15. Reconnaissance studies are a desktop study and the analysis should use resource, economic, and operational data that is readily and/or publicly available. There are also many stakeholders on a project such as TATEG, and it is imperative for project planners to conduct extensive stakeholder outreach prior to any feasibility study work, such as bathymetric mapping, to determine the extent of stakeholder approval. Additionally, the TATEG project’s permitting and regulatory requirements must be known before the project team can sufficiently define the scope of work, and subsequently estimate the project cost and schedule. 15010 City of Napaskiak Napaskiak Reconnaissance and Wind Assessment Costs proposed for equipment and monitoring in the application appear high when compared to similar projects. AEA recommends partial funding for the met tower to bring the cost in line with similar projects; requested funding for this line item was $194k and AEA recommends $97k. AEA recommends partial funding for monitoring costs; requested funding for this line item was $2,000 a month and AEA recommends $1,000. 15031 City of Unalaska City of Unalaska Wind Power Design/Constructio n The requested phases were Final Design & Permitting and Construction. AEA recommends funding only the Final Design & Permitting Phase in Round 15. Partial funding will allow for more refined cost estimates for the Construction Phase in future REF rounds, as well as, provides additional time to determine if other energy projects will be moving forward in the region. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 52 SAFE, RELIABLE, & AFFORDABLE ENERGY SOLUTIONS ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY 813 West Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Toll Free (Alaska Only) 888-300-8534 AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 53 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) Staffing Needs Managing and deploying millions of federal IIJA funds in compliance with federal requirements requires adequate technical and administrative support. Five (5) key positions, funded by federal IIJA receipts, are needed to carry out IIJA projects: Power Cost Equalization (PCE) Staffing Needs $233.9 increment for technical and administrative support. This includes one (1) PCE Technician needed for training, inventory, and technical assistance. Fund source is PCE Endowment Earnings. -PCE Technician R14 –$106.8 -PCE Salary Adjustment, Rural Assistance, Shared Services -$127.1 -Project Manager R24 $160.1 -Project Manager R24 $160.1 -Contracting Officer R20 $127.6 -Senior Accountant R18 $114.4 -Grant Coordinator R18 $114.4 Total $676.6 Staffing Needs AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Capital Budget | House Finance Committee | April 21, 2023 54 AEA FISCAL YEAR 2024BUDGET OVERVIEW Curtis W. ThayerExecutive Director 33rd Alaska State LegislatureApril 12, 2023 ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY Railbelt Energy –AEA owns the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, the Alaska Intertie, and the Sterling to Quartz Creek Transmission Line —all of which benefit Railbelt consumers by reducing the cost of power. Power Cost Equalization (PCE) –PCE reduces the cost of electricity in rural Alaska for residential customers and community facilities, which helps ensure the sustainability of centralized power. Rural Energy –AEA constructs bulk fuel tank farms, diesel powerhouses, and electrical distribution grids in rural villages. AEA supports the operation of these facilities through circuit rider and emergency response programs. Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency –AEA provides funding, technical assistance, and analysis on alternative energy technologies to benefit Alaskans. These include biomass, hydro, solar, wind, and others. Grants and Loans –AEA provides loans to local utilities, local governments, and independent power producers for the construction or upgrade of power generation and other energy facilities. Energy Planning –In collaboration with local and regional partners, AEA provides economic and engineering analysis to plan the development of cost-effective energy infrastructure. About AEA AEA’s mission is to reduce the cost of energy in Alaska. To achieve this mission, AEA strives to diversify Alaska's energy portfolio — increasing resiliency, reliability, and redundancy. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 02 AEA Active Projects and Services AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 03 FISCAL YEAR 2024 OPERATING BUDGET AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 04 Operating Budget Overview (In Thousands) Operating Budget -All Components FY2017Authorized FY2018Authorized FY2019 Authorized FY2020 Authorized FY2021 Authorized FY2022Authorized FY2023Management Plan FY2024Authorized Expenditure Categories: Travel 162.0 162.0 162.0 134.8 134.8 134.8 196.1 196.1 Services (includes personal services paid to AIDEA)9,662.0 8,948.2 9698.2 9698.2 8,548.2 8,548.2 8,503.8 10,008.8 Commodities 56.0 56.0 56.0 56.0 56.0 56.0 56.0 106.0 Capital Outlay/Equipment 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 Grants 40,100.0 37,600.0 32,100.0 32,100.0 29,600.0 32,100.0 47,794.8 47,794.8 Totals 49,995.0 46781.2 42,031.2 42,004.0 38,354.0 40,854.0 56,565.7 58,120.7 Funding Sources: Unrestricted GF (undesignated)2,276.1 874.5 874.5 874.3 874.3 874.3 852.2 1,215.3 Power Project Fund (designated)995.5 995.5 995.5 995.5 995.5 995.5 996.4 996.4 Renewable Energy Fund (designated)2,000.0 2,000.0 2,000.0 2,000.0 1,400.0 1,400.0 1,401.2 1,401.2 Power Cost Equalization Endowment (designated)40,335.0 38,236.8 32,736.8 32,736.8 30,236.8 32,736.8 48,431.6 48,665.5 GF Program Receipts (designated)100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 Subtotal (Undesignated and Designated)45,726.6 42,206.8 38,706.8 36,769.6 33,529.6 39,029.6 51,731.4 52,328.4 CIP Receipts 2,567.8 2,567.8 2,567.8 2,567.8 2,567.8 2,567.8 2,570.1 3,528.1 Federal Receipts 445.0 752.0 1,502.0 1,502.0 1,202.0 1,202.0 1,208.6 1,208.6 AEA Receipts 981.7 980.7 980.7 980.7 780.7 780.7 781.3 781.3 I/A Receipts 123.9 123.9 123.9 123.9 123.9 123.9 124.3 124.3 Statutory Designated Program Receipts 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 Subtotal (Receipts)4,268.4 4,574.4 5,324.4 5324.4 4,824.4 4,824.4 4,834.3 5,792.3 Totals 49,995.0 46,781.2 42,031.2 42,004.0 38,354.0 40,854.0 56,565.7 58,120.7 AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 05 AEA Receipts, $781.3 , 8% Federal Receipts, $1,208.6 , 12% General Fund, $1,215.3 , 12% I/A Receipts, $124.3 , 1% CIP Receipts, $3,380.6 , 33% Power Project Fund, $996.4 , 10% Statutory Designated, $150.0 , 1% PCE Endowment, $970.7 , 9% GF Program Receipts Designated, $50.0 , 0% Renewable Energy Fund, $1,401.2 , 14% FY2024 Proposed Operating Budget $3,528.1, 33% AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 06 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) Staffing Needs Managing and deploying millions of federal IIJA funds in compliance with federal requirements requires adequate technical and administrative support. Five (5) key positions, funded by federal IIJA receipts, are needed to carry out IIJA projects: Power Cost Equalization (PCE) Staffing Needs $233.9 increment for technical and administrative support. This includes one (1) PCE Technician needed for training, inventory, and technical assistance. Fund source is PCE Endowment Earnings. -PCE Technician R14 –$106.8 -PCE Salary Adjustment, Rural Assistance, Shared Services -$127.1 -Project Manager R24 $160.1 -Project Manager R24 $160.1 -Contracting Officer R20 $127.6 -Senior Accountant R18 $114.4 -Grant Coordinator R18 $114.4 Total $676.6 Staffing Needs AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 07 FISCAL YEAR 2024 CAPITAL REQUESTS AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 08 Project/Program Budget Year Federal State UGF Total IIJA -Statewide Grid Resilience and Reliability Formula FY24 12,110,523 1,816,579 13,927,102 IIJA -New Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund Capitalization FY24 3,773,780 -3,773,780 IIJA -State Energy Program FY23 Suppl.*2,865,930 -2,865,930 IIJA -EV Charging Equipment Competitive FY24*1,670,000 -1,670,000 IIJA -Energy Auditor Training FY24 63,600 -63,600 IRA -Home Energy and High Efficiency Rebate Allocations FY24 74,519,420 -74,519,420 Black Rapids Training Site -Defense Community Infrastructure Pilot Program FY23 Suppl.*12,752,540 -12,752,540 Rural Power Systems Upgrades FY24 25,000,000 7,500,000 32,500,000 Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 FY24 -7,500,000 7,500,000 Bulk Fuel Upgrades FY24 7,500,000 5,500,000 13,000,000 Hydroelectric Development -Dixon &Godwin Creek Studies FY24 -5,000,000 5,000,000 Renewable Energy &Efficiency Programs FY24 -5,000,000 5,000,000 Delta Phase 3 Power FY24 3,000,000 3,000,000 Electrical Emergencies FY24 -200,000 200,000 TOTAL 140,255,793 35,516,579 175,772,372 FY2024 Capital Budget Overview •Statewide Grid Resilience and Reliability Formula -$60 million over five years •National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program (funds from Department of Transportation RSA) -$52 million over five years AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 09 ~197 eligible communities Active projects —10 full and 13 Maintenance and Improvement / Diesel Emissions Reduction Act ~400 rural bulk fuel facilities Active projects —13 full and 22 Maintenance and Improvement Rural Power Systems Upgrade Bulk Fuel Upgrade Capital Request: State Match –$7.5 Million Federal Receipt Authority –$25 Million Capital Request: State Match –$5.5 Million Federal Receipt Authority –$7.5 Million Rural Power Systems Upgrades and Bulk Fuel Upgrades AEA and Federal Partners (Denali Commission) 10 Hydroelectric Development BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTAEA owns the 120-megawatt hydro facility, which produces ~10% of the total annual electricity at 4.5 cents per kilowatt-hour and is used by more than 550,000 Alaskans on the Railbelt (~54,400 homes/year).Following the successful completion of the West Fork Upper Battle Creek Diversion project in 2020, AEA is studying the Dixon and Godwin Creeks to optimize the energy potential of the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. DIXON PROJECT*GODWIN PROJECT* Located 5 miles from Bradley Lake and would utilize existing powerhouse at Bradley Lake Estimated annual energy 100,000-200,000 MWh (~14,000-28,000 homes) Located adjacent to Seward and near Railbelt transmission lines lowering development costs Assumed annual energy next 50 years 117,000 MWh (~16,000 homes) Capital Request: General Fund -$5 Million *Funding will be used for engineering studies (feasibility, hydrological, geological) and environmental studies (fisheries, water quality, geomorphology). 11 Renewable Energy & Efficiency Programs BIOMASS ENERGY EFFICIENCY ELECTRIC VEHICLES ENERGY STORAGE GEOTHERMAL HEAT RECOVERY HYDROELECTRIC NUCLEAR SOLAR WIND AEA’s renewable energy and efficiency programs provide critical technical support for communities interested in developing renewable energy programs in with the aim of growing Alaska's clean economy. Funds would be used for: reconnaissance level studies and feasibility analysis to identify project locations, and technical assistance and support for utilities and communities interested in developing cost-effective renewable energy and energy efficiency projects. Funds would help AEA leverage: federal funding from federal partners such as, but no limited to the Denali Commission, USDOE, and USDA —and is imperative for continued renewable development in Alaska. Capital Request: General Fund -$5 Million AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 12 These federal formula grant funds will provide $60 million to Alaska over five years, including $12.1 Million for the first year allocation, to catalyze projects that increase grid resilience against disruptive events. Resilience measures include but are not limited to: -Relocating or reconductoring powerlines -Improvements to make the grid resistant to extreme weather -Increasing fire resistant components -Integrating distributed energy resources like microgrids and energy storage Formula-based funding requires a 15% state match and a 33% small utility match. Statewide Grid Resilience and Reliability IIJA Formula Capital Request: State Match –$1.8 Million Federal Receipt Authority –$12.1 Million Per IIJA section 40101(a)(1),8 a disruptive event is defined as “an event in which operations of the electric grid are disrupted, preventively shut off, or cannot operate safely due to extreme weather, wildfire, or a natural disaster.” 13 Established in 2008, REF provides grant funding (subject to Legislative approval) incentivizing the development of qualifying and competitively selected renewable energy projects. The program is designed to produce cost-effective renewable energy for heat and power to benefit Alaskans statewide. Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Grant Program STATEWIDE INVESTMENT271 Grants AwardedTotaling $300 Million ACTIVE PROJECTS100 Projects in Operation44 in Development ROUND 13 AWARDS11 Projects Awarded$4.75 Million Appropriated ROUND 14 AWARDS27 Applications$15 Million Appropriated ROUND 15: 31 applications totaling request of $33 Million Governor’s Amended Budget -$7.5 Million AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 14 State of Alaska Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Implementation Plan AEA and the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF), submitted their State of Alaska EV Infrastructure Implementation Plan (The Plan) to the United States Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, as required by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act’s (IIJA) NEVI Formula Program. On September 27, 2022, The Plan was approved. The announcement unlocks $19 million to expand EV charging infrastructure in Alaska. Over the next five years, AEA anticipates receiving$52 million. Funds will be received by DOT&PF and administered by AEA. On March 1, 2023, AEA issued a Request for Applications for to site hosts compete for a share of Alaska's NEVI program funding. Applications are due by 4 p.m. on May 1, 2023. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 15 Funding must be used to build outAlternative Fuel Corridors (AFCs) first Alaska currently has one AFC (pending) After AFC buildout, funding can be used elsewhere Charging infrastructure must be DC fast-charging ⁻4 Combined Charging System Connectors ⁻>150 kW each Chargers must be located no more than 1 driving mile from AFC Charging stations must be located no more than 50 miles apart along designated AFC Match Requirements Federal share: 80% Private entity or other: 20% Justice40 Requirements NEVI Requirements AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 16 Transmission Upgrades and Battery Storage AEA and the Railbelt utilities closed on $166 million in bond financing to improve the efficiency and deliverable capacity of power from the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. The bonding comes at no additional cost to ratepayers or burden on the State treasury. Upgrade transmission line between Bradley Lake and Soldotna Substation Upgrade transmission line between Soldotna Substation and Sterling Substation Upgrade transmission line between Sterling Substation and Quartz Creek Substation Battery Energy Storage Systems for Grid Stabilization These projects will reduce constraints on the Railbelt by improving the Kenai Peninsula’s transmission capacity to export power from Bradley Lake —and allow for the integration of additional renewable energy generation. 17 To enhance the power system's resilience to extreme weather and climate change, the Grid Deployment Office is administering a $10.5 billion GRIP program under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. IIJA Competitive: Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP) 1) RailbeltBackbone Reconstruction Project$100 Million(Application Phase) 2) Battery Energy Storage/HVDC Coordinated Control$15 Million(Application Phase) 3) Railbelt Innovation Resiliency Project) $299 Million(Application Phase) 3) Rural Alaska Microgrid Transformation $250 Million(Application Phase) AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 18 813 W Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage, AK 99503 Main: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 info@akenergyauthority.org akenergyauthority.org @alaskaenergyauthority @alaskaenergyauthority Alaska Energy Authority AEA provides energy solutions to meet the unique needs of Alaska’s rural and urban communities. 