Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1AEA-REFAC_Meeting_Minutes_27OCT2015_Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 5 October 27, 2015 Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee Meeting October 27, 2015 Alaska Energy Authority Board Room Anchorage, Alaska 2:01 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. DRAFT MINUTES 1. Call to Order The Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee (REFAC) convened at 2:01 p.m., with Chair Chris Rose presiding. 2. Roll Call (committee members, staff, public) Committee Members Present Chair Chris Rose Brad Reeve Kathie Wasserman (phone) Senator Anna MacKinnon (phone) Representative Jim Colver Bradley Evans Jodi Mitchell Meetings Attended of Total Meetings 7 of 7 6 of 7 5 of 7 4 of 7 2 of 2 4 of 7 6 of 7 Committee Members Not Present Meetings Attended of Total Meetings Senator Lyman Hoffman 5 of 7 Representative Bryce Edgmon 5 of 7 AEA Staff Present: Shawn Calfa, Josh Craft, Jed Drolet, Daniel Hertrich, Sara Fisher-Goad, Yolanda Inga, Cady Lister, David Lockard, Sean Skaling, and Sam Tappen. Other Participants Present: Sydney Hamilton, Accu-Type Depositions; Eric Hanssen, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC); Ron Vecera (Chugach Electric); Laura Keiser, JAK & Associates; Joe Evans, Pilot Point (phone); Pat Walker, Staff for Senator Hoffman (phone); Erin Shine, Staff for Senator MacKinnon (phone); Emma Kelley, Stantec; and Kord Christianson, TDX Power. 3. Agenda Approval The agenda was approved without objection. 4. Approval of Minutes: May 8, 2015 MOTION: A motion was made by Ms. Mitchell to approve the Minutes of May 8, 2015. Seconded by Ms. Wasserman. The Minutes of May 8, 2015 were approved. Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 5 October 27, 2015 5. Public Comments Joe Evans expressed his appreciation to attend on behalf of Pilot Point. 6. Overview of Program A. REF R8 Funded Project Update Mr. Skaling provided an updated status report for the Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Round 8 (R8). The Legislature funded $11.5 million of the projects recommended for funding. B. REF R9 Applications Received Mr. Skaling informed the Request for Applications (RFA) for Round 9 (R9) was announced in early July. The applications were due in late September. Stage 1 of the application process is complete and Stage 2 is fully underway. The updated number of applications is 52, for a total grant funding request amount of approximately $50 million. The total cost for project phases is approximately $87.5 million, and includes the match amount. Mr. Skaling described the analysis of the applications received and highlighted the diversity of projects. He noted the applications reflect a nice statewide representation. The funding request breakdown is 80% "standard" projects and 20% heat projects. There are 23 hydro projects. There are 32 projects in the final design phase. The goal for REF R9 is for approximately 50% of the funds be recommended for reconnaissance and feasibility projects, and 50% of the funds be recommended for design and construction projects. Representative Colver asked if the reorganization of allocation considers the previous request by Senator MacKinnon to prioritize heat projects. Mr. Skaling noted the RFA stated a goal with an emphasis on heat projects. Momentum has been building over the last several years in recognizing the importance of heat projects. Comparatively, heat projects are generally a lower dollar amount. Representative Colver requested additional information on the utilization of hydro power from the project affecting Wrangell and Petersburg. Ms. Mitchell offered anecdotal information there was plenty of capacity initially. The conversion to electric heat occurred when oil prices were very high. Capacity was filled, leaving little additional power to sell. Mr. Lockard informed some of the hydro projects take advantage of electric heating as a dispatchable load to help control frequency, which provides a combined benefit of utilizing the excess electricity available and improving the power quality on the grid. Representative Colver requested data from the communities that utilize hydro projects, delineating how much energy is going toward heat and to what types of heating methods. He believes this information will assist in making good fiscal decisions regarding more investment. Representative Colver inquired as to the number of funded ocean loop heat exchanger projects. Mr. Skaling informed one project has been funded for the Sea Life Center in Seward. The Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 5 October 27, 2015 Emerging Energy Technology Fund (EETF) has another project in the same location using a different kind of technology as a heat pump. Ms. Mitchell recommended Mr. Skaling contact Tim McLeod and Trey Atkinson for additional data. Chair Rose expressed his appreciation to Mr. Skaling for detailing the information presented. He suggested the breakdown of application by phase include the requested funding amount, and the funding by region include the numbers of projects. C. Review of Evaluation Process Chair Rose informed the evaluation process manual is included in the members' packets. Mr. Skaling advised the manual is being fortified and is used as an internal process guide. The important information has been included in the RFA. Mr. Skaling provided an overview of the current system. He believes the system is very effective for vetting projects. It is time-tested and continuously improved. Mr. Tappen reviewed the cost of energy criteria. It is 35% of the ranking score of all projects. The criteria has been changed because of feedback from the last meeting. The cost of energy criteria is updated each round and is now based on both the cost of electricity and the price of heating fuel in the community. The cost of energy scoring weight is applied in Stage III. Mr. Skaling noted Wyn Menefee, who is not present at the meeting, wanted to inform the members that comments from Department of Natural Resources (DNR) will meet the deadline for the evaluation process. Mr. Evans asked for a description of the process used to inform stakeholders of any changes in criteria. He believes it is important to have a robust process for communicating changes to avoid applicants being disqualified because of preventable administrative issues. Mr. Evans gave the example that his entity was denied application because the resolution in support of the project was dated the previous year. He had not been aware of the change requiring a resolution dated the current year. Mr. Skaling explained the most recent changes were decided at the May meeting and those were communicated through the application process. The