19 APPENDIX AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 20 Railbelt Upgrades 21 St. George Island, Pribilof Islands, AK Power Cost Equalization (PCE) AEA, along with the Regulatory Commission of Alaska, administers the PCE program, which serves remote communities that are largely reliant on diesel fuel for power generation. AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 22 PCE Component FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024 Actuals Actuals Authorized Projected Governor’s Proposed Projected Expenditure Categories: Personal Services —————— Travel ——2.2 5.0 2.2 5.5 Services 355.0 355.0 352.8 377.0 586.7 586.7 Supplies ————— Equipment ————— Grants 23,625.0 27,361.4 47,694.8 47,694.8 47,697.8 47,694.8 Totals 23,980.0 27,716.4 48,049.8 48,076.8 48,283.7 48,287.0 Funding Sources: 1169 PCE Endowment 23,980.0 27,716.4 48,049.8 48,076.8 48,283.7 48,287.0 Projections: FY2022 PCE estimated program expenditures were higher compared to FY2021 actual expenditures. FY23 projected cost of services increase due to legislative modification raising eligibility from 500 kilowatt-hours (kWHs) to 750 kWHs. In FY24, AEA expects increases in program expenditures due to escalations in fuel prices and labor costs stemming from higher inflation. The FY24 increase of $233.0 also includes the addition of one (1) PCE Technician to assist in training for communities and an increase in administrative costs, which over the years has increased without an increase in authorization. PCE Endowment Projections (In Thousands) AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 23 FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 FY2021 FY2022 Beginning Investment Fund Balance $1,023,566 1,073,378 1,072,825 1,078,157 1,149,165 Inflows: Annual investment earnings 76,602 74,142 48,303 150,299 (143,842) Capital fund transfers in ———— Total inflows 76,602 74,142 48,303 150,299 (143,842) Outflows: Transfers to AEA for PCE payments (25,595)(29,719)(27,000)(28,237)(24,000) Transfers to Other Funds —(44,000)(14,867)(49,164)(12,140) Program administration –AEA (624)(444)(575)(737)(602) Administrative fee –Regulatory Commission (113)(102)(108)(123)(135) Management fee –Department of Revenue (458)(430)(421)(1,030)(1,030) Total outflows (26,790)(74,695)(42,971)(79,291)(37,908) Ending investment fund balance $1,073,378 1,072,825 1,078,157 1,149,165 967,416 Source: Unaudited schedule included in AEA's financial statements. Fiscal Year 2022 amounts are not final. PCE Endowment History (In Thousands) AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 24 PCE Endowment Earnings Calculations FY2024 Appropriations (SLA2023) Calculation of Excess PCE Earnings Available for Appropriation Average monthly market value for the previous three closed fiscal years (AS 42.45.080(c))$1,098,002,766 FY2022 Earnings (AS 42.45.080(c)(2))($143,841,594) FY2022 5% of Average Monthly Market Value (AS 42.45.085(a))$54,900,138 FY2023 Power Cost Equalization Appropriations under AS 42.45.085(a) AEA –Rural Energy Assistance (AS 42.45.085(a)(3))$381,800 AEA –Power Cost Equalization (AS 42.45.085(a)(1) and (a)(3))$48,049,800 Revenue –Treasury (AS 42.45.085(a)(2))$1,153,600 Less: Total FY2023 Power Cost Equalization Appropriations $49,585,200 Unobligated FY2022 Earnings $0 70% of Unobligated FY2022 Earnings per AS 42.45.085(d) (max $55 million per AS 42.45.085(d)(2))$0 FY2024 Appropriations per AS 42.45.085 (d)(2) Community Assistance Program (AS 42.45.085(d)(2)(A))$0 Renewable Energy Grant Fund (AS 42.45.085(d)(2)(B))$0 Rural Power Systems Upgrades (AS 42.45.085(d)(2)(B))$0 Less: FY2024 Appropriations $0 Remaining Balance $0 AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 25 AEA Organization Chart AEA Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Overview | 33rd Alaska State Legislature | April 12, 2023 26 5/4/23, 8:23 AM Bill would extend state taxes to cover Hilcorp https://www.kdll.org/local-news/2023-05-02/bill-would-extend-state-taxes-to-cover-hilcorp 1/5 Support KDLL, make a donation today! Bill would extend state taxes to cover Hilcorp KDLL | By Sabine Poux Published May 2, 2023 at 10:57 PM AKDT Riley Board /KDLL A bill that would extend the state’s corporate income tax to companies like Hilcorp is making its way through the Alaska Legislature. Senate Bill 114 is sponsored by Anchorage Democrat Sen. Bill Wielechowski. It would extend income taxes to companies that are not publicly traded — like oil and gas company Hilcorp, which is Cook Inlet’s dominant oil and gas producer, and falls under the “S-Corporation” designation. As it stands, S-Corps do not pay income taxes to the state. Only publicly traded corporations like ConocoPhillips, Alaska Airlines and Walmart pay income tax in Alaska. Here & Now KDLL 5/4/23, 8:23 AM Bill would extend state taxes to cover Hilcorp https://www.kdll.org/local-news/2023-05-02/bill-would-extend-state-taxes-to-cover-hilcorp 2/5 The bill would also reduce the per-barrel break for companies by $3 per barrel of oil at certain price thresholds. At a Senate Finance hearing Monday, Fadil Limani with the state Department of Revenue said the legislation could have a positive short-term boost to the state’s nances, bringing in as much as an additional $1.1 billion in the next scal year, according to estimates from his department. “However, it could have long-term impacts, negative impacts, to the state, based on the decisions that oil companies will make as it pertains to their future investment outlook,” he said. The legislation comes in a heightened moment for the state’s oil and gas industry, with warnings about shortfalls in natural gas production in Cook Inlet. Kara Moriarty, executive director of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, said that’s one of the reasons her association opposes the bill. “Any change to Alaska’s tax system truly does need to be analyzed both on impacts of our state economy and North Slope, as well as the Cook Inlet,” Moriarty said at the hearing. The change in the production tax rate would not directly impact production in Cook Inlet. The state years ago set permanent tax ceilings on Cook Inlet oil and gas aimed at keeping Southcentral energy prices low. The majority of energy used on the Railbelt comes from Cook Inlet natural gas, from Hilcorp. But Department of Revenue Spokesperson Aimee Bushnell said in an email that the bill would raise taxes on production in the North Slope, which would impact companies that work in both areas. Hilcorp is the only such company. Anchorage attorney Robin Brena, who specializes in oil and gas taxes, spoke on behalf of the bill on Monday. He said it’s time for companies like Hilcorp to pay their fair share, as the state struggles to pay for public services, like education and the marine highway. “I cannot imagine how we could do an any-worse job of maximizing the bene t to the people from our natural resources, than we are doing now,” Brena said. Donate Here & Now KDLL 5/4/23, 8:23 AM Bill would extend state taxes to cover Hilcorp https://www.kdll.org/local-news/2023-05-02/bill-would-extend-state-taxes-to-cover-hilcorp 3/5 He said the tax burden should be on private companies, not on the public. Legislators and the governor both are considering new taxes to address the budget shortfall. Senate Bill 114 will get another hearing Thursday. Tags Local News Kenai Peninsula News oil and gas 33rd legislature Sabine Poux Sabine Poux is the news director at KDLL. Originally from New York, she's lived and reported in Argentina and Vermont, where she fell in love with local news. She covers all things central peninsula but is especially interested in stories related to energy and shing. She'd love to hear your ideas at spoux@kdll.org. See stories by Sabine Poux Here & Now KDLL 5/2/23, 9:02 AM Senate Finance hears how SB 114 would drive investment from state - Must Read Alaska https://mustreadalaska.com/senate-finance-hears-how-sb-114-would-drive-investment-from-state/1/3 Home Politics Senate Finance hears how SB 114 would drive investment from state Politics Top News Senate Finance hears how SB 114 would drive investment from state By Suzanne Downing May 1, 2023 8 Senate Bill 114 would mean a 76% tax increase on oil production in Alaska, according to the State Department of Revenue. In bill sponsor Sen. Bill Wielechowski’s world, this is what is known as a “tweak.” - Advertisement - Kara Moriarty, speaking on behalf of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, reminded the committee that oil and gas industry contributes more to the economy than any other industry in the state, according to McKinley Research Group, which concluded that the oil and gas industry accounts for 24% of the 5/2/23, 9:02 AM Senate Finance hears how SB 114 would drive investment from state - Must Read Alaska https://mustreadalaska.com/senate-finance-hears-how-sb-114-would-drive-investment-from-state/2/3 jobs in the state. For every one job that is a direct oil and gas job, there are 15 that are created indirectly through indirect payments or tax payments. “Increasing taxes result in a higher net cost to oil and gas companies,” Moriarty said, and this means companies have less to invest. Less to invest will lead to impacts in Cook Inlet and the North Slope. She also reminded the senators that SB 21, which passed in 2013 and was ratified by voters even after Democrats were able to get a repeal initiative on the ballot, has helped stabilize production, and that actual oil production in Alaska has beat forecasts for the past 10 years. Critics note that SB 114 has not been subjected to current economic modeling, and its authors are ignoring how much the world has changed in the past 10 year, including how difficult and costly it is to get projects financed and approved. SB 114 is one more disincentive to companies who may want to invest in Alaska. The bill has also not been analyzed fully by tax experts and is being rushed through the Senate. SB 114 is a hugely complicated bill that runs 42 pages long with sections such as: Notwithstanding AS 43.55.020, a person subject to tax under AS 43.55.011(e), (f), 25 and (o); 43.55.020(a), (e), (g), (h), (j), and (l); 43.55.024(c), (e), (i), and (j); 43.55.030(e) and 26 (f); 43.55.040; 43.55.075(b); 43.55.160(a), (e), (f), (g), and (h); 43.55.165(a), (b), (e), (g), (h), 27 (l), (m), (n), (o), and (r); 43.55.170(a) and (b); 43.55.180(a); 43.55.890; and 43.55.895(b), as 28 amended by secs. 2 - 4, 6 - 15, 17 - 25, and 27 - 41 of this Act, and 43.55.011(q); 29 43.55.024(k); and 43.55.160(i), added by secs. 5, 16, and 26 of this Act, shall pay the balance 30 of the tax due before January 1, 2024, by January 1, 2024. Until January 1, 2024, the 31 Department of Revenue shall waive interest that would otherwise accrue under AS 43.05.225 01 and civil and criminal penalties accruing under AS 43.05.220, 43.05.245, and 43.05.290 that 02 are a result of the retroactivity of this Act. It’s nearly certain that most legislators will not able to read it or comprehend the unintended consequences of SB 114 fully, as this year’s Legislature is represented by many new lawmakers — three new senators and 17 new representatives, for a total of one third of the entire Legislature being freshmen. The entire bill is at this link. Testimony continues later this week in Senate Finance, including at 1:30 pm on Thursday, and 9 am on Friday. - Advertisement - 5/2/23, 9:02 AM Biden quietly backs behemoth natural gas project despite pleas from climate activists https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-backs-behemoth-natural-gas-pipeline-liquefied-natural-gas-lng-alaska-gasline-development-corporation-climat…1/3 Print Close Biden quietly backs behemoth natural gas project despite pleas from climate activists By Thomas Catenacci Published May 01, 2023 Fox News The Biden administration formally issued a record of decision Monday to green-light a massive Alaska natural gas pipeline and export project that's strongly opposed by environmental groups. The Department of Energy's (DOE) finalized decision reaffirms the original 2020 approval of the project under the Trump administration but amends it to include additional environmental protections, according to federal filings. The $38.7 billion project – which involves an 807-mile pipeline that traverses the length of Alaska and an export terminal – would significantly boost U.S. natural gas exports to Asia. Project developer Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC), a state-owned venture founded to ensure Alaskans benefit financially from the state's natural gas reserves, applauded the record of decision, saying it would enable the U.S. to boost energy supplies to allies. "This order is terrific news for the Alaska LNG (liquefied natural gas) project," AGDC President Frank Richards said in April after the decision was first issued. "The Biden administration has reaffirmed the authorization for and climate benefits of Alaska LNG, which will provide Alaskans and U.S. allies with a significant source of low-emissions, responsibly produced energy consistent with international environmental priorities." BIDEN ADMIN DELIVERS BLOW TO FOSSIL FUEL PROJECT IN VICTORY FOR ECO GROUPS Liquefied natural gas infrastructure is shown in Alaska's Cook Inlet. (Farah Nosh / Getty Images / File) "This supplemental decision adds to the record of support for Alaska LNG and our work developing this important project continues," Richards added. DOE's decision, which prevents venting carbon dioxide and reaffirms prior environmental requirements, ultimately allows the project developer to export LNG to non-free trade agreement nations. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved construction of the project in May 2020, years after it was first proposed in 2014. Under the proposal, the developer would construct a pipeline that stretches from Alaska's natural gas-rich North Slope Borough to Cook Inlet in southern Alaska where an export terminal facility would be built. The project would be among the only LNG export 5/2/23, 9:02 AM Biden quietly backs behemoth natural gas project despite pleas from climate activists https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-backs-behemoth-natural-gas-pipeline-liquefied-natural-gas-lng-alaska-gasline-development-corporation-climat…2/3 terminals anywhere in the West. BIDEN ADMIN RECEIVES BACKLASH FROM NEARLY TWO DOZEN GROUPS FOR MOVE CRACKING DOWN ON GAS STOVES "It's the only major LNG project in America that's got all its permits – it's got state and federal. That's not easy to do," Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, who has advocated for the project, told Fox News Digital in an interview. "It's got its export license. That's also not easy to do, from DOE. And, importantly, it's got federal loan guarantees. So, it's the only major project in our country that's got the full faith and credit of the United States of America backing it." "These are great jobs. So, it's a win for the economy, win for American families, win for Alaskans getting clean-burning gas themselves, and helping our allies not only get off Russian oil and gas but flex the muscle that [President] Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party are scared to death of: American energy dominance. Especially if we're sending it to Asia," he continued. In October, Sullivan, U.S. Ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel and State Department senior energy adviser Amos Hochstein participated in a summit in Tokyo with Japanese officials to tout the benefits of the project. Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, and other lawmakers from the state have been strong proponents of the project. (Brandon Bell / Pool / Getty Images / File) Overall, according to AGDC, the project would create 10,000 jobs during construction and 1,000 permanent jobs. It would also have an average throughput of 3.1 billion cubic feet (bcf) of LNG per day, much of which would be delivered to Alaskans. The DOE decision published Monday authorizes the project to export 2.6 bcf of LNG per day. By comparison, the electric power sector across the entire West Coast — California, Oregon and Washington — consumed 2.4 bcf of natural gas per day last year, according to federal data. "I've always said that there is a split within this administration. The rational people understand that we're going to need energy, American energy, for decades to come," said Sullivan. "They should be touting it more. But, you know, they have to kowtow to their far-left wing." Environmental groups, meanwhile, blasted the Biden administration's approval of the project, saying it would lead to a massive uptick in greenhouse emissions. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP "Not only is the Alaska LNG project unnecessary given the widespread transition to clean-energy alternatives we expect to see in the years to come, it’s also a major threat to ecosystems and climate in Alaska," said Erin Colón, a senior attorney for Earthjustice, an environmental law firm that has challenged the project in court. "The state’s greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels would balloon by nearly 30% over today’s levels in an era where all other states will be scrambling to reduce greenhouse gas emissions," Colón added. "It’s frustrating to see the Department of Energy rubber-stamp a massive fossil fuel infrastructure project of this kind when it clearly conflicts with the urgent need to tackle the 5/2/23, 9:02 AM Biden quietly backs behemoth natural gas project despite pleas from climate activists https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-backs-behemoth-natural-gas-pipeline-liquefied-natural-gas-lng-alaska-gasline-development-corporation-climat…3/3 Print Close Home Video Politics U.S.Opinion Entertainment Tech Science Health Travel Lifestyle World Sports Weather Privacy Terms climate crisis." Thomas Catenacci is a politics writer for Fox News Digital. URL https://w ww.fox news .co m/p ol itics/b id e n -back s-behemoth-natur a l-gas -pipeli n e -liquefied-n a t ural-g as-l ng-alask a -gasl ine -devel o p m e nt-cor p orat ion- c limate-ac ti vis ts This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. © FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by Factset. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by Refinitiv Lipper.Do Not Sell my Personal Information - New Terms of Use - FAQ 5/4/23, 8:57 AM More gas at Granite Pt - April 30, 2023 - Petroleum News https://www.petroleumnews.com/pnads/50514138.shtml 1/4 NOW READ OUR ARTICLES IN 40 DIFFERENT LANGUAGES. Select Language Powered by Translate Vol. 28, No.18 Week of April 30, 2023 Providing coverage of Alaska and northern Canada's oil and gas industry More gas at Granite Pt Click here to go to the full PDF version of this issue, with any maps, photos or other artwork that appears in some of the articles. Hilcorp applies for gas pool at Granite Point field, now producing primarily oil Kristen Nelson Petroleum News Hilcorp Alaska would like to increase its natural gas production from Cook Inlet and with that goal in mind, has applied to the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to define the Granite Point gas pool at the Granite Point field. Currently the field produces primarily oil, accounting for some 25% of Cook Inlet oil in February, according to AOGCC production data, and just 1.5% of Cook Inlet natural gas. In its application to the AOGCC, Hilcorp said defining a gas pool for Granite Point is “necessary to support anticipated drilling of new grassroots gas development wells from the Bruce Platform,” a drilling program anticipated to begin this fall, reflecting its “commitment to extend natural gas production from legacy offshore production facilities throughout Cook Inlet,” the company said. In its most recent plan of development for Granite Point, filed with the Department of Natural Resources’ Division of Oil and Gas earlier in April, the company does not mention drilling for gas, but does say it plans to drill as many as three grassroots wells from the Bruce platform targeting the Tyonek formation using Rig 151 in the fourth quarter of this year. Amour Ve 5/4/23, 8:57 AM More gas at Granite Pt - April 30, 2023 - Petroleum News https://www.petroleumnews.com/pnads/50514138.shtml 2/4 In its March 1 request, Hilcorp proposed amending the conservation order for Granite Point to establish the Granite Point gas pool and gas well spacing rules. Hearing scheduled Hilcorp said it met with AOGCC staff in December for an informal technical meeting on the proposed Bruce platform gas development. The commission has scheduled a public hearing on the request for June 6 at 10 a.m. in its Anchorage offices. Call-in information for the hearing is 907-202-7104, conference ID 491 156 598#. Comments on the proposal must be received no later than the conclusion of the June 6 hearing. There are six state oil and gas leases at Granite Point, which produces from three platforms, Anna, Bruce and Granite Point, with oil and gas produced from Anna going by subsea pipelines to the Bruce platform, and from there to the Granite Point Tank Farm onshore. Another subsea pipeline system takes oil and gas from the Granite Point platform to the GPTF, where production is processed, metered and shipped, with produced gas compressed and used for fuel, as lift gas, or shipped to market via the Kenai Beluga Pipe Line. The field produces from the Granite Point Middle Kenai oil pool (correlating to drilled depths of 7,725 feet to 10,855 feet in the Granite Point 1 well) and the Granite Point Hemlock oil pool (correlating to drilled depths of 10,885 feet to 11,280 feet in the Granite Point 1 well). Hilcorp is proposing that the Granite Point gas pool be added, “defined as the accumulation of gas common to and which correlates with the accumulation” in the Granite Point 1 well “between the drilled depths of 3,095 feet MD and 7,725 feet MD.” The company is requesting a spacing rule which would provide for no restrictions on gas well spacing, except that no well “shall be completed less than 1,500 feet from the external boundary” of the area except where owners are the same on both sides of the line. Development Leases were first issued within what is now the Granite Point field in 1962, three acquired by Pan American Petroleum Corp. and one acquired by Union Oil Company of California and Socony Mobil Oil Co. Oil was discovered in the Granite Point field in 1965. The Anna, Bruce and Granite Point platforms were built in 1966, and the DNR certified the Granite Point No. 1 as capable of producing in paying quantities that same year. Oil and gas are produced from the Tyonek and Hemlock formations. Union had 100% working interest in the Pan American leases by 1991 and became operator of the four Granite Point leases and the platforms, acquiring two additional oil and gas leases that same year. The company transferred 75% working interest in three of the leases to Mobil Rocky Mountain (later ExxonMobil Alaska Production) in 1995, and the jointly owned leases (35% Union, 75% Exxon) 5/4/23, 8:57 AM More gas at Granite Pt - April 30, 2023 - Petroleum News https://www.petroleumnews.com/pnads/50514138.shtml 3/4 were unitized as the South Granite Point unit, with Union retaining operatorship. DNR approved formation of the South Granite Point sands participating area and the Hemlock participating area in 2008 the SGPU contracted to the participating areas, with the remainder of the Granite Point field not unitized. Hilcorp acquired Chevron’s (successor to Union) Cook Inlet assets in 2012 and became operator. In 2014, as sole WIO and operator of both the Granite Point field and the SGPU, Hilcorp requested an expansion of the SGPU to include three non-unitized operations associated with the Anna and Bruce platforms, a unit expansion approved by DNR in 2015, along with a change of name of the consolidated SGPU and Grant Point field to the Granite Point unit. In 2019, Hilcorp said, AOGCC approved the vertical alignment of the Middle Kenai oil pool and the Granite Point oil pool, adjusted the affected area of the pools, eliminated interwell oil spacing and established a minimum set-back distance from exterior oil pool boundaries. Print this story | Email it to an associate. State intervenes to protect federal oil and gas lease in Cook Inlet https://www.kinyradio.com/news/news-of-the-north/state-intervenes-to-protect-federal-oil-and-gas-lease-in-cook-inlet/ 1/3 Anchorage, Alaska (KINY) - The State of Alaska filed to intervene Wednesday in a lawsuit that seeks to block congressionally-directed oil and gas leasing on federal land in Cook Inlet. The State is defending the opportunity to develop through the federal government’s Cook Inlet Lease Sale 258, which was held by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) in Dec. 2022 after being mandated to do so by Congress. “Given the federal government’s reluctance to encourage robust leasing on its land, the task has fallen to Alaska to defend what leasing has been made available--all the more so when the development directly impacts the energy security of such a large number of Alaskans,” said Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy. “Development of the oil and gas resources in Alaska, whether on federal or State land, is vital to maintaining Alaska’s sovereignty, strengthening its economy, and fostering an environment where our residents can build homes and raise a family.” Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor stated “Ensuring the responsible development of Alaska’s abundant resources is a right shared by all Alaskans. The Inflation Reduction Act provides a clear congressional mandate for development of federal oil and gas leases in Cook Inlet. By intervening in this litigation, the State is advocating for that mandate to be followed through.” NOAA Cook Inlet photo State intervenes to protect federal oil and gas lease in Cook Inlet https://www.kinyradio.com/news/news-of-the-north/state-intervenes-to-protect-federal-oil-and-gas-lease-in-cook-inlet/ 2/3 The administrative process began in Sept. 2020 but was then halted when President Joe Biden issued Executive Order 14008, pausing all federal oil and gas leasing activity on public lands or offshore waters. Alaska, along with several other states, successfully litigated for an injunction ending the federal government’s pause on leasing—only to have the BOEM cancel the proposed lease sale in May 2022. With the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, Congress required the BOEM to resurrect Cook Inlet Lease Sale 258 and hold a lease sale by Dec. 31, 2022. Yet before the BOEM could do so, five environmental groups—Cook Inletkeeper, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, Center for Biological Diversity, Kachemak Bay Conservation Society, and Natural Resources Defense Council—sued the federal government. While not seeking to stop the lease sale, the plaintiffs allege the BOEM’s administrative process violated several federal laws and have requested the federal court for the District of Alaska to vacate the leases sold as part of Cook Inlet Lease Sale 258. By intervening this week, Alaska joins the federal government in defending Cook Inlet Lease Sale 258. In addition to serving as another source of energy security, making federal lands available for oil and gas development may provide Alaska with revenue in the form of property, production, and corporate income tax, and benefit Alaska’s citizens with jobs in the oil and gas and support industries, the State of Alaska press release states. Because oil and gas producers are more likely to invest in projects where they can take advantage of economies of scale and develop projects on both federal and State land, the development of federal lands in the Cook Inlet is vital to Alaska’s economy, the State of Alaska press release says. “Alaska’s interest in Cook Inlet goes beyond economic benefits to our core need for secure supplies of energy for the people of Alaska,” said DNR Commissioner- designee John Boyle. “The residents of Alaska’s Railbelt—the state’s most populated State intervenes to protect federal oil and gas lease in Cook Inlet https://www.kinyradio.com/news/news-of-the-north/state-intervenes-to-protect-federal-oil-and-gas-lease-in-cook-inlet/ 3/3 region—rely on the energy produced in Cook Inlet to power their homes and businesses. We must have further exploration and development of Cook Inlet to meet Alaska’s energy needs.” Read the motion here. Read the motion here. 5/4/23, 8:45 AM Chugach Electric pursuing clean energy - April 23, 2023 - Petroleum News https://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/921042475.shtml 1/4 NOW READ OUR ARTICLES IN 40 DIFFERENT LANGUAGES. Select Language Powered by Translate SEARCH our ARCHIVE of over 14,000 articles Vol. 28, No.17 Week of April 23, 2023 Providing coverage of Alaska and northern Canada's oil and gas industry Chugach Electric pursuing clean energy Utility says that it is making progress in integrating variable wind and solar with its firm hydro and gas energy sources Alan Bailey for Petroleum News Anchorage based electric utility Chugach Electric Association says that it is making meaningful progress in its efforts to integrate variable wind and solar energy supplies with its firm power from hydroelectricity and gas-fired power generation. The statement comes amid growing concerns about future natural gas supplies from Cook Inlet and increasing interest in new low-carbon energy resources. Bettina Chastain, Chugach Electric board chair, and Arthur Miller, the company’s chief executive officer, have commented that the utility recognizes the need to diversify its energy production to include new low-carbon, renewable energy resources that complement the utility’s dwindling natural gas resources, in the context of the continuing need for reliable and affordable electricity. “We are aggressively pursuing new clean energy projects in a manner that allows us to maintain the lowest rates on the Railbelt, supported by new technologies that enhance the potential of our existing assets to balance, or integrate, variable clean energy resources,” the two executives said. Expanding the generation mix 5/4/23, 8:45 AM Chugach Electric pursuing clean energy - April 23, 2023 - Petroleum News https://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/921042475.shtml 2/4 Currently about 82% of the utility’s electricity comes from natural gas fueled power generation, 15% from hydro and 3% from wind. In addition, about 0.1% of the utility’s power comes from solar energy bought back from the utility’s members. The utility’s strategy for assuring reliable electricity supplies is to avoid dependence on any one energy source by expanding its generation mix to include proven technologies such as hydro, wind and solar. “Together with our efficient natural gas generators, energy storage technologies, and modern control systems, we can diversify our energy mix and provide reliable power when it is needed throughout the year,” the executives said. In 2022 the Chugach Electric board added decarbonization goals to the utility’s strategic plan, to reduce the utility’s carbon intensity by at least 35% by 2030 and at least 50% by 2040, relative to the carbon intensity in 2012. The plan is to achieve this without negatively impacting electricity rates. Integrating variable energy The utility says that it is making meaningful progress in integrating variable clean energy into its existing hydro and gas-fueled firm power sources. For example, with support from the Alaska Energy Authority and the state Emerging Energy Technology Fund, the utility has implemented a hybrid flywheel and battery energy storage system to help regulate the varying power output from a wind farm on Fire Island, offshore Anchorage. And in 2021 the utility issued a request for proposals for renewable energy projects to add at least 100,000 megawatt hours of energy per year to its power supplies. As a consequence, the utility is now conducting feasibility studies for two utility-scale projects, one a wind project and the other a solar project. If these projects prove to be economically viable, without negatively impacting electricity rates, they could exceed Chugach Electric’s original goal for the RFP by supplying more than 20% of the utility’s annual energy, the executives said. In addition, last year the Regulatory Commission of Alaska approved a request by the utility to triple the utility’s net metering allowance that compensates members for small-scale solar and wind power that they feed back into the electricity grid. Battery storage In another initiative, Chugach Electric is purchasing a large-scale battery energy storage system that it plans to install in Anchorage in 2024, to improve the reliability and quality of its services. The utility is also evaluating and pursuing U.S. Department of Energy funding opportunities for other potential initiatives, including long-term energy storage; modern protection and control systems; and carbon capture technology. The utility also says that it is partnering with other utilities, Alaska Native corporations, the state of Alaska and other organizations to enhance the benefits from advances in technology 5/4/23, 8:45 AM Chugach Electric pursuing clean energy - April 23, 2023 - Petroleum News https://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/921042475.shtml 3/4 for all Alaskans. “We will continue to work towards diversifying our energy resources, while maximizing the value of our existing investments and maintaining reliable service to our members,” the executives said. “Chugach is proud to innovate and invest in clean energy and we are committed to our vision of responsibly developing clean energy resources for a clean, sustainable future for Alaska.” Railbelt initiatives In a broader context, the utilities in the Railbelt region, including Chugach Electric, are pursuing a plan for major upgrades to the region’s electricity transmission system. The elimination of single points of failure in the system and an increase to the system’s power carrying capacity would significantly improve the system’s capability to support new clean energy power generation. With a potential cost of just under $3 billion, the utilities are seeking federal and state funding assistance for the proposed upgrades, Chugach Electric said. Another factor that relates to the future mix of power generation on the Railbelt is the recent Regulatory Commission of Alaska certification of the Railbelt Reliability Council as the electric reliability organization for the Railbelt. One of the RRC’s roles will be to develop and maintain an integrated resource plan for the Railbelt’s high voltage electrical system. That plan will presumably encompass a strategy for the deployment of renewal energy power generation. Chugach Electric says that it looks forward to integrating its plans and efforts into the RRC’s procedures, once those procedures are fully developed. Currently the RRC is in the process of ramping up its organization and moving into operation, with the integrated resource plan potentially taking several years to develop. “While the RRC grows and matures, Chugach will continue to pursue technologies to support decarbonization and diversification of our energy resources, and collaborate with other utilities to improve transmission projects across the state,” Chugach Electric told Petroleum News. Click here to subscribe to Petroleum News for as low as $89 per year. Notice: Only paid subscribers have access to the pdf version of this story, which carries maps and other art. Petroleum News - Phone: 1-907 522-9469 circulation@PetroleumNews.com --- https://www.petroleumnews.com --- S U B S C R I B E 5/4/23, 8:44 AM Two more aged Cook Inlet oil platforms may be headed for permanent shut-down | Local News Stories | frontiersman.com https://www.frontiersman.com/news/two-more-aged-cook-inlet-oil-platforms-may-be-headed-for-permanent-shut-down/article_9a7f90c4-e00c-11ed-8e…1/3 https://www.frontiersman.com/news/two-more-aged-cook-inlet-oil-platforms-may-be-headed-for-permanent-shut- down/article_9a7f90c4-e00c-11ed-8e91-1bea9f53b3ab.html Two more aged Cook Inlet oil platforms may be headed for permanent shut-down By Tim Bradner For the Frontiersman Apr 20, 2023 Hilcorp Cook-Inlet-platform Monopod Courtesy photo More aging Cook Inlet, Alaska oil platforms are being shut down, possibly for good. It could also be the end for one of the rst o shore oil elds developed in Cook Inlet, Middle Ground Shoal. Hilcorp Energy, the major operator in the Inlet, told state o cials in a ling that repair of a damaged fuel gas line serving two platforms in the Middle Ground Shoal eld cannot be repaired.Privacy - Terms 5/4/23, 8:44 AM Two more aged Cook Inlet oil platforms may be headed for permanent shut-down | Local News Stories | frontiersman.com https://www.frontiersman.com/news/two-more-aged-cook-inlet-oil-platforms-may-be-headed-for-permanent-shut-down/article_9a7f90c4-e00c-11ed-8e…2/3 The fuel gas pipeline along with Platforms A and C in the Middle Ground Shoal eld that it served have been shut down since a gas leak was discovered in 2021. Hilcorp has been evaluating repair options but has now told the state Division of Oil and Gas that it can’t be done economically. Platform C, one of two production platforms served by the gas line, will be shut down permanently but the company is still looking at possibilities of restarting Platform A with fuel supplied from an undeveloped nearby gas deposit. There are three million barrels of recoverable oil le in the Platform A area but fuel gas is needed to operate the platform. Hilcorp is studying whether this can be done by drilling from the existing platform or whether a small, separate gas production platform will be needed, which could make the venture uneconomic. Two other Middle Ground Shoal platforms, Baker and Dillon, were shut down in 2003 and 2012. Middle Ground Shoal is the rst of Cook Inlet’s o shore oil eld brought into development. All four of its platforms were installed between 1964 and 1967. Permanently closing Alaska o shore platforms raises issues for both the owner companies and the state. Under terms of the state oil and gas leases companies are obligated to remove platforms when production operations cease. This will be expensive, and it is a cost that Hilcorp would prefer to stave o as long as possible. The state has a concern in that removing the platform could be more damaging to the environment than just letting it sit. Some Inlet platforms no longer producing have been sitting for years, such as the Dillon platform in Middle Ground Shoal that last saw production in 2003. Companies have argued that as long as there is some chance that the platforms can be used the state shouldn’t impose the removal obligation and so far state agencies have gone along with this. Hilcorp wants to preserve options for someday tapping nearby small pockets of undeveloped oil and is also considering using the platforms to site tidal power generation facilities. 