application process consists of the request for application, which gives the instructions and scoring criteria, and the application forms. Mr. Skaling stated a cover letter was provided with the request for application and on the website, which highlighted the major changes and also contained information about financing options. Ms. Mitchell requested the members be provided a copy of the cover letter to review the changes outlined. She noted applicants who did not receive funding the previous year have the option of resubmitting their application. It is essential those applicants understand any changes made to the process. Mr. Skaling stated applicants must complete a new application each year and may not use the application from the previous year. Chair Rose suggested every change be included in a cover letter or highlighted specifically on the website. Mr. Reeve asked if the evaluation criteria changes for projects based on the new rounds going forward. He referenced a project that was funded in Round I and then had to alter construction documents as the project continued to satisfy new evaluation guidelines. Mr. Skaling explained Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 5 October 27, 2015 the projects have iterative steps and go/no-go points may be established to provide the best project possible for the community. Mr. Skaling is not aware of the particular project referenced. Mr. Reeve believes it is necessary to discuss these types of impediments to project completion. Mr. Evans commented changing criteria on an existing project generates additional costs. It is critical to implement an effective communication process regarding the reasons for the changes. Chair Rose asked if there have been any projects funded in one round that then had to comply with new rules from a subsequent round. Mr. Skaling advised the grant document outlines the process, and grantees from one round do not have to meet criteria from subsequent rounds. Representative Colver inquired if AEA has determined standard specifications for wind equipment, maintenance, and technical recommendations. Mr. Skaling explained each community is different and the issues are complex. Factors reviewed include load, demand size, wind resource, storage capacity, and available equipment. Manufactures are not specified, but have to be third-party tested in Alaska climate conditions. Mr. Skaling noted the EETF is exploring storage options, including batteries and ultra-capacitors. Mr. Reeve requested project status updates for the grants awarded in prior rounds. Mr. Skaling noted the appendix of every projects' scope, schedule, budget and status is published at the same time the year's recommendations are published and placed on the website. Last year's information is currently on the website, and Mr. Skaling can provide the most current update for each project. Mr. Reeve noted the updated information would be helpful. Chair Rose agreed. 7. Regional Energy Planning Update Mr. Drolet provided the update on the ongoing regional energy planning process. He advised the series of projects funded by the state is nearing closure. The drafts for the plans are in review and will be available within the next few weeks. The plans consider all energy issues across the regions and identify short-term priorities that can be implemented in the near future. Development of ongoing regional level planning processes will be established as implementation of the plans occur. Representative Colver requested copies of the draft plans be provided to the House Energy Committee members. Mr. Drolet agreed. Chair Rose requested additional information about the relationship between the regional energy planning discussed and the Affordable Energy Strategy (AES) from Senate Bill 138, and how those plans would help AEA work with community members who may have competing projects that might apply to this fund. Mr. Drolet indicated the AES is a separate planning effort that has some overlap. AES is a long-term plan with a potential future funding source set aside from a gas pipeline. The information from the regional plans is incorporated into the analysis of the AES. Mr. Drolet informed the plans will be utilized in the Community Assistance Programs as a guideline for focusing efforts to identify and prioritize community energy opportunities. Chair Rose asked if it would be beneficial to use the information collected through regional planning as a backstop to the analysis regarding available financing options, rather than solely rely Renewable Energy Fund Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 5 October 27, 2015 on the applicants' responses and descriptions of their potential financing options. Mr. Drolet believes by next year the understanding of available financing options will be strong enough to use the information during the evaluation process. 8. Meeting dates for January and May, 2016 Chair Rose informed the members will be polled again to finalize the January meeting date. The two tentative dates are either January 13th or January 15th. Representative Colver would be participating telephonically on January 13th, and Chair Rose indicated the meeting on January 15th would need to begin after 1:00 p.m. A poll will be sent to members to determine the May meeting date, and options will range from May 5th to 15th. 9. Committee Member Comments Ms. Wasserman regretted not attending in person and noted the difficulty in attending telephonically. She was unable to view the webinar. Mr. Reeve expressed his appreciation for the information presented. Ms. Mitchell requested discussion regarding funding expectations for Round 9 and going forward. Representative Colver noted this will be another difficult year, and will probably include substantial budget cuts. He appreciates the level of commitment from Senate Finance Committee Co-Chair Senator MacKinnon and others. Representative Colver believes it is important to continue to think long-term for Alaskans, and recommended AEA schedule individual meetings while down in Juneau to get a better sense of available funding. Ms. Mitchell informed she is willing to help with the push for federal funds into the program. She expressed her appreciation for all the good work. Representative Colver agreed with Ms. Wasserman being present at a meeting versus attending telephonically makes a great difference. He believes there is value participating in person. Chair Rose requested to have specific notated information at the January meeting about available financing options, including available federal funding options, while making the recommendation decisions. Chair Rose expressed his appreciation for the hard work completed. 10. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 3:30 p.m.