5/4/23, 8:44 AM Two more aged Cook Inlet oil platforms may be headed for permanent shut-down | Local News Stories | frontiersman.com https://www.frontiersman.com/news/two-more-aged-cook-inlet-oil-platforms-may-be-headed-for-permanent-shut-down/article_9a7f90c4-e00c-11ed-8e…3/3 Cook Inlet has the second-highest tides in North America and companies working on renewable energy are working on tidal-generation from locations near shore, taking advantage of the Inlet’s strong twice-daily tidal currents. Seventeen platforms for both oil and natural gas have been installed in Cook Inlet since the 1960s. Seven are now shut in as no longer economic, but 11 are still operating including one oil platform, the Osprey, operated by Glacier Oil and Gas, a small independent, and the Julius R platform, for gas production, operated by Furie Operating Alaska, another small independent. Over the years the state has worked to help the Inlet producers keep the oil platforms limping along, with reductions of the one-eighth state royalty and special tax terms. Production at most of the shut-in platforms is also just suspended, meaning in theory the wells can be restarted, but Hilcorp has also told the state that it will begin Plugging and Abandoning operations this year on platform wells with suspended operations. Plugging and Abandoning means that wells will be permanently closed o with cement snd eith surface casing removed. While Cook Inlet is a historic Alaska producing province many believe the basin still has potential for new oil discoveries. However, more attention is now focused on nding new natural gas to replace declining gas production in the region. Alaska’s largest communities are in Southcentral Alaska and they mostly depend on gas for residential and building heating. Most power generation is also fueled by gas. Alaska Economic Report No. 6/2023 Page 6 Petroleum: Oil Search to begin Pikka drilling Santos/Oil Search will begin drilling production wells on May 15 for its Pikka project this summer, the company has told state officials. The first drill program is for 43 wells including 22 production wells and 21 injector wells on Pad ND-B, Pikka’s phase one production pad. There is one other dis- posal well planned for injection of used drill fluids and cuttings. Construction of pipelines will begin in November with activities underway until May, the end of the winter season. Two other production pads are planned, ND-A and ND-C, in Pikka’s phase two. The company also told state officials it has established 165 million barrels of oil for its phase one, currently under construction. This is the 51 percent share of reserves held by Santos, Ltd., the Oil Search parent company. Repsol is a 49 percent owner in Pikka. The company also said it hopes to begin production before a May, 2026 target currently set. It also said refinements in planning have helped lower Pikka’s break-even production costs to below $40 a barrel, which would include a 10 percent rate of return. *** Funds being raised for Sourdough Independent Jade Energy LLC is pushing ahead with plans to drill a new well in its eastern North Slope leases where BP drilled years ago and made the Sourdough oil discovery. To comply with its development plan filed with the state Jade must demonstrate that it has funds sufficient to drill by July 1 and to have a contract for a drill rig by September. The well would be drilled in the first or second quarter of 2024. Jade’s current plan is to use one of the lighter-weight exploration rigs Funds for Sourdough testing (Cont.) - Continued top right available on the slope and to move it to the location late this year on a compacted snow road similar to those used in recent National Petroleum Re- serve-Alaska exploration, including by Jade affiliate 88 Energy. Jade told Petroleum News in late March that it has funds committed from two investors and is waiting on a third and final investor. The Sourdough discovery, and Jade’s leases, are on state lands adja- cent to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge state/fed- eral boundary on the Canning River. There is some evidence that the reservoir in which BP discovered oil extends under the river into ANWR, in which case production from the state lands could drain oil from parts of the reservoir under the refuge. *** More Inlet platforms being shut down More aged Cook Inlet platforms could be shut down for good. Hilcorp Energy told state officials that re- pair of a damaged fuel gas line serving two offshore platforms in the Middle Ground Shoal field cannot be done economically. The pipeline and platforms have been shut down since a gas leak was discovered in 2021. Hilcorp has been evaluating repair options since then but has now told the state Division of Oil and Gas that it won’t be done. Platform C, one of two operating platforms served by the gas line, cannot now be operated profitably and will be shut down permanently. The company is still studying restart possibilities at Platform A in the field with fuel supplied from an undeveloped nearby gas deposit, assuming it can be drilled economically, either from an existing platform or a new exploration/production platform can be installed. There are 3 million barrels of recoverable oil left in the Platform A area. Two other Middle Ground Shoal platforms, B and D, were shut down in 2003 and 2012. *** DATE DESCRIPTION TOPIC AND AUDIENCELOCATION TEAM MEMBERMay 4, 2023 Legislative Hearing AEA PCE Overview Presentation to House Energy Committee Virtual Curtis W. ThayerApril 21, 2023 Legislative Hearing AEA Capital Budget Presentation to House Finance Committee Virtual Curtis W. ThayerApril 17, 2023 Presenter Alaska NEVI Plan Workshop in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley In-Person/Virtual Josi HartleyApril 10, 2023 Media Interview Renewable Energy Fund Round 15, Tim Ellis, KUAC Phone Curtis W. ThayerApril 7, 2023 Presentation AEA Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Status Report to 33rd Alaska State Legislature Email Curtis W. ThayerApril 7, 2023 Media Inquiry Dixon Diversion, Tim Bradner, Alaska Economic Digest/Alaska Legislative Report Email Bryan Carey, PEApril 6, 2023 Media Inquiry Dixon Diversion, Tim Bradner, Alaska Economic Digest/Alaska Legislative Report Email Bryan Carey, PEApril 5, 2023 Media Inquiry Dixon Diversion, Tim Bradner, Alaska Economic Digest/Alaska Legislative Report Email Bryan Carey, PEApril 5, 2023 Legislative Hearing AEA Modernizing Alaska's Largest Electric System Presentation to Senate Resources Committee VirtualCurtis W. Thayer Bryan Carey, PEApril 3, 2023 Host/Presenter AEA Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Program Presentation to AKEVWG Technical Session In-Person/Virtual Josi HartleyApril 3, 2023 Media Interview Diomede Power Outage, Megan Gannon, The Nome Nugget Phone Curtis W. ThayerMarch 31, 2023 Media Interview EV Infrastructure in Alaska, Sophie Applin, Alaska Beacon PhoneCurtis W. Thayer Audrey Alstrom, PEMarch 22, 2023 Host/Presenter Alaska Rural Power Plant Operator Working Group Quarterly Meeting Virtual Justin TuomiMarch 21, 2023 Legislative Hearing AEA Overview Presentation to House Energy Committee Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 16, 2023 Legislative Hearing AEA Overview Presentation to House Finance Committee Virtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 15, 2023 Media Interview GRIP Grant Timeline, Brian Kassof, Alaska Energy Transparency Project Phone Curtis W. ThayerMarch 15, 2023 Host/Presenter Alaska NEVI Pre-Application Presentation to Public In-Person/Virtual Josi HartleyMarch 15, 2023 Host/Presenter Bulk Fuel Working Group with Multiple statewide Agencies In-Person/VirtualBill Price Khae PasaoMarch 10, 2023 Host/Presenter Alaska Electric Vehicle Working Group Technical Session: Uptime Requirements Presentation In-Person/Virtual Josi HartleyMarch 9, 2023 Host/Presenter Alaska Wind Working Group Quarterly Meeting In-Person/Virtual AEAAEA COMMUNITY OUTREACHLast Updated on May 4, 2023 (6-Month Look Back) 813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 • Phone: (907) 771‐3000 Fax: (907) 771‐3044 • Email: info@akenergyauthority.org • Website: akenergyauthority.org DATE DESCRIPTION TOPIC AND AUDIENCELOCATION TEAM MEMBERMarch 8, 2023 Presenter AEA Hydropower Opportunities with Change to Alaska Section of the American Water Resources Association In-Person Bryan Carey, PEMarch 7, 2023 Host/Presenter State Energy Security Plan Advisory Group Meeting In-Person/Virtual Rebecca GarrettMarch 7, 2023 Brief Remarks2023 Alaska Sustainable Energy Conference: Pre-Event Workshop 1: Low Carbon Energy Transitions WorkshopVirtual Curtis W. ThayerMarch 3, 2023 Media Interview Solar Projects in Alaska, Alex Kay, Alaska Business Phone Curtis W. ThayerMarch 3, 2023 Media Interview Opportunities in the Latest Energy Infrastructure Bill, Sabine Poux, KDLL Phone Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 21, 2023 Presenter AEA Hydropower Opportunities Presentation to Alaska Dam Owners In-Person Bryan Carey, PEFebruary 9, 2023 Panelist Inflation Reduction Act to Alaska Forum on the Environment In-Person Conner EricksonFebruary 9, 2023 Presenter Alaska NEVI Plan Workshop on the Kenai Peninsula In-Person Taylor AsherFebruary 7-10, 2023 Attendee NASEO Energy Policy Outlook Conference In-Person Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 4-10, 2023 Meetings AEA Overview to Alaska Congressional Delegation, Washington, DC In-Person Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 1, 2023 Presenter AEA Update Alaska Power Association State Legislative Conference In-Person Curtis W. ThayerFebruary 1, 2023 Panelist Energy Committee Panel to Southeast Conference Mid-Session Summit and Transportation Symposium In-PersonCurtis W. ThayerJanuary 27, 2023 Media Interview AEA update, Tim Bradner, Alaska Economic Report Phone Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 26, 2023 Legislative Hearing AEA Susitna-Watana Presentation to House Energy Committee VirtualCurtis W. Thayer Bryan CareyJanuary 24, 2023 Attendee Idaho National Laboratory Alaska Visit In-Person Curtis W. ThayerJanuary 24, 2023 Presenter AEA State Energy Security Plan Presentation to SESP Committee Virtual Audrey Alstrom, PEJanuary 19, 2023 Presenter Alaska NEVI Plan Overview to Alaska EV Working Group In-Person/Virtual Josi HartleyJanuary 12, 2023 Exhibitor Alaska NEVI Plan to Anchorage Transportation Fair In-Person Taylor AsherJanuary 12, 2023 Presenter Alaska Draft Preventing Outages and Enhancing the Resilience of the Electric Grid In-Person/VirtualConner Erickson Daniel MillerDecember 15, 2022 Host/Presenter Bulk Fuel Working Group with Multiple statewide Agencies In-Person/VirtualBill Price Khae PasaoDecember 13, 2022 Presenter Grid Resiliency Program Presentation Public Meeting #3 In-Person/Virtual Conner EricksonDecember 12, 2022 Roundtable Northwest Arctic Leadership Team's Winter Summit In-Person Curtis W. ThayerDecember 9, 2022 Presenter State Energy Security Plan Presentation to the Bradley Lake Project Management Committee In-Person Rebecca GarrettDecember 8, 2022 Media Interview Alaska Electric Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Plan, Jenny Willoughby, KTNA Virtual Curtis W. ThayerAEA Community OutreachPage 2 of 3 DATE DESCRIPTION TOPIC AND AUDIENCELOCATION TEAM MEMBERDecember 8, 2022 Presenter Alaska NEVI Plan Presentation to the Alaska Municipal League Annual Local Government Conference In-Person Josi HartleyDecember 7, 2022 Presenter Alaska EV Infrastructure Plan Presentation to All Hazards Planning Committee Virtual Dan AicherDecember 7, 2022 Panelist AEA Update to Alaska Municipal League Annual Local Government Conference In-Person Curtis W. ThayerDecember 7, 2022 Presentation AEA Update Presentation to Alaska Power Association Board of Directors Meeting In-Person Curtis W. ThayerDecember 6, 2022 Presentation AEA Overview Presentation to the General Consulate of Canada In-Person Curtis W. ThayerNovember 28, 2022 Presentation Alaska EV Infrastructure Plan Presentation to National Association of Women in Construction In-Person Josi HartleyNovember 23, 2022 Media Interview Renewable Energy Fund Round 15, Matt Wilson, KSRM Radio Kenai Phone Curtis W. ThayerNovember 17, 2022 Presentation Bradley Lake and Dixon Study Plan Presentation to Public Agencies In-Person/Virtual Bryan Carey, PENovember 15, 2022 Attendee/Presenter Financing Food Security in Alaska Presentation to Governor's Food Security Workshop In-PersonCurtis W. Thayer Tim SandstromNovember 9, 2022 Presenter Alaska EV Infrastructure Plan Presentation to Alaska Municipal Climate Network Virtual Taylor AsherNovember 3, 2022 Presenter Alaska EV Infrastructure Plan Presentation to Juneau Decision Makers In-Person Audrey Alstrom, PENovember 2, 2022 Meeting Alaska EV Infrastructure Plan Presentation Discussion with AELP & SE Conference In-Person Audrey Alstrom, PEAEA Community OutreachPage 3 of 3 5/4/23, 1:22 PM Alaska Senate passes measure making renewable projects fund permanent | Politics | newsminer.com https://www.newsminer.com/news/politics/alaska-senate-passes-measure-making-renewable-projects-fund-permanent/article_5d6189c0-e856-11ed-8… https://www.newsminer.com/news/politics/alaska-senate-passes-measure-making-renewable-projects-fund- permanent/article_5d6189c0-e856-11ed-8774-d33c6da7711b.html Alaska Senate passes measure making renewable projects fund permanent Jack Barnwell May 2, 2023 Photo courtesy Eric Troyer Above, a wind turbine at the Eva Creek Wind Farm is seen during bike trip to old mining trails around Ferry in 2016. At right, the turbine goes into place at Eva Creek. Photo courtesy Eric Troyer 5/4/23, 1:22 PM Alaska Senate passes measure making renewable projects fund permanent | Politics | newsminer.com https://www.newsminer.com/news/politics/alaska-senate-passes-measure-making-renewable-projects-fund-permanent/article_5d6189c0-e856-11ed-8… jbarnwell The Alaska Senate passed legislation Friday — House Bill 62 — that would make a renewable energy program fund permanent by removing an expiration date. The fund, administrated by Alaska Energy Authority, has distributed nearly $300 million in grants for renewable energy projects since its inception in 2008. “The passage of this bill ensures the successful program will continue to be available as a tool for communities around the state,” said Sen. James Kaufman (R-Anchorage) Kaufman noted that $39 million has been provided to Railbelt projects and $259 million in rural Alaska with the goal “to reduce energy costs in those communities.” The Alaska Energy Authority funds programs in rounds based on applications and makes recommendations to the legislature for approval. Golden Valley Electric Association received a $859,000 grant from the fund last year to study the wind resource availability on Shovel Creek as a possible site for a future wind farm. AEA recommended a $250,000 grant application from GVEA in its list of 27 projects to the Legislature. The Senate approved it without protest in an 18-0 vote. Sens. Elvi Gray-Jackson (D-Anchorage) and Mike Shower (R-Wasilla) were absent. The Alaska House approved HB 62 in March on a 35-1 vote, with Rep. David Eastman (R-Wasilla), casting the lone no vote. The House’s version extended the renewable energy fund for 10 years. The Senate’s changes means it will return to the House for approval or rejection. It must also receive Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s approval before going into effect. Contact reporter Jack Barnwell at 907-459-7587 or jbarnwell@newsminer.com. PUBLISHERS: Mike Bradner, Tim Bradner / Business Office: (907) 440-6068 / 3037 South Circle Anchorage, AK 99507 / Fax: (907) 345-5683 Alaska Legislative Digest - Commentary on Alaska issues and policy Bradners’ May 1, 2023 No. 16/2023 In this Issue:• Education p. 2• Capital budget p. 3• Status of bills pp. 4-5• Public employee pensions p. 6 Our reports are protected by Copyright. Please do not forward to others without permission. © COPYRIGHT Email: timbradner@pobox.alaska.net PCE for rural water and sanitation? Lots of money for construction, but residents left with unaffordable O&M – Continued on page 6 Fiscal plan? More talk-talk There was great anticipation last Thursday when the governor called a press conference with legislative leadership on a state fiscal plan. Turned out it was just a committment for more talk. Gov. Dunleavy has said he likes a sales tax but so far nothing is put forward. The Legislature continues to be divided. Here’s where things stand as the session approaches wind-down to adjournment May 17. There will likely be no Base Student Allocation increase for schools this year. Instead the Senate and House plan for a one-time $175 million funded will likely prevail. The remaining point of contention, as usual, is the Permanent Fund Dividend. The House budget, now passed, has a $2,700 PFD and a $600 million deficit. The pending Senate budget has a $1,300 PFD and a small budget surplus. Otherwise the two operating budgets are basically similar. The PFD will be argued right to adjournement, Where things stand as 2023 session enters final weeks There’s now ample money – mainly federal – for construction of rural water and sanitation projects. But a new dilemma facing communities is how to pay ongoing operations and maintenance costs once facilities are built. Construction costs are covered, but the federal Safe Drinking Water Act has guide- lines the state must follow in approving water projects. Among other things these require assurance that operations will be paid for. This is a challenge. An example: A $47 million new water and sanita- tion system is planned in Wales, on the Seward Peninsula, that will require about $270,000 per year in operating costs. This works out to $330 a month per household (Wales has 42 homes). Neither the state nor federal governments, which are the source of the construction funding, have money to help pay for operations. Once the keys are turned over, this is on these small communities. Page 3Legislative Digest No. 16/2023 Bare-bones capital budget emerges in Senate Finance - Continued on page 5 The Senate Finance Committee released its proposed version of SB 41 last week, on April 25. In state funds it is one of the smallest capital budgets in years. Senate leaders said last week they will revisit the revenue situation in January. If things improve they will do an FY 2024 capital budget supplemen- tal appropriation. SB 41 makes a limited number of additions to the governor’s capital budget proposal from December and includes required state matches to capture as many federal dollars as possible. The bill now has $344 million in state Undesignated General Funds; $68,300 in Designated General Funds; $158,400 in other state funds and $2.132 billion in federal funds, mostly for infrastructure such as the traditional surface transportation and airport funding. Relatively minor changes were made to the gov- ernor’s proposal, including moving money for tourism marketing and legal expenses for “statehood defense,” or suing the federal government, to the operating budget, HB 39, which is also in the Senate committee. Deferred maintenance, matches for federal funds included Additions to the budget include more funding for grant writers to pursue federal Infrastructure Invest- ment and Jobs Act, or IIJA, competitive grants; food security, mainly in western Alaska salmon research; energy programs of the Alaska Energy Authority and Alaska Housing Finance Corp., and $9.5 million added for deferred maintenance of municipal ports and harbors and at the University of Alaska. The university capital budget adds, in deferred maintenance, include $17.5 million for upgrades of several buildings at the University of Alaska Anchorage; $7.1 million for repairs of community college build- ings that operate under the University of Alaska Fairbanks, and $3.5 million for roof replacements at the University of Alaska Southeast. Friday, April 28 is deadline for amendments in Senate Finance Committee Sen. Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel, Finance cochair for the capital budget, said the proposed FY 2024 capital budget is one of the smallest in years in terms of state funds. Hoffman set a deadline of Friday, April 28 for amendments, a signal that SB 41 may move from the committee soon. A recap of selected items the governor’s original SB 41: • Federal surface transportation (highways, bridges) $755.05 million • Airports, federal funding $462 million • State match for federal programs $726.75 million • Alaska Energy Authority, bulk fuel upgrades $13 million • Alaska Energy Authority, power house upgrades $32.5 million • Alaska Energy Authority, grid resilency $13.9 million • Critical minerals mapping, Department of Natural Resources $10.5 million • Alaska Gasline Development Corp. (AK LNG) $10 million* *AGDC must raise this from other sources Page 6Legislative Digest No. 16/2023 Legislators ponder course on coastal management initiative (Cont.)Continued from page 3 – Continued at top, page 7 . . . Rural . . . High utility payments for new water and sanitation. Can rural residents afford it? – Continued from top, page 1 Without something like a water and sewer version of Power Cost Equalization, which helps support rural residential electricity costs, local residents’ monthly water and sewer assessment will be very large. This came out in meetings last week in the House Community and Regional Affairs and Finance committees. Both committees were focused on the required assessments of local capacity for communities that they can support new projects. The state Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development, or DCCED, and the Department of Environmental Conservation, or DEC, do these. DCCED focuses on as- suring sufficient revenues and management while DEC focuses on technical aspects, mainly maintenance. Many communities complain that the assessments do not adequately measure local capability and need to be reworked. Bethel’s city manager said his community saw a 40-point drop in its score despite operations of the local utility being done the same way. St. Paul, in the Pribilofs, had similar complaints. Communi- ties must attain a score of 60 out of 100 to be eligible for Village Safe Water project money but most small villages that do not have safe water and sanitation do not meet that score, legislators were told. Legislature’s solution? Rewrite how assessments are done The solution for legislators appears to be rewriting how the assessments are done. Last week the House Finance Committee introduced HB 178, which requires local needs to be given priority in the assessment. How “needs” will be defined is unclear. Also, it’s unknown whether this will pass muster with the federal government and its requirement that facilities be sustainable financially. DEC and DCCED are meanwhile initiating a major review of the assessment procedures that will be done in consultation with communities, the agencies told legislators. Results and recommended changes will be available later in the year. Idea of a PCE for rural water/wastewater is floated in House Rep. Andy Josephson, D-Anch., a member of the House Finance Committee, floated the idea of a PCE-type program for rural water and sanitation. PCE is a precedent, and it was noted that 40 percent of facility operations costs is typically energy. Federal support for rural telecommunications, which will be expanded with new broadband installation, was cited as another example of an existing program. There is authorization in both state and federal law for operations and maintenance support, DCCED and DEC told legislators, but there has never been funding. The federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which is funding a lot of the construction, cannot finance operations, however. Toksook Bay scores 100 on DEC’s assessment While legislators rush to redo the assessment, it’s noteworthy that some small rural villages score a 100. Toksook Bay, on Nelson Island, did that in the spring assessment. The community has consistently scored above 70 since 2018, often with a score above 90. However, there have also been scores in the mid-to-low 60s “Achieving a score of 100 is no small feat,” said Randy Bates, director of DEC’s water division. “The high bar in each category...really does reflect a community that is functioning at an incredibly high level. During the spring 2023 scoring, 10 rural communities scored 90 or greater,” he said. 5/4/23, 1:19 PM Alaska Senate, following House, passes measure to extend renewable energy program - Alaska Beacon https://alaskabeacon.com/briefs/alaska-senate-following-house-passes-measure-to-extend-renewable-energy-program/ ECONOMY & ENVIRONMENT GOVERNMENT & POLITICS ALASKA IN BRIEF Alaska Senate, following House, passes measure to extend renewable energy program BY: JAMES BROOKS - APRIL 29, 2023 4:00 AM Sen. James Kaufman, R-Anchorage, speaks Friday, April 28, 2023, on the oor of the Alaska Senate. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon) A program that has distributed almost $300 million to renewable energy projects in Alaska since 2008 would be made permanent under legislation that passed the state Senate without dissent on Friday. House Bill 62, as passed by the Senate on an 18-0 vote, would remove the expiration date for the state’s renewable energy grant fund. That fund, 5/4/23, 1:19 PM Alaska Senate, following House, passes measure to extend renewable energy program - Alaska Beacon https://alaskabeacon.com/briefs/alaska-senate-following-house-passes-measure-to-extend-renewable-energy-program/ operated by the Alaska Energy Authority, pays for preliminary work on renewable energy projects across the state, mostly in rural Alaska. The fund is stocked with money occasionally appropriated by the Legislature, which created it in 2008 with an initial $50 million. Last year, lawmakers added $15 million to the fund, the largest deposit since 2013. That was enough to cover the grants requested by 27 projects spread across the state. Projects are selected annually on a competitive basis by a board selected by legislators and the governor. Sen. James Kaufman, R-Anchorage, promoted the bill on the Senate oor and said its passage “ensures a successful program will continue.” The House passed HB 62 on March 20 by a 35-1 vote, with Rep. David Eastman, R-Wasilla, the lone dissenter. That version of the bill would extend the fund for 10 years. The Senate’s changes mean the new version of the bill will return to the House for rati cation or rejection. If approved by the House, it must receive the assent of Gov. Mike Dunleavy before becoming law. GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX SUBSCRIBE REPUBLISH Our stories may be republished online or in print under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. We ask that you edit only for style or to shorten, provide proper attribution and link to our web site. Please see our republishing guidelines for use of photos and graphics. 5/4/23, 2:15 PM Deadline Reminder: Alaska NEVI RFAs due May 15, 2023 https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=d65aba0378 View this email in your browser Good afternoon Alaska EV Enthusiasts! We look forward to reviewing applications for Alaska's National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) EV Charging Sites! This is a friendly reminder that applications must be submitted to AEA by no later than 4 p.m. on Monday, May 15, 2023, either by email or physical delivery. 5/4/23, 2:15 PM Deadline Reminder: Alaska NEVI RFAs due May 15, 2023 https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=d65aba0378 This is Phase 1 of implementing Alaska’s EV Infrastructure Deployment Plan (The Plan). Utilizing NEVI formula funding, Phase 1 of The Plan focuses on building out EV charging infrastructure along Alaska’s Alternative Fuel Corridor (AFC), the 355-mile stretch of road that connects Fairbanks to Anchorage. NEVI program requirements state that charging sites be located every 50 miles along the AFC with four EV fast charging ports at each site. Alaska was granted an exception to the 50-mile requirement for the section of road between Denali State Park and Cantwell since there is no existing electric infrastructure there. The NEVI program is funded through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which was signed into law in November 2021. The NEVI program will invest $5 billion across the nation over the course of five years, with Alaska receiving over $52 million between 2022-2027. For more information about the NEVI RFA and to apply, click here. If you have questions or need assistance, please email grants@akenergyauthority.org. Thank you for your interest in the Alaska NEVI program! — AEA EV Team Facebook LinkedIn Website The Alaska Energy Authority’s Alaska Electric Vehicle (EV) Working Group involves collaborative stakeholders focused on promoting the use of EVs in Alaska by removing barriers to EV adoption and increasing access to charging infrastructure. Stay up to date on AEA's EV efforts at our website here. Copyright © 2023 Alaska Energy Authority, All rights reserved. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. Subscribe 5/4/23, 2:18 PM Fourth Alaska NEVI RFA Addendum Issued: Revised Response https://mailchi.mp/0a75ea96daf1/aea-submits-ev-infrastructure-plan-to-joint-office-13519979?e=[UNIQID] View this email in your browser Good afternoon Alaska EV Enthusiasts! The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) has posted a fourth addendum to the Alaska National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Program to our 5/4/23, 2:18 PM Fourth Alaska NEVI RFA Addendum Issued: Revised Response https://mailchi.mp/0a75ea96daf1/aea-submits-ev-infrastructure-plan-to-joint-office-13519979?e=[UNIQID] website here. This addendum contains a revised response to one of our RFA questions and can be viewed here. Applications must be submitted to AEA by no later than 4 p.m. on Monday, May 15, 2023, either by email or physical delivery. Thank you for your interest in the Alaska NEVI program! — AEA EV Team Facebook LinkedIn Website The Alaska Energy Authority’s Alaska Electric Vehicle (EV) Working Group involves collaborative stakeholders focused on promoting the use of EVs in Alaska by removing barriers to EV adoption and increasing access to charging infrastructure. Stay up to date on AEA's EV efforts at our website here. Copyright © 2023 Alaska Energy Authority, All rights reserved. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. 5/4/23, 1:25 PM In this issue: CFI Discretionary Grant Program, RFA Deadline Extended, and a Mat-Su Alaska NEVI Plan Workshop https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=7778f4e557 View this email in your browser Alaska Electric Vehicle Working Group Newsletter, April 13, 2023 CFI Discretionary Grant Program More money is about to become available for electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure projects! Applications are now being accepted for a chance to receive some of the $700 million that will be distributed during the first round of Charging and Fueling Infrastructure (CFI) Discretionary Grant Program funding. Over the next five years, this program will award $2.5 billion to build out alternative fueling infrastructure, such as EV chargers, across the country. This grant opportunity is distinct and separate from the ongoing National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) EV site host Request for Applications (RFA) that the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) has released. So if you weren’t eligible to apply 5/4/23, 1:25 PM In this issue: CFI Discretionary Grant Program, RFA Deadline Extended, and a Mat-Su Alaska NEVI Plan Workshop https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=7778f4e557 to the RFA, now might be your chance to capitalize on a different source of funding! Applications for the CFI Grant Program are due on grants.gov by 11:59 p.m. EST, Tuesday, May 30, 2023. Successful CFI Grant Program applications will address the program’s five project merit criteria: 1. safety, 2. climate change, resilience, and sustainability, 3. equity, community engagement, and Justice40 4. workforce development, job quality, and wealth creation, and 5. CFI program vision. Additionally, this funding will focus on building up infrastructure in rural areas of less than 5,000 people, low and moderate-income neighborhoods, and areas with a low ratio of private parking spaces to individual households (houses with no driveways or street parking) or a high ratio of multi-unit dwellings (apartments) to single-family homes. The program is broken down into two application tracts: (1) Community Charging and Fueling Grants (Community Program); and (2) Alternative Fuel Corridor Grants (Corridor Program). The Corridor Program focuses on building up infrastructure along designated Alternative Fuel Corridors (AFCs). Since there is only one designated AFC in Alaska, the stretch of Parks Highway from Fairbanks to Anchorage, most Alaskan project applications will likely fall outside of the AFC, and therefore be considered as part of the Community Program. Community Program Overview Eligible Community Program projects will help build alternative fueling infrastructure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Alternative fueling infrastructure includes EV chargers, hydrogen fueling, propane fueling, and natural gas fueling. These projects should aim to expand or fill gaps in existing infrastructure and must be publicly available and located in publicly accessible areas like public roads, schools, or public parking facilities. The minimum award amount for each project is $500,000 and applicants must contribute a 20% match. Eligible costs that can be covered using CFI funds include the acquisition and installation of infrastructure, construction and development of property, development activities such as planning and engineering, as well as community engagement activities. 5/4/23, 1:25 PM In this issue: CFI Discretionary Grant Program, RFA Deadline Extended, and a Mat-Su Alaska NEVI Plan Workshop https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=7778f4e557 Projects in the Community Program should address one of the four Community Program focus areas: Multi-modal hubs and shared-use fleets and services Urban/suburban area charging and fueling solutions Rural area charging and fueling solutions Fleet vehicles that serve and operate in communities Who is eligible to apply to the CFI program? Private entities are not eligible to apply on their own, however, through partnerships, they can support the application of an eligible applicant, which include: States or political subdivisions of states Metropolitan planning organizations Unit of local governments Special purpose districts or public authorities with a transportation function, including port authorities Indian tribes (this includes Alaska Native Corporations) U.S. Territories Authorities, agencies, or instrumentalities of, or entities owned by one or more of these entities Groups of these entities If you are unsure if your organization is an eligible applicant, please reach out to us at electricvehicles@akenergyauthority.org and we will help you determine your eligibility. Are you interested in applying but know you are not eligible? Contact us and we will see if we can get you connected with a partner. How do the final minimum standards and requirements apply to these projects? If you remember from our March newsletter, the Joint Office published the final rulemaking that detailed the standards EV infrastructure installed with federal dollars must meet. Since the CFI program is administering federal funds, all EV charging stations installed through the program must adhere to these rules. There are different requirements for EV charging stations built along AFCs compared to those built outside AFCs, so it will be important to read the rules closely if you are applying! For example, each charging station must have four ports no matter where it is located; however, stations along the AFC are required to have at least four Direct Current Fast Charger (DCFC) ports, whereas stations outside the AFC, for example, areas receiving funds through the Community Program, can have a combination of DCFC and alternating 5/4/23, 1:25 PM In this issue: CFI Discretionary Grant Program, RFA Deadline Extended, and a Mat-Su Alaska NEVI Plan Workshop https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=7778f4e557 current (AC) level 2 ports. Opportunities for Support and Partnership On Monday, April 3, 2023, AEA hosted a technical session discussing the CFI Grant Program. You can watch a recording of the session here using passcode 5.=ftZNm. In this technical session, some participants stated they would be willing to assist interested applicants. The Alaska Electric Vehicle Association said they could help with site visits. At the University of Alaska Fairbanks, Michelle Wilbur with the Alaska Center for Energy & Power (ACEP) said that ACEP is conducting research on barriers and needs that communities face, and they would be happy to collaborate with anyone whose proposed project ties into a related topic. AEA, the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, the Alaska Municipal League (AML), and Launch Alaska recently gathered to discuss an application concept to submit a statewide application for rural community charging. AML will soon release a call for expression of interest to see if communities around the state might be interested in participating in a project like this — stay tuned! Application Resources DOT Transportation Disadvantaged Census Tracts Tool EV Charging Justice40 Map (Argonne National Laboratory) Federal Highway Administration CFI Discretionary Grant Program Webinar Presentation Electrification Coalition - CFI Application Toolkit 5/4/23, 1:25 PM In this issue: CFI Discretionary Grant Program, RFA Deadline Extended, and a Mat-Su Alaska NEVI Plan Workshop https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=7778f4e557 RFA Deadline Extended We recently posted a third addendum to the Alaska National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program Request for Applications (RFA) to our website here. Deadline extension: The addendum provides notification that the application period for RFA 23091 has been extended. Q&A: The addendum also provides AEA responses to modification requests and questions that were received from prospective applicants. Addendeum 3: View the addendum here. Applications must be submitted to AEA by no later than 4 p.m. on Monday, May 15, 2023, either by email or physical delivery. 5/4/23, 1:25 PM In this issue: CFI Discretionary Grant Program, RFA Deadline Extended, and a Mat-Su Alaska NEVI Plan Workshop https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=7778f4e557 Alaska NEVI Plan Workshop in Mat-Su AEA will host an Alaska National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Plan Workshop on Monday, April 17, 2023, from 11:30 a.m.-1 p.m. This is a hybrid meeting. You can attend in person at the Wasilla Museum located at 391 N Main St., Wasilla AK, 99654, or participate virtually using the link below. RSVP: To ensure an accurate headcount for lunch, please RSVP by Thursday, April 13, 2023, to electricvehicles@akenergyauthority.org by indicating whether you will be attending "in person" or "virtually." Remote Access: To attend remotely, please use the virtual instructions below. Join on Zoom by clicking this link 5/4/23, 1:25 PM In this issue: CFI Discretionary Grant Program, RFA Deadline Extended, and a Mat-Su Alaska NEVI Plan Workshop https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=7778f4e557 Meeting ID: 856 0445 4272 Passcode: 331917 833 548 0276 US Toll-free 833 548 0282 US Toll-free 877 853 5257 US Toll-free 888 475 4499 US Toll-free Facebook LinkedIn Website The Alaska Energy Authority’s Alaska Electric Vehicle Working Group involves collaborative stakeholders focused on promoting the use of electric vehicles (EVs) in Alaska by removing barriers to EV adoption and increasing access to charging infrastructure. Stay up to date on AEA's EV efforts at our website here. Copyright © 2023 Alaska Energy Authority, All rights reserved. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. Alaska Economic Report No. 6/2023 Page 2 Page 2 Energy: AEA sets Dixon Diversion plan Health care: Insurer at odds with physicians The Alaska Energy Authority has settled on its preferred option for its Dixon Diversion project, which would add capacity to the Bradley Lake hydro project near Homer. The authority will pur- sue a diversion of water from the Dixon glacier into the southwestern part of Bradley Lake rather than diverting water to the Martin River, which would involve construction of a new power house. An amendment to the Bradley Lake FERC license is expected to be completed in 2026. AEA’s latest esti- mate for the Dixon Glacier-Bradley Lake alternative is $390 million to $490 million depending on op- tions in raising the Bradley Lake dam. The authority is working on optimizations to reduce costs. The addition of Dixon Diversion to Bradley Lake could add 120,000 to 200,000 megawatt hours to Bradley Lake’s existing power output of about 400,000 megawatt hours. The potential will be understood better after additional data is gathered this year. The hydro power can vary by 25 percent depending on annual snow and rain, AEA told us. *** Westinghouse microreactor Westinghouse plans to have its new micoreac- tor fully licensed and ready for commercial use in Alaska by 2027. The company is securing approvals from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in a phased approach and has had no pushback from the NRC on its submissions so far. Talks are underway with potential Alaska customers. The company is also finalizing plans for its energy storage system which can be linked to renewable energy projects like wind, and which relies on ceramic materials to store heat. *** The Alaska Medical Association is at odds with the state’s largest health insurer, Premera Blue Cross, over the state’s 80th-percentile rule that requires insurers to pay medical costs at that lev- el. Premera says the rule drives up costs and cites a 1980 economic study. The medical association says the rule is an important consumer protection tool protecting against insurers’n underpayment of claims, its original justification. The study cited by Premera is now outdated, the association said. *** Transportation: Air cargo growth in Anchorage Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport, or ANC surpassed Shanghai Pudong Airport (PVG) to claim the slot for third busiest airport in the world for cargo. In 2022, 3,461,603 metric tons of cargo transited ANC. The rankings of airports are con- ducted by the Airport Council International World. *** Economy: Private jobs up 3.2 percent Private sector jobs were up 3.2 percent in Feb- ruary over February 2022, although flat state and federal employment kept the overall increase at 2.5 percent, according to state data. Oil, gas and transportation led the job-growth with petroleum up 4.3 percent and transportation, warehousing and utilities up 11.5 percent. Much of this is in air cargo. Professional and business service jobs, an import- ant indicator that includes engineering, was up 2.7 percent. Construction grew 2.2 percent. Leisure and hospitality, which reflects disposable income, was up 7.2 percent. *** 5/4/23, 1:12 PM State agency recommends funding for 27 renewable-energy projects | KUAC https://fm.kuac.org/energy-and-environment/2023-04-12/state-agency-recommends-funding-for-27-renewable-energy-projects State agency recommends funding for 27 renewable-energy projects KUAC | By Tim Ellis Published April 12, 2023 at 3:11 PM AKDT LISTEN • 3:53 Science Channel / The 12 turbines at Golden Valley Electric Association's Eva Creek wind farm can produce up to 25 megawatts of electricity. It's currently the state's biggest wind farm, but larger facilities have been proposed, like a 100-megawatt capacity project that Golden Valley is studying. Alaska Energy Authority, advisory committee review projects for grants through state Renewable Energy Fund The Alaska Energy Authority has recommended that the state provide more than $25 million to help develop 27 proposed renewable-energy projects around the state. They include a Golden Valley Electric Association request for funding for meteorological studies around Murphy Dome, where a developer is considering building a large-scale wind farm. Donate The Daily KUAC 5/4/23, 1:12 PM State agency recommends funding for 27 renewable-energy projects | KUAC https://fm.kuac.org/energy-and-environment/2023-04-12/state-agency-recommends-funding-for-27-renewable-energy-projects Chena Hot Springs Resort / Several geothermal-energy projects were proposed during this round of Renewable Energy Fund grant requests. The projects would employ systems similar to this one, which heats the Chena Hot Springs Resort with the same source of energy that warms pools of water that visitors to the resort enjoy. Alaska Energy Authority o cials announced Monday that they’ve completed a months- long evaluation of the 27 projects that propose to harness wind, solar, hydro or geothermal energy to generate electricity for communities along the Railbelt and elsewhere around the state. “We look at the long-term economics of the project,” says AEA Executive Director Curtis Thayer. “We look at the technical viability of the project. The technology being used …” Thayer says the agency’s experts also considered the location of the proposed projects and various studies that’ve been conducted on them so far. “So it goes through a pretty rigorous testing, to determine what is a viable project,” he said in an interview Tuesday. Thayer says they submitted their ndings to an advisory committee that oversees the state’s Renewable Energy Fund, or REF. And a nine-member advisory committee unanimously recommended that the Legislature appropriate a total of $25,250,000. The Daily KUAC 5/4/23, 1:12 PM State agency recommends funding for 27 renewable-energy projects | KUAC https://fm.kuac.org/energy-and-environment/2023-04-12/state-agency-recommends-funding-for-27-renewable-energy-projects KEA /Kotzebue Electric Association Kotzebue Electric Association's renewable-energy power plant includes a solar-panel array that generates a little over a half- megawatt, and two wind turbines that generate about 2 megawatts. “And then the Legislature, at the end of the day, makes the ultimate choice and decided to fund or not fund,” he said. The 27 projects, proposed by utilities, communities, tribal organizations and other entities, were part of the 15th round of REF funding conducted since state lawmakers established the program in 2008. One of the projects the Legislature approved last year was a request by Golden Valley Electric Association for a $900,000 grant to erect three 200-foot towers in the Shovel Creek area west of Fairbanks, with instrumentation that would monitor the area’s winds. “So the data that is collected will be used to assess a potential location for a future large-scale wind farm,” says Meadow Bailey, Golden Valley’s spokesperson. Bailey says the studies will help the co-op decide whether to support the project, which would be by far the state’s biggest wind farm. “We’re looking at approximately 100 megawatts,” she said. “That would be able to produce enough renewable energy to be used throughout the Railbelt.” The Daily KUAC 5/4/23, 1:12 PM State agency recommends funding for 27 renewable-energy projects | KUAC https://fm.kuac.org/energy-and-environment/2023-04-12/state-agency-recommends-funding-for-27-renewable-energy-projects Ian Dickson/KTOO / The Bradley Lake hydroelectric project is the state's largest hydro project, and it generates up to 20 megawatts. Golden Valley is a part-owner of the facility and can use up to 15 megawatts of its output. But Bailey says more data is needed before the utility’s board would decide whether to give the developer the go-ahead on the project. That’s why the co-op asked the Alaska Energy Authority for an additional $250,000 grant this year to equip the towers with a LIDAR system that uses lasers to precisely measure the wind regime. “So this’ll really be used to supplement and improve the accuracy of the data that’s being collected over multiple years,” she said in an interview Tuesday. The 100-megawatt wind farm was proposed by Fairbanks-based Alaska Renewables -- which has requested its own $2 million grant from AEA this year to study utility-scale wind projects. And Palmer-based Matanuska Electric Association has asked for $1.8 million grant for a Railbelt wind-feasibility study to add to its portfolio of renewables that includes the state’s biggest solar farms. The Daily KUAC 5/4/23, 1:12 PM State agency recommends funding for 27 renewable-energy projects | KUAC https://fm.kuac.org/energy-and-environment/2023-04-12/state-agency-recommends-funding-for-27-renewable-energy-projects Tethys Engineering/PNNL / This round of REF projects in Alaska includes a proposed tidal-energy project for the Turnagain Arm. Verdant Power, a U.S. tidal energy developer, generates electricity using turbines like this submerged in the East River of New York City. Thayer says there’s even more interest in this round of recommendations in solar and hydro energy. “Now we have two solar projects in the Valley that are successful, and some of the communities in rural Alaska are looking at it,” he said. “And then, there’s just a lot of opportunity for hydro-- and hydro, at the end of the day, is the cheapest power.” The advisory committee recommended several hydro projects for Renewable Energy Funding, including one from Juneau-based Inside Passage Electric Cooperative, which seeks this round’s largest grant of $3.5 million. Other utilities have asked for grants to fund studies of hydro projects near Seward and at Chignik and Adak. Two others are seeking grants for geothermal projects along Cook Inlet. And another would be used to study a project that would generate power with tidal waves in Turnagain Arm. “Now, if the Legislature was to come back and say, ‘OK, we’re not going to give you the 25-point- ve,’ ” Thayer said. “ ‘We’re going to give you 20 million or 15 million.’ Then obviously, we’re going to back those project costs down.” The Daily KUAC 5/4/23, 1:12 PM State agency recommends funding for 27 renewable-energy projects | KUAC https://fm.kuac.org/energy-and-environment/2023-04-12/state-agency-recommends-funding-for-27-renewable-energy-projects © 2023 UA is an AA/EO employer and educational institution and prohibits illegal discrimination against any individual. Thayer says the grants are intended to supplement project funding, for studies or to qualify for a state or federal match. He says whatever amount the Legislature decides to appropriate will become available soon after the new scal year begins on July 1st. Energy and Environment Tim Ellis Tim Ellis has been working as a KUAC reporter/producer since 2010. He has more than 30 years experience in broadcast, print and online journalism. See stories by Tim Ellis The Daily KUAC 813 W Northern Lights Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503 Phone: (907) 771-3000 Fax: (907) 771-3044 Email: info@akenergyauthority.org REDUCING THE COST OF ENERGY IN ALASKA AKENERGYAUTHORITY.ORG RGYAUTHORITY.ORG PRESS RELEASE Brandy M. Dixon Communications Director (907) 771-3078 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 10, 2023 AEA Announces Renewable Energy Fund Round 15 Recommendations (Anchorage) — The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) has completed its evaluation period for Round 15 of the Renewable Energy Fund (REF). On April 5, 2023, AEA presented 27 project recommendations to the Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC), as required by statute. At the conclusion of its meeting, the REFAC unanimously approved all projects, which have been advanced to the Alaska State Legislature for Fiscal Year 2024 funding consideration, at a total capital request of $25.25 million. Round 15 marks the third year in a row that Governor Mike Dunleavy has supported and proposed funding the REF program. Approval and appropriation of REF funds, by statute, for any and all REF projects as recommended by AEA, is at the discretion of the Legislature. The REF is a competitive grant program that was established by the Alaska State Legislature in 2008. Since its inception, the REF has invested nearly $300 million, and leveraged an additional $250 million in local matching funds, to finance 271 renewable energy projects across Alaska. To date, 271 REF grants have been awarded, with over 100 operating projects constructed with REF contributions. As the program has matured, the quality of the proposed projects has improved, and the knowledge base for designing, constructing and operating renewable energy projects in Alaska’s diverse climates and terrain has advanced. The program remains unique in its ability to fund projects across all development phases, serving as a catalyst for the continued pursuit of integrating proven technologies, and implementing those nascent, within Alaska’s energy portfolio. The REF is administered by AEA and guided by the REFAC, which provides valuable input and policy direction on the application and evaluation process, as well as final funding recommendations for submission to the Legislature. Nine members make up the REFAC, five of whom are appointed by the Governor and four by the Legislature. The Alaska Energy Authority is a public corporation of the state. Its mission is to reduce the cost of energy in Alaska. ### Applicant Project Title Recommended Funding Amount TDX Adak Generating, LLC Hydroelectric Power Adak - Feasibility and Conceptual Design $ 497,650 Golden Valley Electric Association LIDAR Improvement to Interior Wind Energy Assessments $ 250,000 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. (AEEC) Mount Spurr Geothermal $ 45,500 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. (AEEC) Augustine Island Geothermal $ 68,000 Naknek Electirc Association Inc Naknek Electric Battery Energy Storage System $ 2,172,984 Native Village of Kluti-Kaah Woodchip Heating Project $ 500,000 Kipnuk Light Plant Kipnuk Battery Installation, Integration and Commissioning $ 434,000 Inside Passage Electric Cooperative Water Supply Creek Hydro Construction $ 3,538,526 Cook Inlet Region Inc (CIRI) Energy, LLC Beluga Renewable Resource Assessment $ 298,000 Naterkaq Light Plant Chefornak Battery Installation, Integration, and Commissioning $ 437,000 Cook Inlet Region Inc (CIRI) Energy, LLC Healy Renewable Resource Assessment $ 298,000 Alaska Electric & Energy Cooperative, Inc. (AEEC) Cook Inlet Oil Platform Wind Project $ 214,400 Tanana Chiefs Conference Huslia Community-Scale Solar PV and Battery Project $ 2,082,000 Matanuska Electric Association Railbelt Wind Feasbility Study and Conceptual Design $ 1,833,333 Northwest Arctic Borough Selawik Solar PV $ 1,134,500 Yakutat Community Health Center Yakutat Community Health Center Heat Recovery Project $ 1,000,000 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative Kalskag Wind Feasibility and Conceptual Design $ 267,300 Alaska Renewables LLC Utility-Scale Railbelt Wind – Alaska Renewables $ 2,000,000 Alaska Village Electric Cooperative New Stuyahok Solar Energy and Battery Storage Project $ 2,520,000 City of Chignik Chignik Hydroelectric Power System $ 802,394 Atmautluak Tribal Utilities Atmautluak Battery and Thermal Stove Installation, Integration and Commissioning $ 577,000 Chugach Electric Association Godwin Creek Hydroelectric Project $ 1,729,000 Turnagain Arm Tidal Energy Corp Turnagain Arm Tidal Electricity Generation Project (TATEG) $ 400,000 Tuntutuliak Community Services Association Tuntutuliak Community Services Association Solar Energy Project $ 1,197,768 City of Unalaska City of Unalaska Wind Power Design/Construction $ 420,000 City of Napaskiak Napaskiak Reconnaissance and Wind Assessment Project $ 337,500 Levelock Village Council Levelock Feasibility and Conceptual Design $ 197,000 TOTAL $ 25,251,855 Alaska Energy Authority - Renewable Energy Fund - Round 15 - Recommended Projects to the Legislature* *If approved by the Legislature, this funding would become effective July 1, 2023 for inclusion in the Fiscal Year 2024 budget. 5/4/23, 1:07 PM EVs face many barriers in Alaska, but experts say the time to act is now - Alaska Beacon https://alaskabeacon.com/2023/04/08/evs-face-many-barriers-in-alaska-but-experts-say-the-time-to-act-is-now/ ECONOMY & ENVIRONMENT EVs face many barriers in Alaska, but experts say the time to act is now Lack of charging stations, gaps in electric grid must be overcome to ease use BY: SOPHIA CARLISLE - APRIL 8, 2023 5:59 AM An electric vehicle charges during the Arctic Road Rally. Temporary charging stations like this one helped EVs travel the Dalton Highway last year. (Photo courtesy of Tim Leach) 5/4/23, 1:07 PM EVs face many barriers in Alaska, but experts say the time to act is now - Alaska Beacon https://alaskabeacon.com/2023/04/08/evs-face-many-barriers-in-alaska-but-experts-say-the-time-to-act-is-now/ As the electric vehicle market is booming nationally, Alaska is struggling to keep up. The lack of infrastructure to charge vehicle batteries is one of the biggest barriers to creating a long- lasting and e ective system for EVs to run in the state, according to those working to expand their use. However, with the remoteness of much of Alaska and the state’s many separate power grids, creating charging infrastructure for electric vehicles has proven to be di cult. Most EV owners charge their vehicles at home. They can do this in many ways, but one of the more popular methods is to plug their car into the same port that washing machines or electric stoves will typically use. This type of charging is known as Level 2 charging and it can be done inside or outside of the home. But it is commonly used within personal residences because of the time it takes. When powering an EV through Level 2 charging, the vehicle will usually need to be plugged in overnight, because of the low levels of power that Level 2 charging provides. This type of charging is great when an EV owner knows they will be close to home. But when an electric vehicle travels farther away, the need for faster, more e cient charging arises. This type of charging is known as Level 3 charging, or direct current fast-charging. Because of the use of direct current power, fast-charging can power up an electric vehicle faster than other types of charging can, which makes it an e cient way to charge a vehicle that won’t have access to a home charging point. Fast-charging stations are essential to broadening EV use in America because they allow electric vehicles to go farther distances, according to experts. And while there are over 50,000 fast-charging stations in the United States, only a handful are in Alaska. What fast-charging stations do exist are most often concentrated in city hubs like Juneau and Anchorage. Charging Problems in Alaska This becomes a problem when residents need to travel through much of Alaska — such as between Anchorage and Fairbanks. The highway between the two cities does not currently have enough fast-charging stations along its designated Alternative Fuel Corridor. It needs to have a fast-charging station every 50 miles, among other requirements, to be a true AFC, according to the Alaska Energy Authority, a public corporation that’s been charged by the state with a mission of reducing the cost of energy. A priority of the authority is to build out the designated alternative fuel corridor in Alaska so that charging stations are more frequent. “One of the challenges we have in Alaska is the distance between communities,” said Curtis Thayer, who is the executive director of the Alaska Energy Authority, a public corporation whose mission is to reduce the cost of energy. “Our holes within the grid are di erent.” Some of these holes are found in the vastness of Alaska’s power system, which is often unreliable in some places. Many rural communities in the state are not connected to the larger power grids. Between areas of connection to the grid and towns that are powered independently of it are dead spots of no power. 5/4/23, 1:07 PM EVs face many barriers in Alaska, but experts say the time to act is now - Alaska Beacon https://alaskabeacon.com/2023/04/08/evs-face-many-barriers-in-alaska-but-experts-say-the-time-to-act-is-now/ And if there is no power, there can be no charging stations. This is a problem for EV owners who want to drive their vehicles throughout Alaska, said Sara Hall, who is the co-founder of ReCharge Alaska alongside her husband, Kris. The Halls founded ReCharge Alaska in 2020 as a response to the lack of public infrastructure for electric vehicles. The company installs fast-charging stations across the state to help increase access to fast-charging. The Halls received nancial assistance from the Golden Valley Energy Association to install their rst EV charging installation, in Cantwell. Now, the company has stations across the state, including in smaller cities like Delta Junction and Glennallen. However, the installation process hasn’t been easy, especially when it comes to nding a place to put the charging stations. “Honestly nding site hosts has been one of the larger challenges for us,” Hall said. She noted that in addition to nding places to install chargers where there was enough power, many potential site hosts were hesitant about electric vehicles in general. “It’s too early,” she continued. “You know, we’re really early adopters, and I think there are a lot of people who are like, ‘Well, I’m not super opposed to electric vehicles, but I’m going to wait and see.’” The couple has been interested in EVs for years now. Kris Hall was curious about the vehicle’s potential for e ciency. And when there were little to no options in Alaska for fast-charging, he decided to do it himself. Because, as he put it, “I’m tired of waiting.” 5/4/23, 1:07 PM EVs face many barriers in Alaska, but experts say the time to act is now - Alaska Beacon https://alaskabeacon.com/2023/04/08/evs-face-many-barriers-in-alaska-but-experts-say-the-time-to-act-is-now/ A charging port for an electric vehicle when not in use. Not all EVs use the same type of charging port, and adapters are often used when charging. (Photo by Sophia Carlisle/Alaska Beacon) But making better EV infrastructure a reality has been di cult for the pair. The company has experienced issues with regulations in installing its charging facilities, in addition to the problem of nding site hosts and reliable spots of power. One of the issues they experienced was how they would charge for the power that people used to charge their EVs. In some of their sites, the Halls can charge customers by the kilowatt hour. In other locations, like their Glenallen location, they must charge by the minute. This charging structure is determined by the electric companies that supply the power to the Halls’ charging stations. Sara Hall said that charging by the minute led to people paying more for power in the winter when their batteries would take longer to charge. This stood in stark contrast to charging during the summer when prices would be lower despite customers needing the same amount of power to charge their vehicles. State and Federal Involvement The issue of charging for power came to the attention of the Regulatory Commission of Alaska in part due to a petition led by the Alaska Electric Vehicle Association, a nonpro t 5/4/23, 1:07 PM EVs face many barriers in Alaska, but experts say the time to act is now - Alaska Beacon https://alaskabeacon.com/2023/04/08/evs-face-many-barriers-in-alaska-but-experts-say-the-time-to-act-is-now/ that promotes EV use. AKEVA sought to ease the burden of the cost of power that came with charging an electric vehicle outside of the home, as well as easing the cost of operating charging stations. The petition eventually led to a formal order by the RCA in 2021 aimed at accomplishing both goals: creating regulations that make EV charging stations cheaper to use and operate. AKEVA is still working to promote increased EV charging infrastructure throughout Alaska, according to its executive director, Dimitri Shein. They also work to connect people (and particularly potential site hosts) with the Alaska Energy Authority, so that more individuals might apply for a federally funded grant. The National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure, or NEVI, grant program will provide $52 million over ve years to Alaska so the state can build out its fast-charging station network. Individuals and organizations can apply to receive a portion of the funding through the Alaska Energy Authority. Charging stations funded by NEVI will help Alaska see an increase in fast-charging stations soon. However, even with millions of dollars backing the project, there are still considerable problems with getting EV infrastructure up to where the state wants it to be. “I think the biggest challenge we have is the availability of the power for these large charging stations,” said Thayer. He discussed the availability of power as it related to smaller, more rural communities within the state that are not connected to the main power grid. There is concern that these smaller, more localized communities will struggle to meet the demand of charging electric vehicles in the future, he said. Because no matter how much money is designated for the improvement of infrastructure, it can’t happen without access to power. Looking ahead: the future of EVs in Alaska Tim Leach has rsthand experience with dealing with charging an EV in places without electrical infrastructure and established fast-charging stations. Leach is the transportation lead for Launch Alaska, a nonpro t working to decarbonize the state in areas like transportation. The organization, along with AKEVA and support from various other organizations including the U.S. Department of Energy’s O ce of Technology Transitions, held an Arctic Road Rally last year. The event aimed to increase electric vehicle awareness, and the problems that may arise with charging them, by having a eet of EVs drive the Dalton Highway between Fairbanks and Oliktok Point. Driving through many areas of the state that lack electrical infrastructure required innovative solutions. Leach said that temporary charging stations were installed along areas of the route that lacked existing electrical infrastructure. He highlighted the help of a few of the event’s sponsors — including ConocoPhillips — in setting up the temporary charging stations. He said that some of these charging stations used to power the eet of EVs that participated in the rally were mobile, which he thinks could be a potential solution for creating charging stations in places where robust electrical infrastructure is not present. 5/4/23, 1:07 PM EVs face many barriers in Alaska, but experts say the time to act is now - Alaska Beacon https://alaskabeacon.com/2023/04/08/evs-face-many-barriers-in-alaska-but-experts-say-the-time-to-act-is-now/ “[T]hat’s where some of these more mobile or movable solutions for EV charging can come into play,” he said. “Those can be fueled by di erent types of inputs and that could be natural gas as an input fuel. And you could do that with, you know, some combination of renewable energy resources.” This raises the question of the environmental impact of EVs that are powered by electricity generated from fossil fuels. The Environmental Protection Agency states that electric vehicles will likely have lower emissions than combustion engine cars even if the electricity that powers them comes from fossil fuels. However, Leach pointed out that if the generation of electricity comes from fuel sources like diesel, emissions might actually be greater. Despite the complexity of determining the environmental impact, Leach is still very much on the side of electric vehicles and the charging infrastructure they require. “EV infrastructure is critical or will be critical for us all as we’re considering whether to purchase an electric vehicle or a traditional internal combustion engine vehicle,” he said. This decision creates an added layer of complexity, one that Audrey Alstrom recognizes as well. “What comes rst, the chicken or the egg?” she said. Alstrom, who is the director of renewable energy and energy e ciency programs with the Alaska Energy Authority drew attention to the small number of electric vehicles in the state. “There’s not a whole lot of electric vehicles on the roads right now within Alaska,” she said. There are only about 2,500 registered electric vehicles in Alaska. While the demand is likely to continue rising, Alstrom said that the lack of strong demand is still an issue. “Do you put in these big EV charging stations before we have a whole lot of electric vehicles, or do you wait for the electric vehicles?” she said. This question, compounded with issues of cost, remoteness and lack of power spell a complicated future for Alaska’s electric vehicle infrastructure. But despite the concerns, the answer seems clear to people like Thayer. “If not now, when?” GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX SUBSCRIBE 5/4/23, 2:51 PM After 11 day outage, Diomede’s power is restored | The Nome Nugget www.nomenugget.net/news/after-11-day-outage-diomede’s-power-restored LOGIN ABOUT US CONTACT US PAYMENT CENTER MAY 04, 2023 SEARCHSEARCH CalendarCalendar e-Editione-Edition Image GalleriesImage Galleries MultimediaMultimedia SubscriptionsSubscriptions SubmissionsSubmissions ArchivesArchives THU, 04/06/2023 - 9:17PM BY: MEGAN GANNON HOME / NEWS / AFTER 11 DAY OUTAGE, DIOMEDE’S POWER IS RESTORED After 11 Day Outage, Diomede’s Power Is Restored admin On March 20, the power went out in Diomede and wasn’t restored until the afternoon of March 31. For 11 days, the island’s 76 residents shared generators and made sure each other’s houses had enough heat amid below freezing temperatures. They baked bread in the school’s kitchen and found other ways to live on a limited supply of electricity. “It’s not the first time Diomede has experienced this kind of crisis,” the village’s tribal coordinator Frances Ozenna said last Thursday while the power was still down. “But we weren’t prepared for this because we just got upgraded last year with two new generators.” Little Diomede can only be reached by boat in summer or via helicopter service from Nome, if weather allows. Recent severe winter storms meant that Diomede’s former local powerhouse operator, Orville Ahkinga, was delayed in getting to the island for repairs. The heavy snow buried homes and entry ways in snowdrifts and created more shoveling work for residents on top of the outage. “We’re already struggling with keeping our houses warm and the children fed with the limits we have, and it’s really hard to go out to do your chores over mountains of snow—it’s just been difficult,” Ozenna said. Orville Ahkinga, formerly of Diomede, has the most expertise about Diomede’s power system but he now lives in Anchorage. He arrived with replacement parts via helicopter last Friday and promptly got one of the generators working again that afternoon. As of Monday, two of the generators were running. A third older generator, which had previously experienced a fire, is still undergoing maintenance. “I hope we look at long-term alternatives to keep us having a safe powerhouse,” Ozenna said. Of the 26 families affected by this outage, eight had portable generators, Ozenna said. Some were able to share those generators with others. Meanwhile, other households were able to get power from facilities in the village that have backup generators. Four families were hooked up to the school with a long extension cord, five were hooked to the clinic and five to the water treatment plant, Ozenna said. Another family had lost electrical service a few years ago due to a fire and now heats their home with kerosene. The school, which doubles as a shelter for emergencies, was allowing people to warm up and shower there. The school’s kitchen was also open for residents to use since large appliances could overload small generators. It’s a delicate balance to keep a household running with a small generator that might only be able to handle a certain wattage. Even just to use a percolator to make coffee, all other electronics might have to be unplugged. Without running water, residents of Diomede don’t have to worry about frozen pipes during a power outage, but they do have to worry about food spoilage. Ozenna said her refrigerator fared fine as she was turning her generator off for about half the day then plugging it back in. Another family emptied their freezer and stored their meat outside in the cold. Diomede’s mayor Robert Soolook said he has maintained a personal generator for emergencies since the ’90s. Every year he tries to emphasize the importance of having a generator in the village, he said, encouraging others to purchase one with their PFD or when they have enough money. “Everyone here is trying to work together to try to maintain life without power and try to get people to have enough heat into houses,” Soolook said last week. “When it comes to things like this, it’s time to help each other a lot, especially the Elders and the people who don’t have generators.” View This Week's Paper Online May 4, 2023 Visitor's Guide Nome Visitor Guide HOME NEWS SPORTS EDUCATION ARTS OPINION OBITUARIES AROUND THE SOUND CLASSIFIEDS 0 1 5/4/23, 2:51 PM After 11 day outage, Diomede’s power is restored | The Nome Nugget www.nomenugget.net/news/after-11-day-outage-diomede’s-power-restored Section: NEWS Soolook said the community has enough to eat and described how everyone recently got together for a meal to celebrate the first polar bear harvest of the year. During the crisis, the Native Village of Diomede had dispensed 529 gallons of motor gas valued at $3,200 for people to power up their generators, Ozenna said. The village store was able to reopen after they borrowed a generator from one of the residents, she added. But others were having a hard time working and missing deadlines. The tribal and municipal offices had to close. The lack of power added to the already difficult communications situation in Diomede. Telephone, cell and internet service was spotty due to thick ice coating the communication tower. Ozenna is one of eight residents who now has a Starlink satellite internet system set up in her home. They were able to keep that system running. The power grid is owned and operated by the City of Diomede. Soolook said the municipality had previously tried to work with other utilities—such as Kotzebue Electric Association, Nome Joint Utility Systems and Alaska Village Electric Cooperative—to help maintain their power plant. “A lot of companies said no,” Soolook said. “My belief is it’s too hard to maintain and too hard to get out here due to the remoteness. My suggestion is really to get the best things out here so they don’t always have to be maintained from the outside all the time.” But even making decisions as a municipality is difficult in Diomede right now. Besides Soolook, there are just two other sitting members of the seven-seat city council. They need four council members to make a quorum and conduct regular municipal business. With more chores to do but also more time with family, Ozenna said the power outage reminded her of the old days on Diomede. “It seems like a lot of manual activity is happening,” she said. Before an electric grid was introduced to the island, her parents used a seal oil lamp to heat their sod home. “We didn’t have these kinds of problems,” she said. “The sod houses that were in use were more prepared for better shelter.” People were growing weary of the situation, Ozenna said, but also aware that negativity could be damaging in such a situation in a small community. “Being hard on each other is not going to fix anything,” Ozenna said. “For me, I’ve learned that when we become dependent or codependent [on things like electricity], it changes how we respond or react or even how we can appreciate what we have.” People in Diomede are used to relying on themselves. When reached on Thursday, a representative from Alaska’s State Emergency Operations Center said the office was not involved in any official response and had not received any official request for help. And because Diomede’s powerhouse is a city-owned utility, there is not much an organization like Alaska Energy Authority can do immediately.Alaska Energy “I wish that we were in a position, where the minute there’s a problem, to run out there and fix it,” said Curtis Thayer, the executive director of Alaska Energy Authority. “But we have a lot of communities that are that are in similarAlaska Energy situations. It’s up to the utility to determine what went wrong, and then we if we can support them in getting back operational on what maintenance needs to be done, we do that.” The tribal nonprofit Kawerak also doesn’t have the capacity to help a community like Diomede with its power grid, though it could act as a liaison to help relay information to the state, said Kevin Knowlton, Kawerak’s emergency preparedness specialist. “But when we’re completely left out of the loop, we can’t help with doing that,” Knowlton said. “And it leaves it up to the small staffs at the city level or the tribal level to coordinate all that. Our communities are so resilient with responding to what most people would consider a small disaster, and they’ve been doing it for so long.” For Knowlton, the destruction caused by ex-typhoon Merbok demonstrated that Kawerak needs to be more involved with helping the communities in the region. He said Kawerak is working on establishing legal agreements with the different communities that would allow the organization to assist with emergency management and emergency preparedness. 33.8 °F Snow Showers WSW Wind 4.6mph 21 31 FRI 19 34 SAT 20 32 SUN 23 34 MON 22 °F 32 °F 2:49 PM Thu May 4 WillyWeather Nome, AK Weather Wind Sun 5/4/23, 2:27 PM AEA to hold Alaska NEVI Workshop in Mat-Su Valley on April 17 https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=945be0c9f2 View this email in your browser The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) invites EV Stakeholders in the Mat-Su Valley to join us for an Alaska National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Workshop on Monday, April 17, 2023, 11:30 a.m.-1 p.m. 5/4/23, 2:27 PM AEA to hold Alaska NEVI Workshop in Mat-Su Valley on April 17 https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=945be0c9f2 Over the next five years, the NEVI program will provide nearly $5 billion to help states create a network of electric vehicle (EV) charging stations along designated Alternative Fuel Corridors throughout the country. Alaska will receive more than $52 million through this program. In 2022, Alaska's Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment Plan (The Plan) was developed by AEA and the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities with support from various stakeholders. The Plan details how the NEVI program funds Alaska receives will be administered. We are currently in the first phase of implementing The Plan and recently released a Request for Applications to solicit potential EV charging station site hosts. Join us at this workshop to learn more about The Plan and ask any questions you might have. Who: Mat-Su Valley EV Stakeholders What: Alaska NEVI Plan Workshop When: Monday, April 17, 2023, 11:30-1 p.m. (Lunch will be provided.) Where: Wasilla Museum, 391 N Main St., Wasilla AK, 99654 Why: Learn about Alaska’s NEVI Plan and share your thoughts! RSVP: To ensure an accurate headcount for lunch, please RSVP by Thursday, April 13, 2023, to electricvehicles@akenergyauthority.org by indicating whether you will be attending "in person" or "virtually." Remote Access: To attend remotely, please use the virtual instructions below. Join via Zoom by clicking this link or with the information below: Meeting ID: 856 0445 4272 Passcode: 331917 833 548 0276 US Toll-free 833 548 0282 US Toll-free 877 853 5257 US Toll-free 888 475 4499 US Toll-free Have a colleague who would be interested in this workshop? Please email their contact information to electricvehicles@akenergyauthority.org and we will send them a personalized invitation. 5/4/23, 2:31 PM Third Alaska NEVI RFA Addendum Issued: Deadline Extended https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=e7a617f099 View this email in your browser Good afternoon Alaska EV Enthusiasts! The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) has posted a third addendum to the Alaska National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Program to our website here. Deadline extension: The addendum provides notification that the application period for Request for Applications 23091 has been extended. 5/4/23, 2:31 PM Third Alaska NEVI RFA Addendum Issued: Deadline Extended https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=7bde743be4d525a5f52d948ed&id=e7a617f099 Q&A: The addendum also provides AEA responses to modification requests and questions that were received from prospective applicants. Addendum 3: You may view the addendum here. Applications must be submitted to AEA by no later than 4 p.m. on Monday, May 15, 2023, either by email or physical delivery. Thank you for your interest in the Alaska NEVI program! — AEA EV Team Facebook LinkedIn Website The Alaska Energy Authority’s Alaska Electric Vehicle (EV) Working Group involves collaborative stakeholders focused on promoting the use of EVs in Alaska by removing barriers to EV adoption and increasing access to charging infrastructure. Stay up to date on AEA's EV efforts at our website here. Copyright © 2023 Alaska Energy Authority, All rights reserved. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. State funding pursued for Unalaska geothermal project, Alaska https://www.thinkgeoenergy.com/state-funding-pursued-for-unalaska-geothermal-project-alaska/ State funding pursued for Unalaska geothermal project, Alaska Makushin project site, Unalaska/ Alaska, U.S. (source: Ounalashka Corp., Chena Power) Representatives from the Makushin geothermal project recently met with a delegation from the Alaska Energy Authority and the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority during a visit to Unalaska, Alaska. The agenda for the meeting was to provide updates on the project and gain support from the two public corporations that finance energy projects around the state. State funding pursued for Unalaska geothermal project, Alaska https://www.thinkgeoenergy.com/state-funding-pursued-for-unalaska-geothermal-project-alaska/ The Makushin geothermal project in Unalaska is being developed by Ounalashka Corp. / Chena Power (OCCP), a joint venture between Chena Power and the Qawalangin Tribe of Unalaska . The project aims to build a 30 -MW geothermal power plant extracting geothermal energy from the Makushin Volcano. In 2020, OCCP signed a 30-year Power Purchase Agreement with the City of Unalaska. Dave Matthews, Program Manager for the project, addressed the delegation during the meeting. “I want to let you know we’ve been working every week, every day, sinc e we last spoke. We’ve been sending reports to city management, and we’re still on track to completing the project by late 2027.” As Matthews said, financing for the project has been challenging because the return on investment does not easily attract capi tal. Due to this, the company hopes to secure government financing at low interest rates. In early 2022, the project secured USD 2.5 million in federal funding . However, this is a small fraction of the total estimated project costs, which is at around USD 235 million. In April 2022, OCCP selected Ormat Technologies Inc. as EPC contractor for the project with a total contract cost of USD 90 million. Various entities have attempted to develop the geothermal resource in Alaska since the 1980s, and the Unalaska project is the closest that this ambition can become reality. Financial support from the Alaska Energy Authority and the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority can provide an important boost to the project. Source: KYUK 5/4/23, 1:09 PM State investment and energy authorities show interest in Makushin Geothermal Project https://www.kyuk.org/alaska-state-news/2023-03-30/state-investment-and-energy-authorities-show-interest-in-makushin-geothermal-project State investment and energy authorities show interest in Makushin Geothermal Project KUCB | By Theo Greenly Published March 30, 2023 at 5:23 PM AKDT Courtesy Malcolm Herstand /Alaska Volcano Observatory The Alaska Energy Authority and the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority are public corporations that nance energy projects around the state. Getting their support could provide a boost to the project, which recently secured a $90 million with Ormat Technologies to engineer and construct the project. A delegation of Alaska energy o cials on Tuesday visited Unalaska, where representatives from the Makushin Geothermal Project made their case for what could prove one of the biggest geothermal projects in Alaska history. Ounalashka Corp./Chena Power (OCCP), the joint-venture between the private energy company Chena Power and Unalaska’s Native corporation, has taken major steps in recent years to develop a renewable energy source from Makushin Volcano, approximately 14 miles from the city center. Various entities have attempted to develop Donate Contemporary Americana KYUK 5/4/23, 1:09 PM State investment and energy authorities show interest in Makushin Geothermal Project https://www.kyuk.org/alaska-state-news/2023-03-30/state-investment-and-energy-authorities-show-interest-in-makushin-geothermal-project the renewable energy source since a test-well was drilled in the 1980s, but this is the closest anyone has come to making it a reality. Dave Matthews is the program manager for the project. He addressed the city council at a meeting Tuesday — the rst update to the council in more than a year. “I want to let you know we’ve been working every week, every day, since we last spoke. We’ve been sending reports to city management, and we’re still on track to completing the project by late 2027,” Matthews said. The Alaska Energy Authority and the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority are public corporations that nance energy projects around the state. Getting their support could provide a boost to the project, which has hit funding snags since the company signed a power purchase agreement with the city in 2020. “There’s been a lot of challenges with nancing,” Matthews said. The return on investment … does not attract capital. So we’re back down to government nances, where we can get low interest rates over the long term.” Representatives from both state authorities, OCCP, and local seafood processors visited the 6,000-foot volcano by helicopter Wednesday to see the proposed location for the power plant. Matthews said OCCP expects to complete an access road and to begin drilling a well at the site by the end of the year. OCCP recently nalized a $90 million agreement with Ormat Technologies to engineer and construct the project — about one third of the total project costs, which come in at around $235 million. Alaska State News Theo Greenly Theo Greenly reports from the Aleutians as a Report for America corps member. He got his start in public radio at KCRW in Santa Monica, California, and has produced radio stories and podcasts for stations around the country.